Something WWII History Buffs Might Be Interested In

Discussion in 'General Military Arms & History Forum' started by LurpyGeek, Nov 7, 2006.

  1. LurpyGeek

    LurpyGeek Active Member

    Nov 30, 2005
    There is a book that just came out this year called "My Tank is Fight!" by Zack Parsons. He's a writer for a website called "Something Awful".

    We've all seen books and documentaries about some of the crazy ideas that were formulated and in some cases implemented in World War II (especially by the Germans). This book takes a look at twenty inventions of World War II that never really saw the light of day (Looking at most of them, it's easy to see why). Inventions such as a tank so large that it had to be powered by naval engines, early night vision scopes, a submarine u-cruiser, and a tank that could fly. Some never made it past the drawing board, some had prototypes built and some even saw very limited action.

    Mr. Parsons really did his research on these inventions. One of the things that I found a refreshing departure from a normal history book is that for each chapter he includes a hypothetical deployment history detailing the "what if"'s and an evaluation of whether each of the new weapons would have been a success or a failure.

    Take a look at it if you're interested.
  2. polishshooter

    polishshooter Well-Known Member

    Mar 25, 2001
    The tank that could fly actually made some "flights," there are pictures of it after casting off the tow.

    It was a Russian light tank with jettisonable glider wings attached....but the reason they dropped it was that once on the ground it was no different than OUR "airborne" light tanks like the Tetrarch or Locust...too light, too small, too little gun, virtually no armor, to make a difference in the actual FIGHT.

    Plus there were "Cruiser subs" with 6" and even 8" guns actually in service between the wars, we had two, the Narwhal and Argonaut.

    But they were too big and slow to actually be effective as SUBS, and too slow, small and unarmored to fight on the SURFACE against conventional warships.

    They had some use early for "surprise" surface bombardments of outposts early, but they did have utility as "transport subs" once the guns were removed. The Narwhal got sunk being used as a typical "Fleet boat."
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2006

  3. Here is the Antonov A-40 Krylya Tanka:


    The Russians, it seems, really liked this sort of thing. Hmmm, I wonder if the M-4 could have been used that way? I mean, after all, it had no armor to speak of and Patton would have approved since it was so mobile. :D ;)
  4. LurpyGeek

    LurpyGeek Active Member

    Nov 30, 2005
    Many of the things you mentioned are discussed in the book Pistol & Polish. I myself can't imagine what it would be like to be soaring through the air and then plummeting to Earth inside a tub of metal.
  5. LurpyGeek

    LurpyGeek Active Member

    Nov 30, 2005
  6. I still think the M-4 would have made a great flying tank. Heck, it was so light, and its armor so thin, that it could have been transported with a glider. Of course, the Tigers would still have been waiting when it landed. :D ;) :p
  7. Looks like something worth reading
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
General Military Arms & History Forum Something I want to know more about Brown Powder Feb 22, 2015
General Military Arms & History Forum How about a Twin engined WWII fighter comparo. Mar 12, 2016
General Military Arms & History Forum LIFE MAGAZINE WWII AIRPLANE PHOTOS ‏ Apr 11, 2015
General Military Arms & History Forum Finnish Sniper in WWII Jan 21, 2015
General Military Arms & History Forum Rescued Film Project-----recently discovered WWII photos Jan 21, 2015