Jump to content


ACIII Thunderbolt


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

camdy #1 Posted 03 February 2017 - 01:27 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 29123 battles
  • 620
  • [CAMDY] CAMDY
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

thought i'd share this while i was going from the australian war memorial site 

 

https://www.awm.gov....tion/REL/08478/

 

if the AC 4 was built the hull design was similar to the AC3’s with the drivers door moved to the side of the hull, the engine bulkhead shifted to the rear slightly, the air intake located across the top of the hull behind the turret was removed and the air vents on the side of the fighting compartment enlarged to compensate.

according to http://www.mheaust.c.../sentinelmk.htm



Inglorious_Aussie_Tanker #2 Posted 03 February 2017 - 05:28 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 10950 battles
  • 3,929
  • Member since:
    01-18-2015

The AWM is great, and the wealth of information and Videos on the Australian Armed forces is Interesting.

 

While the Information on the AC Series Tank is good, I wish they'd "Napkin" sketched a few more Iterations, or Options for WOT to "Russian/Japanese/Czeck style" Implement.

Maybe an Naval gun replacement for the Limited AC1 6pounder, instead of the Nerfed 2pdr?

Hows about a "Napkin" Heavy Tank, "Yowie" HT1, along the Japanese Heavy style Tanks?

 

Anyway, It'd be great for WOT to include another AC Tank or even Correct the Current AC Tanks, Personally I'd like to see the Double 25pdrs included, given that this was an IRL Tank, and not a "Napkin" drawing like some other Nations Tanks lines. 


Vote NOW, to Wall up the Lakeville Valley Pass.

So Many Idiots.

So little Shells.


camdy #3 Posted 03 February 2017 - 09:11 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 29123 battles
  • 620
  • [CAMDY] CAMDY
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
yeah they must of taken AC 4 experimental's hull from this photo https://en.wikipedia...(AWM_P03498.010).jpg which shows the AC 4 turret test on the E1 prototype hull.

MaximumSomething #4 Posted 06 February 2017 - 07:11 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 9571 battles
  • 77
  • Member since:
    09-06-2014

View Postcamdy, on 03 February 2017 - 09:11 AM, said:

yeah they must of taken AC 4 experimental's hull from this photo https://en.wikipedia...(AWM_P03498.010).jpg which shows the AC 4 turret test on the E1 prototype hull.

 

Yeah, kind of, WG have then filled in the driver's hatch with one off an M3 rather than the one it should have, given it the early production suspension, fudged some of the other details, and passed it off as representative of the AC4. The vehicle in the photo was simply to test the complete 17 pounder tank gun.

 

 

AC4 artists impression

Probably as close as you are going to get to the AC4.



camdy #5 Posted 12 March 2017 - 11:01 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 29123 battles
  • 620
  • [CAMDY] CAMDY
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
yeah that looks alot better then the one we have now

Inglorious_Aussie_Tanker #6 Posted 14 March 2017 - 05:27 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 10950 battles
  • 3,929
  • Member since:
    01-18-2015

 

View PostMaximumSomething, on 06 February 2017 - 09:11 PM, said:

 

Yeah, kind of, WG have then filled in the driver's hatch with one off an M3 rather than the one it should have, given it the early production suspension, fudged some of the other details, and passed it off as representative of the AC4. The vehicle in the photo was simply to test the complete 17 pounder tank gun.

 

 

AC4 artists impression

Probably as close as you are going to get to the AC4.

 

In WOT defence they did name it the AC4 Experimental.

Which could STILL leave the option open to include the AC4 in the British line.


Edited by Inglorious_Aussie_Tanker, 28 April 2017 - 06:02 AM.

Vote NOW, to Wall up the Lakeville Valley Pass.

So Many Idiots.

So little Shells.


MaximumSomething #7 Posted 18 March 2017 - 01:26 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 9571 battles
  • 77
  • Member since:
    09-06-2014

View PostInglorious_Aussie_Tanker, on 14 March 2017 - 05:27 AM, said:

Which could STILL leave the option open to include the AC4 in the British line.

