Türk porno yayini yapan http://www.smfairview.com ve http://www.idoproxy.com adli siteler rokettube videolarini da HD kalitede yayinlayacagini acikladi. Ayrica porno indir ozelligiyle de http://www.mysticinca.com adli porno sitesi devreye girdi.
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Determining the best tank: the "Effort ratio" or why it should bye bye big cats

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    424

    Default Determining the best tank: the "Effort ratio" or why it should bye bye big cats

    It all started with the discussion about "the best tank".
    Usually the race is all about T34 vs Panther with focus on "medium design towards future" or Panther vs Tiger with focus on "kill ratio" or Sherman vs T34 with focus on "production".

    But! Criticism came around. The III/IV stood up. Stats were brought up etc etc

    Recent thinking put me to another point of view:
    not the "kill ratio" but what one can call the "effort ratio" appreciates the total war scale. It is nothing more than a kill ratio with the value of the kills added: kill ratio x production ratio.

    If let's say a Tiger tank has a kill ratio of 1 / (9 T34 + a JS-2) one would call it 10 / 1. Kill ratio philosophy woud label this a superb tank.
    If however one side is capable of producing more than 9 T34 and a JS-2 per Tiger
    (monthly stats can be produced) the side with the apparent low kill ratio prevails on the battlefield, having literally one or more tanks "still around".
    If one knows 2.5 Panzer IV's substituted (only in cost alone) a Tiger we can make the following calculation:

    2 Tigers would mean 5 Panzer IV's.
    2 Tigers would kill 20 tanks, which means the equivalent investment Panzer IV's would need a kill ratio higher than 20/5 to defeat the Tiger = 4 / 1. This seems not unrealistic.

    This can help explain why the Tiger is that much questioned. I dare to say that the kill ratio of a Tiger simply can't be high enough to make it that superb tank. I'll stick with the IV.

    The Panther would fail utterly. Continuous Breakdowns definitely need to be counted in, since repair equates to reduced availability and thus reduced production.

    Other things can be added in favour of the IV. for example simply the highest rate of fire power (shell / gun size) per weight unit in a turret tank for the Germans. In fact, the only tank that mattered at the end that got upgraded. Or the fact it weighed ( less material) less than it's enemy "peers".
    Last edited by steben; 08-23-2013 at 08:33 AM.
    It is nice to have big heavy tanks, it is even nicer not to need them

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    midwest
    Posts
    201

    Default Re: Determining the best tank: the "Effort ratio" or why it should bye bye big cats

    Aaaaargh....

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    424

    Default Re: Determining the best tank: the "Effort ratio" or why it should bye bye big cats

    Thanks for the input.
    Are you a proponent of the Tiger?
    It is nice to have big heavy tanks, it is even nicer not to need them

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •