T14 Heavy Tank - Revision history

imported>Administrator: 2 revisions imported

2023-06-23T13:27:02Z

2 revisions imported

← Older revision	Revision as of 13:27, 23 June 2023
(No difference)

imported>Administrator: 1 revision imported

2023-06-19T13:47:58Z

1 revision imported

← Older revision	Revision as of 13:47, 19 June 2023
(No difference)

1d4chan>Lord Of The Lemmings: /* In Real Life */

2022-06-17T21:46:45Z

In Real Life

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:46, 17 June 2022
Line 10:		Line 10:
	The American T-14 shares a lot of similarities and design-qualities with the early Sherman, sharing the same shape, the same short-barreled 75mm (though the Brits would've used the 6-pdr) and standardized modules, except built to be longer so that it could be used as mobile cover. Even the T-14's armor thickness was the same as the Sherman, but at a steeper angle, giving it effectively more armor while using less resources; even though the armor was thinner than a Churchill's, it offered similar protection. That being said, because it was ''longer,'' the tank was also quite a bit heavier than a Sherman, which strained its engine and made it too heavy for less-than-ideal off-road conditions and took up more space in a ship when transported to Europe.		The American T-14 shares a lot of similarities and design-qualities with the early Sherman, sharing the same shape, the same short-barreled 75mm (though the Brits would've used the 6-pdr) and standardized modules, except built to be longer so that it could be used as mobile cover. Even the T-14's armor thickness was the same as the Sherman, but at a steeper angle, giving it effectively more armor while using less resources; even though the armor was thinner than a Churchill's, it offered similar protection. That being said, because it was ''longer,'' the tank was also quite a bit heavier than a Sherman, which strained its engine and made it too heavy for less-than-ideal off-road conditions and took up more space in a ship when transported to Europe.

	When the time came, the British decided to stick with the Churchill. Though the design was inefficient, it was also easier to upgrade and modify to address its inherent flaws, and they a already had the factory and tooling in place for ~~them and they lose~~ production ~~switching over~~.		When the time came, the British decided to stick with the Churchill. Though the design was inefficient, it was also easier to upgrade and modify to address its inherent flaws, and they already had the factory and tooling in place for the Churchill to be simply upgraded. Switching over would cause a loss in production that was seen as prohibitive.

	{{US Forces in Flames of War}}		{{US Forces in Flames of War}}
	{{British Forces in Flames of War}}		{{British Forces in Flames of War}}

2601:1C0:5C01:EAA0:0:0:0:C26D: /* In Real Life */

2022-06-17T18:08:05Z

In Real Life

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:08, 17 June 2022
Line 8:		Line 8:
	A joint American-British effort, the T-14 was meant to be an infantry/heavy tank to surpass the then-still-in-production [[Churchill]] infantry tank, which was built to assumed World War 1 conditions and doctrines (like, trenches, thinner armor on enemy tanks which would allow them to use smaller calibers on their guns, and unsloped armor, more in the Churchill page.) The Americans did not have an infantry tank of their own, so they consulted the British on what features they would like to see on this new heavy.		A joint American-British effort, the T-14 was meant to be an infantry/heavy tank to surpass the then-still-in-production [[Churchill]] infantry tank, which was built to assumed World War 1 conditions and doctrines (like, trenches, thinner armor on enemy tanks which would allow them to use smaller calibers on their guns, and unsloped armor, more in the Churchill page.) The Americans did not have an infantry tank of their own, so they consulted the British on what features they would like to see on this new heavy.

	The American T-14 shares a lot of similarities and design-qualities with the early Sherman, sharing the same shape, the same short-barreled 75mm (though the Brits would've used the 6-pdr) and standardized modules, except built to be longer so that it could be used as mobile cover. Even the T-14's armor thickness was the same as the Sherman, but at a steeper angle, giving it effectively more armor while using less resources; even though the armor was thinner than a Churchill's, it offered similar protection. That being said, because it was ''longer,'' the tank was also quite a bit heavier than a Sherman, which strained its engine and made it too heavy for less-than-ideal off-road conditions.		The American T-14 shares a lot of similarities and design-qualities with the early Sherman, sharing the same shape, the same short-barreled 75mm (though the Brits would've used the 6-pdr) and standardized modules, except built to be longer so that it could be used as mobile cover. Even the T-14's armor thickness was the same as the Sherman, but at a steeper angle, giving it effectively more armor while using less resources; even though the armor was thinner than a Churchill's, it offered similar protection. That being said, because it was ''longer,'' the tank was also quite a bit heavier than a Sherman, which strained its engine and made it too heavy for less-than-ideal off-road conditions and took up more space in a ship when transported to Europe.

	When the time came, the British decided to stick with the Churchill. Though the design was inefficient, it was also easier to upgrade and modify to address its inherent flaws.		When the time came, the British decided to stick with the Churchill. Though the design was inefficient, it was also easier to upgrade and modify to address its inherent flaws, and they a already had the factory and tooling in place for them and they lose production switching over.

	{{US Forces in Flames of War}}		{{US Forces in Flames of War}}
	{{British Forces in Flames of War}}		{{British Forces in Flames of War}}

1d4chan>MiaoKobayashisDragonMaid: Created page with "An experimental heavy tank that was designed and had two-prototypes built, but was never brought into active service. It exists in Flames of War as part of a T14 Assault Tank..."

2022-05-05T21:04:14Z

Created page with "An experimental heavy tank that was designed and had two-prototypes built, but was never brought into active service. It exists in Flames of War as part of a T14 Assault Tank..."

New page

An experimental heavy tank that was designed and had two-prototypes built, but was never brought into active service. It exists in Flames of War as part of a T14 Assault Tank Company/Squadron. Think of it as a [[/d/|longer, harder, and thicker]] Sherman.
==British==
[[File:Britbongt14.jpg|thumb|right|The stats]]
==American==
[[File:T14.jpg|thumb|right|The stats]]

==In Real Life==
A joint American-British effort, the T-14 was meant to be an infantry/heavy tank to surpass the then-still-in-production [[Churchill]] infantry tank, which was built to assumed World War 1 conditions and doctrines (like, trenches, thinner armor on enemy tanks which would allow them to use smaller calibers on their guns, and unsloped armor, more in the Churchill page.) The Americans did not have an infantry tank of their own, so they consulted the British on what features they would like to see on this new heavy.

The American T-14 shares a lot of similarities and design-qualities with the early Sherman, sharing the same shape, the same short-barreled 75mm (though the Brits would've used the 6-pdr) and standardized modules, except built to be longer so that it could be used as mobile cover. Even the T-14's armor thickness was the same as the Sherman, but at a steeper angle, giving it effectively more armor while using less resources; even though the armor was thinner than a Churchill's, it offered similar protection. That being said, because it was ''longer,'' the tank was also quite a bit heavier than a Sherman, which strained its engine and made it too heavy for less-than-ideal off-road conditions.

When the time came, the British decided to stick with the Churchill. Though the design was inefficient, it was also easier to upgrade and modify to address its inherent flaws.

{{US Forces in Flames of War}}
{{British Forces in Flames of War}}