Finest and Most Influential Tanks of WWII

Some of the false claims made in the British report regarding the Panther summarized (parts also apply to the Tiger tank series):

1. The gunners position is cramped, there being no room for headphones whilst sighting = False.

Fact = The gunners position in the Panther is as roomy as that found on most tanks of the period, and there is plenty of room for the headphones when sighting, as proven through both video evidence and veteran and modern day operator testimonials.

2. The gunners controls are badly positioned = False.

Fact = The gunners controls are well positioned and easy to operate, as testified by veteran crews and modern day operators of restored examples.

3. The gunner’s sight padding is hard and you have tendency to hurt yourself on the sight when the tank is on the move = False.

Fact = That is one of the most ridiculous claims made in the entire report as not only was the padding just as soft as that found in Allied tanks, but the sight was also articulated so that it sat still and didn’t move around with the gun, removing risk of the gunner knocking his head against the sight whilst being on the move. The British test operator apparently for a moment forgot about the horrible job of having to follow the straight-through sights clamped directly the gun in all Allied tanks, where the risk of getting hurt by knocking your head against the sight was very real.

4. The pressure sensitive foot pedals for powered traverse feature slack and input delays = False.

Fact = When properly maintained & adjusted the pressure sensitive foot pedal traverse system features no slack and there is no noticeable delay between operating the pedals and the turret starting to traverse (the beauty of hydraulics). This is proven through veteran and modern day operator testimonials.

 

What faulty parts? If something is damaged they fix it to its' original state, that's it.

Care to point out where I claimed this?? Seems you reading comprehension issues...

I refered to the incorrect mounting of the sight mounting arm to the turret roof bracket. Guess that was abit too technical for you...

Looking back at the picture though it seems like a none std. mounting arm, explaining the desparity.

 

I would be interested to know how you can summarise reports you have not seen. Until such time as you post the relevant sections then there is no real point in all of this.
Have you read the Panther reports?
Either the technical evaluation or the ergonomic study?
It is a simple yes or no.
You claim the manufacturers photos (of the Panther) I posted have the sight brow pad attached to the wrong support.
What evidence have you got that this is true?
Have you an illustration where this brow pad is attached to a support other than the one shown in every single photo I published?

 

Bollocks. You can clearly see the breech in the video, as-well as the gunners shadow falling upon it, the gun sitting at near zero elevation. If you can't see this then need your eyes fixed, as only a blind person or someone in complete denial would ever try to dispute that.

 

Here:

The photos are not from a British report. They are German technical photos. You say they put it together wrongly?

 

You truly live in a fantasy world m kenny. You need to get out abit more...

No'one ever mentioned anything about any plot or anything of the sort, yet you always feel the urge to make such absurd claims in order to try and convince other of your biased beliefs.

What was said, and you weren't listening, was that you shouldn't take tests of captured enemy material as gospel as they are often riddled with mistakes (as so clearly proven in this thread), and that goes for tests carried out by both sides. But ofcourse you need to twist that into being about plots & conspiracies.. it truly is pathetic on your part m kenny.

 

And where exactly did I mention that they positioned the forehead padding incorrectly as you claimed m kenny? Answer: Nowhere.

I was talking about the sight's mounting arm for the turret roof bracket, which looked to be incorrectly positioned, but looking at other photos it just seems that the mounting arm itself was different from usual and was therefore mounted differently. Also it is quite clear that tank in question wasn't a field operational tank and only used for illustrating the various parts and for testing purposes, the sight's forehead padding missing and featured an unusualy sight mounting arm etc etc..

 

You're right that it truly is very simple: Are you saying that the claims I listed aren't present in the British report? Yes or No?

I have read the reports, and that long before you ever posted them, and I know what is written in them. The only thing new to me was the attached photos which I had never seen before, otherwise I've read it all. That answers your question, now answer mine.

 

It doesn't matter to them what you saw Darren, they won't even believe what their own eyes tell them.

But I agree with you, the gun is at zero elevation and the breech is clearly visible in the video, being right besides the gunners head. You can even clearly see the gunners shadow fall upon the breech as-well as he moves around. That anyone would even attempt to deny this is truly ridiculous and only shows their true nature.

I'd be very interested in hearing their version of what that large piece of metal at the gunner right is if not the breech though; should be be fun to read!

 

Yes, tanks did fire while stopped but they brought the gun to the target before stopping. You know that I'm sure (hope?) Making up how you believe tankers would act does not make for a good base for an argument. They remain nothing but your beliefs.

 

Believe in what'ever you want JBark, I am done trying to explain things for you. You don't want to learn anything, you had your mind made up from the beginning.

Your loss..

 

I agree

 

The breech is always to the right of the gunner. As it always will be. The question is as it goes below the vertical does it foul the headphones?
I have never read the Panther report. I have said this at least twice now.
You say you have read it but refuse to place any of it here. I believeyou have not read it and are just responding to the snippets in Zaloga.
I think that is very revealing.
Please note every black and white photograph I placed in this thread is a manufacturers photo.
Taken inside the turret of a real wartime Panther by the Germans.
It is absurd to claim the fittings are non-standard, the bracket is attached to the wrong support or that it was done by British testers.

The mono sight is identical in fiitings and placements in every photo of this sight.
There is nothing attached anywhere other than where it should be.
What is happening is you are twisting and turning so much over an insignificant detail that you are tying yourself in knots
If necessary I will posts ALL the Panther interior photos I have and it will be plain to everyone (and even to you) that you are are confused.

 

Ah so now I'm a liar? That's rich! Please tell me exactly what is it I made up anywhere? I am curious!

When you have failed to do so you will realize that all I have done is post the facts, backed up by technical manuals, video & photographic evidence as-well as veteran & modern day operator testimonials etc etc.. You refuse to accept them however, resorting instead to closing your eyes and calling me a liar. That is considered neither very polite nor smart in my book JBark, and as a result you will recieve no further gestures of good faith from this side anymore.

 

Do you even know what it is you're saying?

If there is room when the gun is completely level and the breech is right beside the gunners face (same height), then what difference will it make that you elevate or depress the gun? Answer: Nothing, there will always be room for the headphones.

It is truly ridiculous that you're still trying to argue against this as anyone with anywhere near decent eyesight can clearly see the full side of the breech right beside the gunner in the video. And if there is room when the gun is level then there's going to be room nomatter the gun elevation, which should be clear from looking at interior photos of the tank.

 

Really?
Look at the following, red line starts at eyepiece







More clearer in the one below. This position is roughly level with the top photo of the 2 above. What will happen when the breech is lowered (i.e the gun is elevated)
Won't the top bit (vertical red line)move a lot closer to the eyepiece?

 

As I have said you have excellent resources, of this I am sure. You like the pleasure of posting pictures that no one can verify for authenticity but I think you can be trusted with that. You don't say what comes from Jentz, what comes from manuals, so that does not help much. As for modern day operator testimony this has many shortcomings, among which is that they are published nowhere and they are biased. "I just spent $1,500,000 restoring my Panther, but it is not really a great tank." Sure.

Have you been trying to be polite to me up to now? Where did you go to finishing school? LOL.

 

More views:

 

Mkenny,

Brilliant as usual.