This is meaningless : that the Me-410 shot down 12 US aircraft,has nothing to do with the question if the Me-210 was crap .
A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
If the Hungarians could shot down American bombers in 1945,this proves that the claim that their aircraft were crap, is not correct .
There is no such thing as a crap aircraft and there is no such thing as a crap tank .
There is no such thing as a crap aircraft and there is no such thing as a crap tank .
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
All it proves is that the Hungarians could shoot down some American bombers...Even the Royal Thai Air Force did that in 1945.
Never heard of the Bob Semple tank did you?
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
If crap Hungarian aircraft could shoot down in 1945 American aircraft, that would mean ...that these American aircraft were even more crap than the Hungarian ones .
If you say A, you must also say B .
There are countless reasons why aircraft A can shoot down aircraft B ,and the design of both is only one of them ,and it is not the most important .
Most of the Japanese kamikaze aircraft had no success, but it would totally wrong to say that this proves that these aircraft were crap .
Most of the Soviet tanks were lost to non combat causes, but this is not a proof that they were crap .
2/3 of the American aircraft that were lost in WW 2,were not lost in combat, but that is not a proof that they were crap .
That Horthy jr died in an air accident is also not a proof that the aircraft was crap .
If you say A, you must also say B .
There are countless reasons why aircraft A can shoot down aircraft B ,and the design of both is only one of them ,and it is not the most important .
Most of the Japanese kamikaze aircraft had no success, but it would totally wrong to say that this proves that these aircraft were crap .
Most of the Soviet tanks were lost to non combat causes, but this is not a proof that they were crap .
2/3 of the American aircraft that were lost in WW 2,were not lost in combat, but that is not a proof that they were crap .
That Horthy jr died in an air accident is also not a proof that the aircraft was crap .
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
I hope you both realize that you are discussing a nonsense, right
"Everything remained theory and hypothesis. On paper, in his plans, in his head, he juggled with Geschwaders and Divisions, while in reality there were really only makeshift squadrons at his disposal."
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
I only ever expect nonsense from ljadw, as I have never seen him be anything other than contrary on this and other forums.
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
Other forums?
"Everything remained theory and hypothesis. On paper, in his plans, in his head, he juggled with Geschwaders and Divisions, while in reality there were really only makeshift squadrons at his disposal."
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
I see that you did not read the article about the Bob Semple tank : if you had done ,you would have read that it was not impossible that the Bob Semple tank could have been efficient in combat .
This means that there is no reason to qualify the Bob Semple tank as crap .
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
The nonsense is the claim ( inspired by jingoism ) that German tanks and aircraft were crap .
The nonsense is also the claim that winning or losing a battle, a war depends only on the weak and bad points of the used weapons,the old American'' qualitative '' myth .
The truth is that is was very simple to eliminate a T 34 or Tiger II or Sherman , but no intelligent person would say that this makes these tanks crap .
The truth is also that a Pz 2 could be as efficient as a Panther ,but this does not make the Panther crap .
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
Oh, it is not impossible...It would have made a fine paperweight or farm tractor...But, not a tank. You can use both a paperweight and farm tractor in combat.ljadw wrote: ↑01 Jun 2022, 12:18I see that you did not read the article about the Bob Semple tank : if you had done ,you would have read that it was not impossible that the Bob Semple tank could have been efficient in combat .
This means that there is no reason to qualify the Bob Semple tank as crap .
Oh, the Wiki article?
Addendum: it is not impossible that the Bob Semple tank could have been made to fly...This does not mean it would have been a good warplane.In the end, due to their impracticality, the tanks were disposed of by the Army.
Last edited by Takao on 01 Jun 2022, 14:10, edited 2 times in total.
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
He is/was LJAd over on WW2F, but has not been on in some years. He was as contrary there as he is here and using the same nonsense to back up his ideas.
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
The intention was to use the Bob Semple tank if NZ was invaded by Japan .As this did not happen, it was not used .Takao wrote: ↑01 Jun 2022, 12:29Oh, it is not impossible...It would have made a fine paperweight or farm tractor...But, not a tank. You can use both a paperweight and farm tractor in combat.ljadw wrote: ↑01 Jun 2022, 12:18I see that you did not read the article about the Bob Semple tank : if you had done ,you would have read that it was not impossible that the Bob Semple tank could have been efficient in combat .
This means that there is no reason to qualify the Bob Semple tank as crap .
Oh, the Wiki article?Addendum: it is not impossible that the Bob Semple tank could have been made to fly...This does not mean it would have been a good warplane.In the end, due to their impracticality, the tanks were disposed of by the Army.
End of the Wiki article : ''It might have been at least somewhat effective in the event of an invasion .''
And, if it killed only one Japanese, or slowed the Japanese advance by 15 minutes, it was not crap .
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
The Semple tank might have been at least somewhat effective as a submarine...This does not make it a good submarine.ljadw wrote: ↑01 Jun 2022, 16:47The intention was to use the Bob Semple tank if NZ was invaded by Japan .As this did not happen, it was not used .
End of the Wiki article : ''It might have been at least somewhat effective in the event of an invasion .''
And, if it killed only one Japanese, or slowed the Japanese advance by 15 minutes, it was not crap .
The Semple tank might have been at least somewhat effective as a rocketship...This does not make it a good rocketship.
Anything might be at least somewhat effective at being something else...This does not mean it is good at being something else.
You can kill a Japanese soldier with a rock...This does not make the rock a good tank.
Need I continue...You still have not proven the Semple tank was a good tank, not a crap one. Woulda, Coulda, but Didn't, does not make the Semple a good tank, it makes it a crap one. They woulda...They coulda...But, they didn't, because it was crap.
Re: A Panzer 3 is all there needed to be
I have not to prove that the Semple tank was a'' good'' tank,because I never said that it was a ''good '' tank.You said that it was crap ,thus the onus is for you .
Besides : there is no such thing as a good tank, a better tank or a crap tank .
To give tanks good or bad points is a totally wrong practice .
Besides : there is no such thing as a good tank, a better tank or a crap tank .
To give tanks good or bad points is a totally wrong practice .