Light tanks

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • maybe but stupid in this game you only need light tank fast and strong 10 light tank destroy my 5 mediums . But medium have stronger armor and gun on light tank cant hurt in real life medium tank , light tank is so fast in this game only need to build light tank and nothing more . Airplanes and rest of the tanks no need and they much exspensive and slow . In my game light tank take my 20 provinces for 10 hours , just 12 , 3 brigades with 4 tanks .
    • Wow, have you even completed a single game? LT get decimated by MT when you use the MT correctly. Besides, you can do a lot of hurt to bigger tanks when are in a fast, maneuverable one and can get to its backside.

      Forum ArmyField Marshall :00000441:

      Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!

    • car dusan silni wrote:

      I say this is stupid if tanks are fast they must have low armor and weak gun
      Lol, not true. Look at any modern MBT or lots of WWII era and beyond medium tanks. Also, most tanks have incredibly weak rear armour which can be destroyed with a tiny gun. Also, the tanks gun be using stuff like wolfram core shells and sabot rounds.

      car dusan silni wrote:

      Bomb from bomber to cant destroy a fucking light tank i say this is a stupid .
      We are not allowed to swear and you can be reported for that. Light tanks are very fast and commonly small. These make them very hard to hit. Besides, the plane could be dropping an armour piercing bomb and we should all know those things are not very explosive.

      Forum ArmyField Marshall :00000441:

      Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!

    • Well it was five years ago, quite some stuff changed since then ;)
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.
    • Butter Ball Bill wrote:

      car dusan silni wrote:

      I say this is stupid if tanks are fast they must have low armor and weak gun
      Lol, not true. Look at any modern MBT or lots of WWII era and beyond medium tanks. Also, most tanks have incredibly weak rear armour which can be destroyed with a tiny gun. Also, the tanks gun be using stuff like wolfram core shells and sabot rounds.

      car dusan silni wrote:

      Bomb from bomber to cant destroy a fucking light tank i say this is a stupid .
      We are not allowed to swear and you can be reported for that. Light tanks are very fast and commonly small. These make them very hard to hit. Besides, the plane could be dropping an armour piercing bomb and we should all know those things are not very explosive.
      IF any air force commander puts AP bombs on his bombers, he is most likely to suffer from a demote. AP rounds are extremely ineffective against infantry. Also, a high impact angle is required for the AP to do its job, airplane-thrown bombs practically don’t have very high impact angles. Bombers will, in most occasions, only be loaded with high ex, flame and nuke bombs. For those attack bombers out there, like Ju87, they are loaded with high ex anti tank bombs, or HEAT.

      HEATs don’t work in the way APs does. Upon intact, HEATs explode(does not go through armor), produce extremely high temperatures and pressure, make a big hole on the armor and the hot metal pieces produced in the blast injures or kills the crew. APs simply penetrate(goes through) the armor using its relatively high muzzle velocity and high impact angle.

      Attached please find an illustrated explanation to impact angle.

      AND tactical bombers are made to anti infantry, they are not that well suited for the job to destroy panzers than attack bombers. Tanks could have high speeds along with a big gun and heavy armor, if the motor and the weight-balancing features are excellent.
      Images
      • 0BA0404E-A568-4CC9-8104-942893298502.jpeg

        655.19 kB, 3,010×1,687, viewed 2 times

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Joe-6989 ().

    • In the WW2 era, most anti-armor attack bombers didn't actually use bombs, but either autocannon (Stuka and Yak versions) or missiles (Typhoon). The reason is that you need high impact velocities to penetrate armor, and the mere pull of gravity of a bomb simply isn't enough. Sure you can make a big boom with a HE bomb, but that will just give the tank crew an ear malfunction or a headache - the armor simply deflects the blast of a "plain" explosion, even when exploding right on top of it. The point of an armor-piercing round is to penetrate the armor and THEN explode - cause for an explosion INSIDE the narrow confines of a tank hull you only need a fraction of the explosive power to kill the crew. But to penetrate the armor, your absolute number one priority is velocity.

      This also means that such a targeted application of cannon and rocket means you need less weight per round, so you can carry more ammunition per plane.

      For soft targets (which includes infantry, trucks/jeeps, stone buildings, etc), high explosives is of course the better choice - with a lack of protective armor, the bigger the boom, the better.

      This same difference can be seen in the guns category - soft target howitzers, mortars, and field guns with a low muzzle velocity (allowing an arced fire trajectory and long distance), and specialized AT guns with a high muzzle velocity (and flat trajectories and short range).
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.
    • Butter Ball Bill wrote:

      Wow, have you even completed a single game? LT get decimated by MT when you use the MT correctly. Besides, you can do a lot of hurt to bigger tanks when are in a fast, maneuverable one and can get to its backside.
      r u talkign abt real life light tanks can do a lot of damage when behind a heavy tank? if so, ur kinda wrong, if u've every played War Thunder u'd understand. For example a M5A1 light tank obv isn't gonna pen a tiger Heavy tank on the back, light tanks were never built to be intended to fight heavier tanks during WW1 and 2 at least