/int/ - International

>>10070 >Triggered troll bitch upset that his retarded T-34 comparison didn't quite go as he planned Lol, cry more. >>10072 >Mariupol Kek.

>>10097 T-34 comparison was spot on, you just didn't get it because you're militarily illiterate. Also more of "The job".

>>10112 T-34 comparison was shit because none of the reasons that caused T-34 production quality to be subpar apply to BTR-4. Cry more, retarded exposed troll bitch. >"The job" Lol.

>>10114 Nope, you're still not getting it. Try again, Blyadislav. Or ask me to enlighten your tiny slavic peabrain. The choice is yours. Also more of "The job".

>>10117 You have no arguments and you choose to squeal. Good.

>>10120 You have no clue and refuse to think, GαyOrgy. Or maybe you do, but then refuse to accept it because your in the end just a slavic subhuman. Again, ask nicely, and I'll tell you. PS: I would also have to add that you really chose the worst possible hill to die on in this argument, because there is simply so much material about the BTR-4 doing The Job (i.e. killing your countrymen).

>>10136 >>10120 gentlemen this is a wendy's (tank thread not war thread)

I like this kind of vehicle. 4 wheels armored, but with a shape that also helps dissipating explosions, including from bellow. Murkoids came up with this one during the Iraq war because they needed something small but the humvee couldn't even take 0.50 caliber. After the war they gave up on it complaining that it was too expensive and replaced it with those monstruosities: the JLTV and LATV. Canada bought a more powerful version.

>>10149 >Murkoids came up with this one during the Iraq war No, it's much older than that. The M1117 was developed in the 1990s and was in turn based on the Cadillac Commando from the 1960s.

>>10149 Cuuute! CUTE!

>>10150 I didn't know that the m1117 already existed before the iraq war, but I'm aware that there are others vehicles like that from the 20th century. France also has a family of vehicles like that. But the m11117 seems to be the most updated, and also the most powerful one while still being an urban vehicle.

>StuG III posted >Wiesel posted I don't think I have anything to add, except the notion that I really like how there are seemingly more than one model builders on here. Pic 1 is the last tank I built, I only have a wip picture right now; this was to simulate track sag. Second one is the current project (which I started in march or april and haven't been doing anything for since then XD). It's a DeHavilland Tiger Moth in 1:72. First time I'm doing "proper" mods like separating the rudder from the tail part and adding pegs for the steering wires.

>>10982 Noice, love the freehand. Three Modelbernds so far.

>>10924 hate it when people call APCs 'tanks'. are you a clueless woman or something?

>>11006 In german every armored vehicle is called a tank. An APC is a "Schützenpanzer". Are you american behind a proxy? Because terminology autism "what is a tank" and "what is an assault rifle" is a distinctly murrican phenomenon.

>>11009 nah, Belarusian but here linguistics-wise it's more like in English: APC, IFV, tank

>>11019 Are SPGs tanks?

>>11020 yep, self-propelling artillery unit - SAU - funnily it has the same acronymic in Belarusian

>>11022 So a Caesar is a tank, but a Luchs isn't?

>>11034 why would you make such a conclusion? Cesar is a SAU / SPG, Luchs is an APC and, dude, calling APCs tanks is surely weird af. it is basically a slightly armoured truck. I drove one - it literally has a steering wheel and all the shit like an automobile.

>>11006 I started every filename with "tank" so this batch of photos would all show up in spot in the folder. Also, in German, all those things are indeed "tanks" (i.e. Panzer). MBT = Kampfpanzer Tracked IFV = Schützenpanzer Wheeled IFV = Radpanzer APC = Transportpanzer ARV = Bergepanzer

>>11041 >Luchs is an APC The Luchs is not an APC, it doesn't carry personnel (except the crew itself of course). It's a "Spähpanzer" (roughly meaning "scouting tank").

>>11041 >why would you make such a conclusion? I asked you if SPGs are tanks and you said yes, see >>11022 Also, what exactly makes a tank a tank? Is there a commonly accepted definition? If I put a bunch of red army soldier onto a T-34 isn't that an APC then, too? And isn't bicycle with a sidecar with an MG42 an IFV? As I said, terminology autism that is usually in the firm grasp of anglos.