 

I agree, that is the one nice thing to come out of the way WG have handled the ACs.

 

I'm allowed to be a pedant if I want to be, the real world analogue of WG's AC4 Experimental wasn't an experimental or prototype AC4 in the sense of this is more or less what we intend to build, although it is perhaps understandable to a degree as there an awful lot that gets written about the Australian Cruisers that, how can I put this, is at significant variance with natural law and recorded reality? its purpose seems to have been to proof the recoil system with the 17 pounder, and to see if it would induce a failure in the turret ring, that is dimpled races, cracked or chipped balls, that sort of thing. It is kind of like say this:

except made out of a tank that wasn't needed any more. So yes an experiment that was part of the work leading towards the AC4 but not an actual AC4, experimental or otherwise. If they'd called it the AC1 E1 with 17 pounder you wouldn't hear a peep out of me. At least not about the name.



camdy #8 Posted 02 April 2017 - 01:29 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 29123 battles
  • 620
  • [CAMDY] CAMDY
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
well they do call the game replay uk-GB35_Sentinel_AC_IV  but i'm sure it use to be AC IV Experimental or something like it.

camdy #9 Posted 11 April 2017 - 10:40 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 29123 battles
  • 620
  • [CAMDY] CAMDY
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
while on the chinese server http://mall.kongzhon...etail?pid=1696 

Jarms #10 Posted 12 April 2017 - 10:22 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 13028 battles
  • 662
  • [-KO-] -KO-
  • Member since:
    03-02-2014

View PostMaximumSomething, on 18 March 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

except made out of a tank that wasn't needed any more. So yes an experiment that was part of the work leading towards the AC4 but not an actual AC4, experimental or otherwise. If they'd called it the AC1 E1 with 17 pounder you wouldn't hear a peep out of me. At least not about the name.

 

Lol. This.

 

View PostInglorious_Aussie_Tanker, on 03 February 2017 - 07:28 AM, said:

While the Information on the AC Series Tank is good, I wish they'd "Napkin" sketched a few more Iterations, or Options for WOT to "Russian/Japanese/Czeck style" Implement.

 

Well there's certainly the possibility for 5 AC variants.

With the current:

- AC I "Sentinel"

- AC "IV Experimental"

 

And a potential mini-branch in the UK tree:

- AC 1B (tier V): 2-Pdr, 6-Pdr Mk. III, 6-Pdr Mk. V, 25-Pdr gun/howitzer

- AC III "Thunderbolt" (tier VI): 6-Pdr Mk. V, 25-Pdr gun/howitzer, 3 inch 20 cwt anti-aircraft gun, 3.7-inch AT Gun

- AC IV: 25-Pdr gun/howitzer, duel 25-Pdr gun/howitzer, 3.7-inch AT Gun, 17-Pdr Mk. VII


Edited by Jarms, 29 April 2017 - 11:23 AM.


DeadArashi #11 Posted 27 April 2017 - 07:46 PM

    Imperium Tech Priest

  • Member
  • 12884 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    05-31-2013

View PostMaximumSomething, on 18 March 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

except made out of a tank that wasn't needed any more. So yes an experiment that was part of the work leading towards the AC4 but not an actual AC4, experimental or otherwise. If they'd called it the AC1 E1 with 17 pounder you wouldn't hear a peep out of me. At least not about the name.

 

fun fact: when it was first in Supertest it was the called the "AC IE2/IV"

Edited by DeadArashi, 27 April 2017 - 07:46 PM.


MaximumSomething #12 Posted 01 May 2017 - 06:45 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 9571 battles
  • 77
  • Member since:
    09-06-2014

View PostDeadArashi, on 27 April 2017 - 07:46 PM, said:

 

fun fact: when it was first in Supertest it was the called the "AC IE2/IV"

 

Well, small miracle WG didn't go with that then, 'coz that's terrible.




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users