Prev: Re: Supertank? Next: RE: New mailing list question

Re: [DS] Tank designs was Re: [ds] Ogres

From: "John M. Atkinson" <john.m.atkinson@e...>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 13:18:12 -0800
Subject: Re: [DS] Tank designs was Re: [ds] Ogres

Thomas Anderson wrote:

> ever hear of economies of scale? this is why ten million pounds
> of battleship will beat ten million pounds sterling of destroyers.

Not nowdays.  How many destroyers firing how many SSMs do we get for
that?  That might be why nobody has battleships anymore, but everyone
from the RN and USN down to thrid-world countries with 6 feet of
coastline and a military budget measured in quarters has destroyers.

> > You have to cross bridges during COMBAT operations.
> not if it's a static defence, or a defence of a prepared area. i don't

You don't win wars fighting static defenses.  You delay defeat and
nothing more.

> otoh, an AVLB conversion of a maus might be able to carry a bridge big
> enough to carry another maus.

No AVLBs in WWII, and no, it wouldn't.	Do you know what a MLC 120 (I
think that's what the website listed earlier said it weighed) bridge
looks like? 

> >  How long does it take to unload?  Of course, much
> > cheaper and easier to drop 5 inch rocket off P-47, but that applies
> > all tanks.	Except that if I drop a 5 inch rocket on a force of Pz
> > there are some left.  I drop on Maus, and the only one you got is
> ratios are not that extreme; 3:1 at the very most. so, air attack on 3
> maice or 9 pz4s: maybe you're left with 3 pz4s or 1 maus. same
> roughly.

3 Mauses, 9 Pz-IVs.  You loose 3 Mauses, or 3 Pz-IVs.  So you're left
with either 6 Pz-IVs, or a train.  I know what wins.

John M. Atkinson

Prev: Re: Supertank? Next: RE: New mailing list question