It’s called the Archer not achilies, the archer in real life as well was actually excellent when it was defending as it mounted the excellent 17 pounder cannon which wrecked the enemy forces.
Was also engine wise rather reliable.
most of them in real life were infantry support tanks and filled those roles magnificantly..
How can you say they were bad IRL and that British tank design was crap when they literally saved the Russians on lend lease with thousands of tanks.
The mobility wasn’t relevant, the real life war was no where near what we get in warthunder, tanks rolled with their infantry and the churchills were fantastic when they were with their infantry due to the sheer volume of fire they could soak up.
the mobility wasn’t a huge factor during the second WW2. At all.
All of the vehicles in game perform terribly compared to their IRL counter parts, that includes centurions, chieftains , challangers and even the vickers mK7
In GRB, yeah… In IRB (infantry realistic battles, a term we are going to have to get use to soon)… not necessarily. But the player should be given the choice.
Yeah also folks forget to realise the suspension of Cheiftain, CR1 and such allowed them to maintain a decent pace off round, they consistently could get to their speed on almost any terrain. Ofc bar in the likes of you know where when it’s a literal bog.
The facts are there for you to see, it is your choice to deny them.
The Javelin, NLAW have been brutally effective at destroying Russian armour.
Even FPV drones have had some success usually after multiple hits (putting a grenade on an fpv drone does not make it some anti tank wonder weapon)
Still, you don’t want to have to reverse to your position. The only time that reverse is handy is when fleeing, and that is not debatable.
The Russians has mixed feelings on the churchills, saying they weren’t very reliable mechanically, and lacked good HE shells.
Mobility is very important in war, if the tank can’t match the pace of your advance, regardless of its in a battle, or moving troops, you cause a slow down.
That was something drilled into me in the USMC, and any slowdown, gets people killed.
Even the centurion had a long laundry list of mechanical issues (that I’m sure were ironed out).
But I’m not saying the Brit’s cannot make a good tank, I’m merely blaming the designers.
It’s like saying the m60 was a good tank, when in reality its engine roughly would only go 500 miles before it starts to puff black smoke, I think it toasted the piston rings? I can’t remember…
Or the Soviets bad reverse gears, and the T-64’s but aiming drives.
It literally was effectively used throughout 1944 - 1945 for firing on german armour then changing it’s position.
A fantastic ambush tank. Wether you agree or not is irrelevant.
Find me any infantry moving faster than a churching, infantry in WW2 moved with the tanks not infront of them.
doesn’t matter if it was a T34 or a PZIV. Do you think tiger tanks rolled into combat at 40 KMPH? no they rolled in at 15kmph that was it.
The churchill as with every tank the first iterations have teething issues, but from the MkIII generally onwards they were incredibly reliable. They could cross terrain literally no other tanks could especially not heavies.
They could take some amount of punishment as well doing so.
Ah yes the USMC who for half a decade haven’t had any tanks?
Same ones who rocked M60s in the gulf?
You talk about time in the USMC with armour vehicles then go on to show you know absolutely shitall about them IRL.
it is very dependant on the war, as the churchill proved time and time again during WW2 it was more than effective for what it was uspposed to do.
It could, and did, they literally led the advances in some cases, as well as broke german lines.
Dunno what history you’ve been looking at but the armour tends to set the pace. Extreme mobility just leads to isolation of armoured units.
Hence why leopards didn’t roll with infantry initially, or AMX30 they had to design IFVs to bring infatry up to speed
Or do you think masses of infantry are moving faster than maybe 9kmph marching?
Average walking pace is 4mph, which translates roughly to 6.4 ish kmph last I checked.
You literally said that the british are and I quote.
“the Brit’s make crap tanks. They’re like the Arietes” I added the capital letter to the Ariete seeing as it’s a noun.
That looks pretty damn clear to me you think the britsih cannot make a good tank xD
find me one single tank in the world which didn’t have a laundry list of issues before it was effective.
The centurion again was a world changing Tank, the birth of the MBT so to speak.
Who designed fantastic tanks but with issues? Much akin to cheiftain using a multifuel engine for nato who’m none of them did ?
None of that is relevant to the tanks actual design.
Also it was no where near 500 miles it was 500KM on average. barely 300 miles.
the leopards sent to you know where have suffered substantially more losses than the CRs which have been sent, and the challagners got used for the kursk breakthrough.
Wont argue that.
nor are the challangers lol?
Anyways none of this is ralated to the T- series MBTs so enough
Also the USMC had tanks up until 3 years ago when they started to move towards drone warfare and repurposed their tank crews into drone warfare specialists.
The chasis was that from a Valentine. So divert a few chasis from a seperate production line, slap a QF-17 onto it that again, you were gunna build anyway with the other modifications. Probably didnt cost that much.
Looks like about 655 Archers were built compared to 8200 ish valentines. No idea how many QF-17s were biult
3 years ago? no, they signed to give up the tanks in 2020 and by 2021 they had given up their last abrams. That’s half a decade ago now brother. 6 years ago for the signing and 5 years for actually giving them up.
Keep bringing what up:
You wanna insult and entire nations tank design which has been pivotal for the world then ofc people will bring it up.
That was the P-39 and it was only bad because it didn’t suit the theatre which it was used in, by the US.
The P-63 simply improved on what made the P-39 good.
But weird talking about it in this discussion about carousel autoloaders.