My favourite tank…hmmmm

PzKpfw VI Ausf. E, by any chance? 🙂

It’s well worth a visit. 🙂

Was it the King Panzer2 that had the flack 88 as it’s weapon?

Both the Tiger I and Tiger II were armed with a development of the original ’88’.

If so I beleive it was only vulnerable to our Churchil tanks AP ammo, but the Churchil had to be behind the Panzer, as there was a “Sweet spot” that the Churchils inferior AP could penitrate.

The British 17 pounder towed AT gun (also turret-mounted on the Sherman ‘Firefly’) could defeat the armour of Tigers with APDS ammunition, including the frontal armour of the Tiger II.

Moderator Message

They have bringing back to life to this thread. But I still feel that it was unfair conduct from the administrator of forum.

Hello again, Tango.

I can assure you that none of the moderator team were happy at the situation we found ourselves in.

I wish you would understand that, subject to UK law as we are, no other course of action was open to us.

I can also assure you that you have not been singled out in any way, and that we have clamped down on the use of copyright material right across the forums.

Good to have you back.

GA

Any chance of a summary for the non-Russian readers?

Good news is always welcome. 🙂

Yes, because, as he has made clear by his actions in the past, Grey Area is himself biased against the F-35, and has no problem letting that bias affect how he moderates threads.

Hence his attempt to prohibit discussion in this thread, when this was (at that time) the only F-35 thread he had not closed down.

This at a time when there are multiple J-20 threads.

There are two currently active J-20 threads.

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=106205&page=5

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=105843&page=6

There are two currently active F-35 threads.

This thread, and the other one: http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=105288&page=11

Draw your own conclusions, ladies and gentlemen.

Oh, yes it is.