Author Archive

Tanker’s Tuesday, Merka 5 Medium Tank

Posted on May 19th, 2015 under , , . Posted by

 Product DescriptionRebel Minis is proud to present the Merka 5 Medium Tank. The Merka 5 comes with a Main Gun Turret as well as a radar and mini vulcan anti-personnel system. The tank is designed to fit with our 15mm scale sci-fi minis. Sculpted …

Tanker’s Tuesday: Tank destroyer battalion (United States)

Posted on May 12th, 2015 under , , . Posted by


Main article: Tank destroyer battalion (United States)

U.S. Army and counterpart British designs were very different in conception. U.S. doctrine was based, in light of the fall of France, on the perceived need to defeat German blitzkrieg tactics, and U.S. units expected to be faced with large numbers of German tanks attacking on relatively narrow fronts. These were expected to break through a thin screen of anti-tank guns, hence the decision that the main anti-tank units – the Tank Destroyer (TD) battalions – should be concentrated and very mobile. In actual practice, such German attacks rarely happened; throughout the war only one battalion ever fought in an engagement quite like that which had originally been envisaged (the 601st, at the Battle of El Guettar). The Tank Destroyer Command eventually numbered over 100,000 men and 80 battalions each equipped with 36 self-propelled tank destroyers or towed guns.

Only a few shots were expected to be fired from any firing position. Strong reconnaissance elements were provided so that TDs would be able to use pre-arranged firing positions to best advantage. Flanking fire by TDs was emphasized, both to penetrate thinner enemy side armor, and to reduce the likelihood of accurate enemy return fire.

All American tank destroyers were officially known by exactly the same collective term used for American self-propelled artillery ordnance, “Gun Motor Carriage”. The designs were intended to be very mobile and heavily armed. Most of the tank-hull based designs used special open-topped turrets, of a differing design to the original tank it was to be based on, which was meant to both save weight and to accommodate a larger gun. The earliest expedient design was an M3 Half-track mounting an M1897 75 mm gun in a limited-traverse mount, and called the 75 mm Gun Motor Carriage M3. Another, considerably less successful, early design mounted a 37-mm anti-tank gun in the bed of a Dodge 3/4-ton truck – the 37-mm GMC M6. By far the most common US design was the 3in Gun Motor Carriage M10 (Wolverine), later supplemented by the 90 mm Gun Motor Carriage M36 – both based on the M4 Sherman hull and powertrain – and the 76 mm Gun Motor Carriage M18 (Hellcat), based on a unique hull and powertrain design, with a slight visual resemblance to what was used for the later M24 Chaffee light tank. The M18 came closest to the US ideal; the vehicle was very fast, small, and mounted a 76 mm gun in a roofless open turret. The M36 Jackson GMC possessed the only American-origin operational gun that could rival the vaunted 88 mm German anti-tank ordnance, the 90 mm M3 gun, and the M36 remained in service well after World War II. The only dedicated American-origin, casemate hull design fighting vehicle of any type to be built during the war, that resembled the German and Soviet tank destroyers in hull and general gun mounting design, was the experimental T28 Super Heavy Tank, which mounted a 105 mm T5E1 long-barrel cannon, which had a maximum firing range of 12 miles (20 km), and was originally designed as a self-propelled assault gun to breach Germany’s Siegfried Line defenses.

Of these tank destroyers, only the 90 mm gun of the M36 proved to be effective against the frontal armor of Germans’ larger armored vehicles at long range. The open top and light armor made these tank destroyers vulnerable to anything greater than small-arms fire. As the number of German tanks encountered by American forces steadily decreased throughout the war, most battalions were split up and assigned to infantry units as supporting arms, fighting as assault guns or being used essentially as tanks.
Doctrinists’ expectation that German tanks would be engaged in mass formation was a failed assumption. In reality, German attacks effectively utilized combined arms on the ground fighting cohesively. American tank destroyer battalions comprised three tank destroyer companies supported by nine security sections. The single-purpose tactics of the tank destroyer battalion failed to account for non-tank threats.

