PDA

View Full Version : TIGER TANK??



XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 04:05 AM
does anybodies have a pic or 2 of that tank??
p47 does carried BB guns right??



The Sun is Gone
But I Have a Light

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 04:05 AM
does anybodies have a pic or 2 of that tank??
p47 does carried BB guns right??



The Sun is Gone
But I Have a Light

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 04:28 AM
Oh, for God's sake. Look, it's already the Thread From Hell. Please let's not have another one.

Not that you're wrong in what you're saying, just that it doesn't need to be spread around. Pretty soon somebody starts another one and another one and it's like those "Mustang Won The War" or "FW View Is Wrong" threads, taking over the whole place like creeping kudzu vine.

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 04:44 AM
hey whats wrong with asking the pic of that tank?



The Sun is Gone
But I Have a Light

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 04:50 AM
Try a Google search, key word Tiger./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap18a.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 04:56 AM
but my search button is mulfuction/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
it gave me totally different result



The Sun is Gone
But I Have a Light

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 05:00 AM
http://www.panzer-vi.fsnet.co.uk/

check this one out too. gorgeuos paintings!

http://www.geocities.com/dietiger/tigerart.html

Ye Jacobites by name, lend an ear, give an ear!
Ye Jacobites by name, lend an ear,
Ye Jacobites by name,
Your fautes I will proclaim,
Your doctrines I maun blame, you shall hear!
2. What is Right, and what is wrang, by the law, by the law?
What is Right, and what is Wrang, by the law?
What is Right, and what is Wrang?
A short sword and a lang,
A weak arm and a strang, for to draw!
3. What makes heroic strife, famed afar, famed afar?
What makes heroic strife famed afar?
What makes heroic strife ?
To whet th' assassin's knife,
Or hunt a Parent's life, wi' bluidy war?
4. Then let your schemes alone, in the State, in the State!
Then let your schemes alone, in the State!
Then let your schemes alone,
Adore the rising sun,
And leave a man undone, to his fate!
Burns

<img src =http://www.unicef.ca/eng/unicef/lessons/peace/images/peace.gif>



Message Edited on 07/01/0305:02AM by samba_liten

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 05:04 AM
hmm that a good looking tank and also look very though to me!!
you'll need bigger bomb/missles to destroy it for good, i dont think BB gun can even scrach it surface skin..unless it made out of aluminium



The Sun is Gone
But I Have a Light

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 05:05 AM
forgot to say thank you SAMBA_LITEN for the link



The Sun is Gone
But I Have a Light

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 05:07 AM
http://www.onwar.com/tanks/germany/plans/tiger1.gif




http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap18a.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 05:21 AM
her ya go



http://www.nwf.org/keepthewildalive/images/photos/tiger.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 05:25 AM
heres another one


http://www.flakmag.com/opinion/images/tiger.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 07:19 AM
any more tiger??
i love anything to do with tiger /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif



The Sun is Gone
But I Have a Light

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 07:29 AM
Are you referring to the Tiger I or Tiger II tank? Both were wartime production vehicles, with the Tiger II (or King Tiger or Royal Tiger as it was sometimes referred to by the Allies) entering production later and having much thicker armor.

One thing to keep in mind about Armored Fighting Vehicles of this time was that the hull deck plates and turret's roof armor was usually significantly thinner than the front armor. Case in point, look at the specs for the TigerI-E:

Armor: hull nose 100-mm, front plate 100-mm, lower sides 60-mm, upper sides 80-mm, rear 82-mm, and top and bottom 26-mm; turret mantlet 110-mm, front 100-mm, sides 80-mm, back 80-mm, and roof 26-mm.

So, it doesn't seem inconceivable that .50 bullets fired from a high angle of attack could penetrate into the vehicle's fighting compartment or, more likely, into the relatively unprotected engine at the rear of the vehicle. In fact, here's a statistic that is actually about the German 'Panther' tank but reveals the vulnerability of armor of this era in general: over 70% of all Panzerkampfwagen V lost to enemy action were victims of enemy artillery or air attack. (The Panther's armor was similar in thickness to TigerI's but Panther had only 15-mm for the roof. Overall the Panther's wedge-shaped hull was a better design than TigerI's boxey shape for deflecting projectiles fired directly at it.)

Try your search again, but this time use the "Tiger I tank" or, better yet, "Panzerkampfwagen VI" in your keyword search.



Message Edited on 07/01/0306:54AM by JT_Skycat

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 07:52 AM
Tiger IE

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/tigold.jpg


http://www.wwiivehicles.com/images/germany/pzkpfw_vi_e_12.jpg



Tiger II "King Tiger":

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/image001.jpg


http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/tig2por.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 07:59 AM
Unfortunately you have to look up the hardness index of armor to compare penetration data done on rolled homogenous steel plate. 25mm of the steel-nickel plate the German's used on the Tiger 1 and 2 is equivalent to trying to penetrate roughtly 45mm of rolled homogenous steel plate.


