Comments on: Valentine IX Trials in the USSR

By: Valentine IX Trails in the USSR – Tank and AFV News

Valentine IX Trails in the USSR – Tank and AFV News — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:25:08 +0000

[…] For the Record has an interesting post translating information on the Valentine infantry tank in Soviet service provided by Russian researcher Yuri Pasholok. The post relates the results of Soviet testing at Kubinka in March of 1943 of a Valentine IX tank. The IX variant was equipped with a larger turret and 57mm 6 pounder gun as compared to earlier versions of the vehicle which had the 2 pounder gun. The report concludes that the Soviets were less than enthusiastic about this varient of the tank due to the lack of an HE round for the main gun and lack of coaxial machine gun. The test results can be viewed at the Archive Awareness website. […]

By: LuanPershing2000

LuanPershing2000 — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:20:54 +0000

Lol

By: Oberonium

Oberonium — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 06:54:36 +0000

Funnything is that in soviet Russia Churchill was not so good in a questionof off-roadcapability. It is always mentioned one case when in time of Battle of Kursk 15 Churchill tank have been ordered to recapture a village. During the march to the village 10 Churchills tank were broken and 1 has lost its track while trying to climb on the hill . Only 3 or 4 vehicles were able to get to its destination.

By: 23r0_NA

23r0_NA — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 05:03:35 +0000

There was also a Valentine with a 17-lber gun as well, though iirc it was very limited-production.

By: FPSGHoST808 .

FPSGHoST808 . — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 02:51:30 +0000

Sneeze sorry I’m allergic to bullshit

By: Mr_Ekshin

Mr_Ekshin — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 00:27:28 +0000

“… I would not want to stabilize a 57mm gun with my shoulder. Im sure it was engineered well and worked if you say so, but sounds bones-broken-concussion-inducing horrible…”

No. The person “shouldering” the gun did not have to absorb the recoil. He was simply using human power to elevate and depress the gun. The A-13 series were the same.

Some Brit gunners got very good at it, and their accomplishments “firing on the move” were not equaled until vertical stabilizers were later invented. :)

By: Septfox Malkier

Septfox Malkier — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 15:51:33 +0000

I’ve read that 6pdrs have elevation locks of some sort to keep the gun from smushing the gunner whilst going over bumps and whatnot.

Gotta agree, though, I’m not sure I would want even a well-balanced ~1000kg gun riding on my shoulder.

By: Septfox Malkier

Septfox Malkier — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 15:48:18 +0000

Probably down to training. I’d guess that most Soviet tankers would be familiar with the concept of stabilization with the shoulder, but not have the days/weeks/months of training and practice to do it effectively.

I mean, lets face it, the whole arrangement looks like you’re aiming and shooting it “like a rifle”, but I would imagine actually doing it was wildly different :v

By: Baldrickk

Baldrickk — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 15:42:17 +0000

Exactly, The Churchill holds the record for the fastest advance of the war, actually having to wait for the rest of the allies to catch up, lest they pushed too far.
This is mainly due to its excellent off-road capability, which is not shown in WOT (here’s hoping they actually model it properly in the new movement physics) – the tank could almost literately get anywhere. There were numerous occasions where the Germans were caught off guard because they didn’t believe that /any/ tank could make it across certain terrain, and so the Churchills were able to advance and attack German fortifications where they were weakest.

It was also one of the best hulls for re-use as utility vehicles – there is a reason the AVRE, bridge-layer, ARK, ARV, Crocodile flame tanks etc were based on the Churchill chassis.

I’m not saying it didn’t have faults, but so did other tanks – there is a reason they were still in service through the Korean war (mainly as gun-tanks) and beyond (though that was the last time they were used in combat).

By: Westonbirt_EU

Westonbirt_EU — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 15:24:36 +0000

The fucking thing that kills the Valentine is the terrible, terrible, terrible RoF on all guns. Cut in HALF compared to the average for their caliber.