Wargame Spotlight: Stargrunt II

Posted on May 11th, 2015 under , , . Posted by

                 Apr 17, 2013 | by Stephen Bajza A lot of games these days focus on big guns, big battles, and wreaking all kinds of…

Gruntz 15mm sci-fi

Posted on May 11th, 2015 under Posted by

Warhammer 40,000? NO!! It’s Stargrunt 2!!

Posted on May 11th, 2015 under Posted by

GZG East Coast Con 18

Posted on May 7th, 2015 under , . Posted by

Tanker’s Tuesday: Keith Laumer Bolos!

Posted on May 5th, 2015 under , . Posted by

Keith Laumer was a well-known and respected science fiction writer who, during the 1960s, began writing short stories featuring sentient robotic tanks known as Bolos, huge and powerful combat machines that often seemed to understand such concepts as “h…

National Robotics Engineering Center – Black Knight Unmanned Ground Comb…

Posted on April 29th, 2015 under Posted by

Tanker’s Tuesday:US Army GCV Prototype

Posted on April 29th, 2015 under . Posted by

 US Army GCV Prototype

Pre-Mayday Nostalgia

Posted on April 28th, 2015 under , , . Posted by

Tanker’s Tuesday: The Battle of Easting

Posted on April 22nd, 2015 under . Posted by

Coolhand Customs: Desert Apocalypse!

Posted on April 14th, 2015 under Posted by

Coolhand Customs: Desert Apocalypse!: The apocalypse is coming, May 1st… Working on my midnight in the desert scene, with the Apocalypse tank, developed for ClearHorizon M…

Tanker’s Tuesday: Tax Day Special

Posted on April 14th, 2015 under . Posted by

Battle tanks are crucial components of a nation’s army. Often organized into units of armored vehicles, tanks often provide the direct fire unleashed to the enemies. They usually stand in front of the infantry units, taking the brunt of the enemies’ shells as well.

Tanks have come a long way since its introduction in World War I that turned the tide of battle and put an end to those bloody and drawn-out trench battles. They have become even stronger, faster and more powerful. Here is a list of the top 10 most expensive tanks in the world today.

The Most Expensive Tanks in the World

NTC – Convoy Ops Training (3rd HBCT /3 I.D.) at Fort Irwin

Posted on April 8th, 2015 under Posted by

Fort Irwin NTC Tour " In The Box "

Posted on April 8th, 2015 under Posted by

The 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment in Vietnam (Restored Color)

Posted on April 8th, 2015 under Posted by

Tanker’s Tuesday:11th Armored Cavalry Regiment

Posted on April 8th, 2015 under . Posted by

11th Armored Cavalry Regiment

By Dagger Or Talon : (Tomorrow’s War Supplement)

Posted on April 6th, 2015 under , , , , . Posted by just picked up the core rule book for Tomorrow’s War and really liked the system so far, I had to have the supplement.First impression, I’m working from the PDF (hard cover on it’s wa…

Tanker’s Tuesday : Sci-fi Coversions By Dan

Posted on April 1st, 2015 under , , , , , , , . Posted by

Gunners Wargaming

Turbil Minatures Sci-Fi Terrain

Posted on March 31st, 2015 under , , , , . Posted by

 I’ve gotten quit a few units from Turbil Miniatures over the years, I’m thinking of ordering this type of terrain from them…very nice!

Tanker’s Tuesday: Zulfiqar III

Posted on March 25th, 2015 under . Posted by

Tanker’s Tuesday: M60 AVLB

Posted on March 17th, 2015 under , , . Posted by

The M60 AVLB is based on a M60 Patton tank chassis, but instead of the tank’s gun turret, it is equipped with a bridge launcher integrated into the chassis and mounted on top. When emplaced, the bridge is capable of supporting tracked and wheeled vehic…

Tanker’s Tuesday: Kirov Tank T-100

Posted on March 10th, 2015 under , , , . Posted by

Kirov Tank T-100

The T-100 was a twin-turreted Soviet heavy tank prototype, designed in 1938–39 as a possible replacement for the T-35. The T-100 was designed to by N. Barykov’s OKMO design team at S.M. Kirov Factory No. 185 in Leningrad. It was in competition with a similar design – the SMK – but neither were adopted and instead a single turret version on the SMK was ordered as the KV-1.