There is a huge wealth of data and phyics dealing with stuff like this which of course are beyond the human mind by itself without external aids. It will unfortunately never make it into the digital world because to do the millions of calculations is for simple interactions is mind boggling.

IRL it just happens, fortunately for us the universe doesn't have to compute all this http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif... although it is funny to think of the possiblity of universal 'lag' http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JT_Skycat wrote:
- Are you referring to the Tiger I or Tiger II tank?
- Both were wartime production vehicles, with the
- Tiger II (or King Tiger or Royal Tiger as it was
- sometimes referred to by the Allies) entering
- production later and having much thicker armor.
-
- One thing to keep in mind about Armored Fighting
- Vehicles of this time was that the hull deck plates
- and turret's roof armor was usually significantly
- thinner than the front armor. Case in point, look at
- the specs for the TigerI-E:
-
- Armor: hull nose 100-mm, front plate 100-mm, lower
- sides 60-mm, upper sides 80-mm, rear 82-mm, and top
- and bottom 26-mm; turret mantlet 110-mm, front
- 100-mm, sides 80-mm, back 80-mm, and roof 26-mm.
-
- So, it doesn't seem inconceivable that .50 bullets
- fired from a high angle of attack could penetrate
- into the vehicle's fighting compartment or, more
- likely, into the relatively unprotected engine at
- the rear of the vehicle. In fact, here's a
- statistic that is actually about the German
- 'Panther' tank but reveals the vulnerability of
- armor of this era in general: over 70% of all
- Panzerkampfwagen V lost to enemy action were victims
- of enemy artillery or air attack. (The Panther's
- armor was similar in thickness to TigerI's but
- Panther had only 15-mm for the roof. Overall the
- Panther's wedge-shaped hull was a better design than
- TigerI's boxey shape for deflecting projectiles
- fired directly at it.)
-
- Try your search again, but this time use the "Tiger
- I tank" or, better yet, "Panzerkampfwagen VI" in
- your keyword search.
-
-
-
- Message Edited on 07/01/03‚ 06:54AM by JT_Skycat



http://www.redspar.com/redrogue/CraggerUbisig.jpg

About after 30 minutes I puked all over my airplane. I said to myself "Man, you made a big mistake." -Charles 'Chuck' Yeager, regards his first flight

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 08:07 AM
Universal lag; now there's a scary thought.

Though usually when there is a strong wind (there are lots of those where I live, near sea) and you feel you try to move but aren't; it comes pretty close /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

The Tiger tanks still look amazing, even after so many years they look absolutely great. There are some companies out there that actually has a rc model out of it ... A huge sucker too, but bring plenty of cash; you'll need it!

--
Sl√ inte,
:FI:Kitty

http://home.quicknet.nl/qn/prive/amatullah/fis01.jpg
Fightin' Irish Squad (http://www.fighting-irish.org/)

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 08:48 AM
www.tiger-tank.com (http://www.tiger-tank.com)

Pictures of restoration showing everything. Structure, engine covers etc. See page 14

http://www.tiger-tank.com/secure/journal14.htm

Doesn't say how thick the engine covers were.

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 08:57 AM
Some gorgeous pics! Especially the paintings.

Man, that king tiger sure looks like a big, fat mutha! Wouldn't wanna see that come rolling towards my trench 8)

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 09:40 AM
Tiger is good, but i think king-tiger is more like a panther /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 09:46 AM
Phew, I understand why Tigers were feared, I'd surely keep my head down if one of those were nearby.. Fortunately I haven't had to fight a war and meet tanks.

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 09:51 AM
some useful info at...

http://chinese.astrology.com/tiger.html

<center>http://easyweb.globalnet.hr/easyweb/users/ntomlino/uploads/sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 12:14 PM
http://www.onwar.com/tanks/germany/plans/tiger2.gif




http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap18a.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 12:54 PM
yanqivic wrote:
- Tiger is good, but i think king-tiger is more like a
- panther /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
-
-

The King Tiger used the same chassis as the Panther II (which never entered production). Otherwise its' nothing like a Panther.



We few, we happy few, we band of W√ľrgerwhiners...
http://home.wanadoo.nl/wana.mail1/Op****/WurgerwhinerLogo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 01:14 PM
Now I am wondering, which Tiger was evryone referring to in the now locked tiger vs .50 ammunition post ??

Tiger 1 or 2 ??

Funny how a lock winds up on a post with biggest volume of traffic in 2 months .... when interest wanes, it will die alone ... someone was whining, and must have been whining hard.

I have not laughed so hard in a long time!

