|
|
|
#21
02-05-2009, 06:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
M48's were not exactly made for comfort, not that any AFV is, but these fun machines never had a heater that ever worked right, one of the 1st things a AFV driver learns, is to keep the TC happy, always, always have a spare heater igniter, if not, learn the ole paper clip trick, hulls of the M48 were great for keeping out water, NOT, they leaked like heck, deep water fording was a real treat, and in the winter to boot, oh happy day:(. Prone to spray cherry juice every time the main gun was fired, that did help to warm you up! Have a finite understanding of track tension, cause it ain't no joy to throw track in the middle of a stream. Other than that they were just peachy. Like I said, I am a M60 kind of guy:D. Don't get me wrong, the M48 would pave the way for one of the best Main Battle Tanks to come down the line, and she did her part in that little fun part of the world known as SE Asia, though tanks were of little use there other than convoy and gate guard duty. Jungle seem to swallow them up and Charlie had a nasty habit of running at you w/a AT Mine that left you dead in your tracks. These ole war horses would go to soldier w/NG units thru-out the US. Best place to see one is on display. If I remember right, these were the first thing you seen upon entering Ft. Knox, KY. Just a ole armor cavalry trooper get'in to ramble on about his steeds. To keep with the thread, is this Tiger a early version w/early style exhaust and bussel box.:D Rick Last edited by Papercut; 02-05-2009 at 06:48 PM. 
|
|
#22
02-05-2009, 07:06 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think it's supposed to be a mid-production model but it lacks the Feifel aircleaners used on most Tigers. It's got a rommel box but most Tigers except for the very early ones had this. I think the exhausts are about right for a mid-production Tiger.
I think this model really is a simplified Halinski Tiger - same designer and publication year. I was a bit surprised when the hull skin went on without the misfits usual with MM models. I know an ex-Centurion TC who would disagree with you about using tanks in jungles - admittedly he got an HE kill on an NVA PT-76 - I guess the Russian designers didn't have 105mm guns in mind when they designed those things. Regards, Charlie Last edited by CharlieC; 02-05-2009 at 07:24 PM.
|
|
#23
02-05-2009, 08:06 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I am sorry if my comment was taken to include the many types of AFV used in the SE Asian command. Many types were deployed and used to great success against anything Charlie could throw at them, but, the terrain of the area was not good for heavy armoured vec's. I also believe, not too sure about the Centurion's weight, but I believe the M48 had a bit more weight to move around the jungles. If my memory serves me right, after the seasonal rains, the jungle pretty much turned too mud from he<' and tanks had a really hard time keeping the track system working w/o throwing tracks or burying themselves to the sponsons. Again, I can only speak for US Armor, and I in no way imply that tanks were of no use in the jungle. I remember intersection/road duty for most missions toward the end. And in reguards to 105mm, still to this day, one heck of a punch!
|
|
#24
02-05-2009, 09:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The Centurion was about the same weight as an M48 - 51 tons vs 50 tons the armour was bit thicker on Cent - 6 inches vs 4.9 inches. It probably was an experience and training issue - the Australian army had a lot of jungle warfare experience with armour going back to WW2 in New Guinea. The British used to send their tanks to be evaluated for jungle warfare by the Australians in WW2 and afterwards.
Regards, Charlie Last edited by CharlieC; 02-05-2009 at 09:41 PM.
|
|
#25
02-13-2009, 05:31 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I am curious CharlieC, what was your experience in a Armoured Combat Unit. I don't know about all this expert stuff of jungle warfare other than a lot of my friends died there in those jungles, they were ill trained to fight in !!!!!!!! Counting from start to end about 10 years I'd say give or take. I guess we just didn't get it. And I will disagree with you in regards about armour in the jungles regardless of what country they came from. Tanks, vines, swamps and a determined dug in enemy are a tough deal for any tank. Oh yea, lets not forget without infantry, your a dead duck.:D Just my opinion. I am not saying they were not deployed, and finally someone figured it was too much time washing blood out of Teflon coated interiors, patching up for the next crew that got the jitters when they saw the welded patches and knew most of the previous crew died in the vehicle they now were fighting in, that tends to get to you. Tanks were pulled from deep jungle combat and was used to keep supply routes, depots, highway inter sections, and occasionally a short patrol to engage Charlie, which if I remember correctly we kicked their teeth in during their little New Years surprise. Tanks took and held the cities and a whole lot of NVA vehicles of all types were taken out. That's what I remember.
 Gary Owen
Last edited by Papercut; 02-13-2009 at 05:38 PM.
|
| Google Adsense |
|
#27
02-14-2009, 08:13 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
No offence taken.
The Australian armour didn't have an easy war with the Cents - 58 tanks deployed, 42 damaged, 6 totaled - 2 kia. Another Tiger update is coming - I'm still slogging through the roadweels as well as doing a large no.. of updates on the AMMS. Regards, Charlie
|
|
#28
02-14-2009, 11:22 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I look forward to seeing your progress.
|
|
#29
02-28-2009, 07:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I've been busy doing other stuff - updating the AMMS Brisbane site - trying to catch up on 2/3 years worth of updates. The Tiger isn't forgotten - finally managed to get all the roadweels cut out and made a start on the tracks.
The track patterns on the original model are printed on a single page of 80 gsm with a couple of track strips printed on one of the parts sheet. If the track parts were built as suggested two sections of the track will be much thicker than the rest. I scanned and printed the 80 gsm sheet on 160 gsm and backed all track parts with Manilla folder card mostly because folder card is soft and easy to cut. Built the tracks using the Pz IF technique and I'm currently adding grouser bars and guide plates. I thought about adding some relief to the outside of the track links but figured that was stretching the contest definition as well as a lot of additional work. Images later. Regards, Charlie
|
|
#30
03-01-2009, 11:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thinking ahead during the mind-grinding boredom of the Tiger tracks.....
I might have time to get another MM AFV built before the contest end in June so looking at my stack I've got: 5/1979 T-70 7-8/94 Crusader III (I think that one was done last comp.) 9/1982 IS-3 2/1980 ISU-152 4/1981 KV-1 11-12/1985 T-72 10/1983 SU-100 (Kevin's doing that one) 7-8/1996 T-34 Anyone have a preference for one of these? Regards, Charlie
|
| Google Adsense |
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