The project was initiated by the Red Army’s need to replace the aging five-turreted T-35 tank based on combat experience in the Spanish Civil War. One of the lessons the Red Army drew from this conflict was the need for heavy ‘shell-proof’ armor on medium and heavy tanks. Although the T-35 was never used in Spain, its thin armor was vulnerable to the small towed antitank guns and gun-armed tanks encountered there by Soviet T-26 and BT tanks.
The T-100 was in direct competition against the very similar SMK heavy tank, by Lt-Colonel Kotin’s team at the Leningrad Kirovsky Factory. The original specification was for a five-turreted “anti-tank gun destroyer” which would resist 37mm-45mm guns at any range and 76.2 mm artillery at 1,200 m. Both design teams objected to the antiquated multi-turreted design and the requirement was reduced to two turrets before serious design work began. Both tanks had some modern features, including thick, welded armor, radios and torsion bar suspension (another feature insisted upon by the design teams).

It was ordered as a successor of the mighty five-turreted T-35, world’s heaviest tank of the Interbellum. The SMK (Sergey Mironovich Kirov, after a prominent Bolshevik leader assassinated in 1934) was to meet the requirements that were put forth by the Directorate of Armed Forces (ABTU) in November 1937. These requirements called for a tank that could withstand shots from a 76.2mm gun from 3,937 ft (1,200 m). It was also to be powered by a diesel engine as it was felt gasoline was too dangerous in case of hit. The requirements also called for a tank with five turrets. In 1938 the SMK was designed by Colonel Zh. Kotin (chief engineer of the Kirov Works in Leningrad) to replace the T-35. The initial study featured three turrets – the main one with a 76.2mm gun and two smaller offset ones with 45mm:

But this design was soon revised and the final layout had a 76.2 mm gun in the main turret and a 45mm in the lower turret, centerlined. This layout was virtually the same as it’s competitors, T-100. The engine was based on a German BMW aircraft engine.

On May 4, 1938 the designs for the SMK and T-100 were presented to a joint committee from the Politburo and Defense Council. Both were approved to build prototypes.

The SMK prototype was completed in August 1939. It was sent to the Kubinka testing grounds outside of Moscow. The SMK was tested alongside the T-100 and KV-1 prototypes.

The T-100 tank sported two turrets placed on a long chassis. The front turret, mounting a 45mm antitank gun, was placed at a lower elevation than the other, and as such had a limited area of fire. The top turret, mounting a 76.2mm gun, was able to turn a full 360 degrees. The multi-turret design concept had been common in the 1920s, with the British one-off Vickers A1E1 Independent influencing the Soviet T-35.

The prototype T-100 tank was briefly tested alongside the other designs in the Soviet invasion of Finland in 1939 without success. It was never put into production, due to the archaic design concept, poor mobility and the availability of a far superior alternative, the KV series.The SMK was used in the Winter War with Finland. The T-100, SMK, and KV-1 prototypes were a part of the 91st Tank Battalion of the 20th Heavy Tank Brigade and had their first combat near Summa from December 17 to 19.5
In an attempt to rush a tank armed with a large howitzer capable of dealing with Finnish bunkers into use, one of the T-100s was converted into the SU-100Y self-propelled gun. It did not go into production, although the prototype was used in the defence of Moscow in 1941.

On December 19 the SMK and T-100 were joined by five T-28s and Red Army infantry. The SMK was immobilized by a mine which blew off one if its tracks. It was then found that during the repairs, under fire from the Finns, that the engine wouldn’t restart. The T-100 was hooked up to it to try and tow it out of fire. But this was difficult in the icy conditions.

The SMK was eventually abandoned when the covering forces started to run low on ammunition. The SMK wasn’t recovered until February 1940 when the Red Army broke through the Mannerheim Line.

There were attempts to use the T-100 chassis as a platform for an 6in howitzer carriage (T-100Z) and for self-propelled guns (here’s one of several designs, the SU-100Y, armed with a 130mm naval gun).

t-34 many vs Tiger

Posted on March 10th, 2015 under Posted by

T-34-85 VS Tiger

Posted on March 10th, 2015 under Posted by