>>11042 >>11043 >MBT = Kampfpanzer - MBT >Tracked IFV = Schützenpanzer - IFV >Wheeled IFV = Radpanzer - IFV >APC = Transportpanzer - APC >ARV = Bergepanzer - fighting reconnaissance vehicle of the paratroopers (here paratroopers or sea landing operations are called Descente - like from French) I didn't know Luchs is an IRV but yeah, we also have a separate word for it >>11045 oh, shit my bad, man - I somehow read it 'is there a separate word for SPGs?'

>>11045 >what exactly makes a tank a tank? well, apparently everybody knows what it is - aside from Swedes I mean - heavily armoured, tracked, turreted with a gun, meant for defense breakthrough >If I put a bunch of red army soldier onto a T-34 isn't that an APC then, too? nah, come on but if I'm not mistaken Israeli Merkavas are weird in the sense that they have a small infantry compartment >And isn't bicycle with a sidecar with an MG42 an IFV? it's fighting vehicle - so meant for fighting, APCs' primary purpose is for transporting - again, basically a modified truck so bicycle is closer to an APC

>>11051 Why is the Stridsvagn not a tank? The only thing it's lacking is a turret, but who says a tank needs a turret? Or do you just think only MBTs are tanks? Anyway, have this alignment chart and let us drop this dumb argument. ATAB (all tanks are beautiful) except for british, especially ww2 tanks

>>11067 >this dumb argument nah, my man. just chilling here with a genial kc discussion. not trying to convince you of anything. and your explanation on the German language perspective was clearly making me understand your point of view. here's one more thing though - picrel is one and only meme image I ever tried to create

>>11073 Oh that wasn't me, that was another Bernd. I was just the one arguing. I don't understand the picture though, wasn't it always the russians with the biggest guns?

>>11076 >wasn't it always the russians with the biggest guns? for me it always were the French I think for IFVs only BMP-1 had some large caliber gun. then they moved to the 30 mm.

>>11045 You call these things by their purpose. You can maybe beat a nail into wood by using a phone, but the intended purpose of the phone is not to beat nails into things. As I understand, a tank is meant to advance onto enemy positions and bonk things close up. You can perhaps use it for indirect fire or carry infantry, but those are not its primary purpose.

>>11067 Stridsvagn is a tank and bandvagn is a tank and Kundvagn is also a tank!

>>11088 You know what's also a tank? You're mom (because she is so fat) :-DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

>>11045 It's about doctrine and purpose. Though yes some people can get hung up on these things which can lead to some silly conclusions. >>11073 What French IFVs have huge cannons? Somewhat related, in Australia we made this, it's an M113 with a turret form a Saladin armoured car. But it's a fire support vehicle designed for Vietnam not an IFV,

>>11145 Sacrebleu, hon hon hon

>>11145 Those are APCs not IFVs though.

>>11151 I meant they are Armoured cars not APCs.

What is the evolutionary advantage of the male mind being inadvertedly enamored in armored vehicles? Is the protection and firepower they provide somehow giving us the feeling of returning to the motherly womb? If for one have to admit, I love all armored vehicles.

>>11153 >Marge and Panzer uh oh.....

>>11155 Yes, it's technically not a Panzer, but I thought I go for the memetic filename instead of an accurate Nomenklatur.

>>11158 >accurate nomenclature I mean, it IS literally, figuratively and actually a *Spähpanzer*, so...

>>11160 Isn't it named Panzerspähwagen or the such? Then one might argue how the Panzer doesn't provide the stem in the world, but acts rather descriptivly as in that it's armored. I might add that I think that it's the most sexy and for daily use probably the most useful armored vehicle, if the interior would be updated for modern standards of course.

>>11163 >Then one might argue how the Panzer doesn't provide the stem in the world, but acts rather descriptivly as in that it's armored. Yes, and that is why all armored vehicles are called "Panzer" in German. I'm just arguing again for the sake of arguing.

>>11166 So am I Bernd, so am I. Still 1,5h of wörk and I rather spend the time with Panzers :3 Really liking the angular second one.

H

>>11167 >Still 1,5h of wörk What are you, a Beamter? I still have a good 6 hours to go ;_;

>>11175 Office stallion and proud of it. Gotta have those people that can calculate them angles to get such nice vehicles for example. Hang in there Bernd, the weekend is near!

>>11153 It really do be like that.

Here's another totally historical picture of a tank