Italian L6/40 ammo variant with trailer for the Semovente 90/53 SP 90mm gun.Mobile beehive for giant bees?
It was jrv, not me, at least I don't think jrv's name is Paul. I was too late to check GS.Paul got both!!! First one was Romanian.
Italian L6/40 ammo variant with trailer for the Semovente 90/53 SP 90mm gun.Mobile beehive for giant bees?
It was jrv, not me, at least I don't think jrv's name is Paul. I was too late to check GS.Paul got both!!! First one was Romanian.
Perhaps your name is jrv.Italian L6/40 ammo variant with trailer for the Semovente 90/53 SP 90mm gun.
It was jrv, not me, at least I don't think jrv's name is Paul. I was too late to check GS.
PSW 221 in North Africa.View attachment 5280I know these are kind of grainy, but see if you can id this one, bonus if where it's at, lol
KV-85?View attachment 5281And this should be easy for most.
There is a possibility that the British TOG 2 might have beaten the AC IE by a few months, not really sure. It definitely was the first practical design with the 17lbr.The first tank to mount the 17lbr.
JR
It's hard to beat the Bob Semple tank, besides, where else are you going to see THAT MANY MG's on a tank???There is a possibility that the British TOG 2 might have beaten the AC IE by a few months, not really sure. It definitely was the first practical design with the 17lbr.
The AC line is one of those "Should have been good" series of designs.
AC I: Armed with a 2lbr, cmg, bmg and 65mm frontal armour. Roughly somewhat faster equivalent to a Valentine III/V. 12 HP/ton.
AC II: Basically an AC I in intent but a different design using less critical components and easier construction, paper design only.
AC III: Armed with a 25lbr, cmg but the bmg was dropped. Similar to AC I, but bigger turret, better engine and 13.7 HP/ton.
AC IV: As AC III but with 17lbr, 13.2 HP/ton.
Definitely better than either the New Zealand Schofield (a fairly passable light tank) or the dreadful Bob Semple corrugated shed tank.
Now that's a low silhouette! Recumbent tank?