If you could design WWII armor,

[Task Force]

Originally Posted by Castout

T-34's body slope and speed and simplicity, Panther Panzer V armor thickness and weight and size and Tiger I's 88mm gun, IS-3 low front silhouette and turret shape.


Easier said than done.

For RL I must give T-34-85 my utmost respect.

Why give your idea the Kwk 36, Id give it the kwk 43, far better gun.

Using the Pzgr 39 it could penitrate 110 mm of armor at 500m, while the 43 could penetrate 185 at the same range with the same amunition IIRC.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Task Force

Why give your idea the Kwk 36, Id give it the kwk 43, far better gun.

Using the Pzgr 39 it could penitrate 110 mm of armor at 500m, while the 43 could penetrate 185 at the same range with the same amunition IIRC.

Not the same ammunition, the KwK 43's was different, especially with its much larger propelling charge.

Though if your chassis is only as heavy as a Panther, it might not be able to carry the KwK 43 and sufficient ammunition, or it might not be able to withstand the pressure of firing it.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by Task Force

Why give your idea the Kwk 36, Id give it the kwk 43, far better gun.

Using the Pzgr 39 it could penitrate 110 mm of armor at 500m, while the 43 could penetrate 185 at the same range with the same amunition IIRC.

Umm Just think that an ideal medium tank should not carry a too big gun, but nonetheless gun which will bring serious threat to enemy heavy and deadly to other medium.

Bigger guns naturally have longer reload times wouldn't be suitable for a medium mobility tank.

But since kwk 43 has the same 88mm caliber, if it's suitable then why not

[frinik]

The problem with upgunnign a medium size tank ids the weight of the gun.The Kwk 39 of the Panzer IV F2 weighs 700 kilos, the KwK42 of the Panther 1.2 tons(metric) while the Kwk36 and 43 were considerably heavier so you end up with either enlarging your tank, both turret and hull and then gainign considerable weight which means your tank is no longer a medium tank but a heavy one.I think the gun of the Panther was more than adequate and rather thna invest in costly and ridiculous dead end projects like the Ratte and Maus they should have invested German R & D ,the most adavnced in the World at the time, to improve the existing shells and give them more penetratin gpower and or develop guided anti -tank missiles that could fired from tanks.Would have been cheaper and more effective

[Sledgehammer427]

I agree Frinik, the 75mm the Panther used was more than enough. IIRC it was a wonderful gun.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Castout

Bigger guns naturally have longer reload times wouldn't be suitable for a medium mobility tank.

Simple solution:

Long time to reload one gun?
Have more than one gun.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Simple solution:

Long time to reload one gun?
Have more than one gun.

Nooooooooo I hate tanks with more than one gun .

I've changed my mind about the 88mm gun. It seems even the Russian D-10T 100mm gun is even a more powerful(ideal gun) for a medium WWII tank. And the gun is available late in WWII period.

It can be carried by a T34(T34-100) as seen in the following picture:



So

T54 armor thickness
T34 mobility and sloping and simplicity
100mm D-10T gun or equivalent
T72 turret shape and T54 hull size.


Raaawrrr

In the end, after looking at the criteria, my ideal WWII [medium] tank simply to have already existed in second world war,

The T54(March 1945).



In my opinion The T54 revolutionary ballistic protection shape and high mobility, powerful gun and low silhoutte would make it the war winning machine of its day. Had it been introduced a year or two sooner it would reign king in second world war. The fact that it was used into late 1980s even now in some countries is a testament of its design quality. Its high production number also testified to the confidence it gave to the Soviet army.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Castout

Nooooooooo I hate tanks with more than one gun .

More than one main gun I take it?

Hate to only have the big gun when Infantry is swarming about.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

More than one main gun I take it?

Hate to only have the big gun when Infantry is swarming about.

Yeah no more than a single main gun . Am okay with MG. That M3 Lee is a pain to look at to give example. They should compensate the Germans and the British for having to see that in battle. An ungainly sight.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Castout

Yeah no more than a single main gun . Am okay with MG. That M3 Lee is a pain to look at to give example. They should compensate the Germans and the British for having to see that in battle. An ungainly sight.

The AMX-30 seemed to pull of the twin heavy weapons with style.

[Pillar]

Originally Posted by Castout

revolutionary ballistic protection shape

What about it is revolutionary? Interesting