CC

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 01:32 PM
Coon-Chow wrote:
- Now I am wondering, which Tiger was evryone
- referring to in the now locked tiger vs .50
- ammunition post ??
-
- Tiger 1 or 2 ??
-
- Funny how a lock winds up on a post with biggest
- volume of traffic in 2 months .... when interest
- wanes, it will die alone ... someone was whining,
- and must have been whining hard.
-
- I have not laughed so hard in a long time!
-
- CC
-
-
-
-

We were talking about the late Tiger I. I submitted proof why it was impossible for the .50 cal to penetrate the engine grill or the top armor, but i guess nobody read it and the thread continued another 8 pages /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

The Tiger II is even tougher at 40mm top armor.

fluke39
07-01-2003, 01:33 PM
here is two pics of my tiger, i think could be taken out by a .50 cal - if the pilots aim was good enough


<img src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/Beaufigs_059.jpg>

<img src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/Beaufigs_043.jpg>

ok so its R/C /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
(also, ignore the fool in the background, he exists only as a guide to scale)





<center><img src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/ffluke.jpg>

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 01:36 PM
There is a 3rd "Tiger" tank, the "Jagdtiger"

(any P-47s here to kill this giant? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif )

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/pz12.htm

++ 88.IAP_Manuc ++

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 01:37 PM
fluke39 wrote:
- here is two pics of my tiger, i think could be taken
- out by a .50 cal - if the pilots aim was good enough
-
-
- <img
- src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/Bea
- ufigs_059.jpg>
-
-
- <img
- src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/Bea
- ufigs_043.jpg>

And where are you going to take it out?

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 01:39 PM
VVS-Manuc wrote:
- There is a 3rd "Tiger" tank, the "Jagdtiger"
-
-

And this Tiger, the SturmTiger

http://www.737thtankbattalion.org/St1.jpg

for more photos http://www.737thtankbattalion.org/sturmtiger.htm

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap18a.jpg


Message Edited on 07/01/0308:41AM by MiloMorai

fluke39
07-01-2003, 01:44 PM
TiGeR----- wrote:
-
- fluke39 wrote:
-- here is two pics of my tiger, i think could be taken
-- out by a .50 cal - if the pilots aim was good enough

- And where are you going to take it out?



it's only small

it likes the comfort and warmth of my room most of the time.
occaisionally it may venture out when somewhere need defending ( but only if there's no 1/72 thunderbolts around)

it's size belies it's abilities though - ask anyone thats seen it -it'll climb just about anything ! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


<center><img src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/ffluke.jpg>

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 01:48 PM
I don't know about the .50's, but I flew a Stuka with the big cannons and loosed my entire ammo load on one of those Russian tanks to no avail. On the other hand, I flew a sortie up and down the enemy armor line and destroyed about 6 or 7 Russian tanks before I was bingo and headed home.

What kind of Tank was it that couldn't be destroyed by multiple strikes with the Stuka's big guns?



http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/_uimages/TBolt.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 01:54 PM
Thunderbolt56 wrote:
- I don't know about the .50's, but I flew a Stuka
- with the big cannons and loosed my entire ammo load
- on one of those Russian tanks to no avail. On the
- other hand, I flew a sortie up and down the enemy
- armor line and destroyed about 6 or 7 Russian tanks
- before I was bingo and headed home.
-
- What kind of Tank was it that couldn't be destroyed
- by multiple strikes with the Stuka's big guns?
-
-
-
-
<img
- src="http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/_uimages/
- TBolt.jpg">
-
-
-


One from Il-2FB /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 02:07 PM
Hi there.

In terms of the configuration of its armour, the Tiger II is much closer to the Panther than to the Tiger I.

The Tiger I was the oldest of the three designs, and showed little evidence of the 'sloping armour' concept. Nevertheless, its armour was exceptionally thick and the overall standard of protection - compared to most of its contemporaries - was very high. This fact, combined with the potent 88mm gun, made it a serious headache for most Allied tankers - East and West - almost to the end of the war.

Tank designers had experimented with the idea of sloping armour for some time, but until 1942/43 at least, perhaps no tank embodied the concept better than the Russian T-34. After the Germans encountered it, they made haste to incorporate sloped plates in their newer designs. The general shape of the armour on both Panther and Tiger II reflects this.

As for roof and deck armour, this is where the protection on almost all tanks is at its thinnest. Although AFVs such as Tiger II, Jagdtiger and, to some extent, Tiger I benefitted from extraordinary thicknesses even on their roofs and decking, they were far from common vehicles.

Only 1,354 Tiger I were built, plus 489 Tiger II and 77 Jagdtiger. By contrast, there were over 8,500 Panzer IV and almost 6,000 Panthers built - not to mention many other types produced in large numbers.

These types had roof armour significantly thinner than Tiger I and way, way thinner than Tiger II. Most of the German tanks encountered in Normandy, for example, were Panzer IV or Panther, with a relative few Tiger I here and there. The Tiger II wasn't enountered in the West until the battle for Normandy was as good as over, the Jagdtiger much later.

Best regards to all,
Panther3485

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 04:24 PM
No wonder the allied Tank crew were afraid of the Tigers:

<center>http://www.parinet.fi/esso/images/tiikeri.jpg </center>


/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/shots/Vipez2.jpg </center>