Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Posted: 10/16/2014 11:11:03 PM EDT
This falls in line with questions like, "what is the Confederacy had AK's?" Or, "If we had had P-51's in WWI...?"

What if a modern armored division of Bradleys and Abrams suddenly appeared in, oh, say 1943?

Link Posted: 10/16/2014 11:19:09 PM EDT
[#1]
Link Posted: 10/16/2014 11:19:48 PM EDT
[#2]
Or X wings
Link Posted: 10/16/2014 11:51:03 PM EDT
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History


I like the thought.

And to the Debbie Downers out there saying "not this shit again," have a little fun and run with it.

Panzerfaust vs ablative armor is just so damn intriguing
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:06:52 AM EDT
[#4]
Battle of Karbala Gap x 100.
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:14:24 AM EDT
[#5]
Merry Christmas, war's over!
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:18:28 AM EDT
[#6]
I'm such a slut for these threads.
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:25:38 AM EDT
[#7]
They would run out of spare parts and ammo in short order and become combat ineffective.
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:27:40 AM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
They would run out of spare parts and ammo in short order and become combat ineffective.
View Quote


That's AFTER they took out the Axis and were halfway through the USSR.
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:32:55 AM EDT
[#9]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Merry Christmas, war's over!
View Quote
this. accept for the fact that jet fuel wasnt invented. it would depend on how much diesel they could take from the germans. Turbines be thirsty yo!

 



other than that. there is no real threat firepower-wise on the Germans side.
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:35:58 AM EDT
[#10]
It would be like lasers
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:41:00 AM EDT
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
this. accept for the fact that jet fuel wasnt invented. it would depend on how much diesel they could take from the germans. Turbines be thirsty yo!  

other than that. there is no real threat firepower-wise on the Germans side.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Merry Christmas, war's over!
this. accept for the fact that jet fuel wasnt invented. it would depend on how much diesel they could take from the germans. Turbines be thirsty yo!  

other than that. there is no real threat firepower-wise on the Germans side.


Abrams is multi-fuel and could probably run on gas.
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:44:25 AM EDT
[#12]
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:44:30 AM EDT
[#13]
Did the germans have a tank with a gun that could get through the Abrahms' armor?
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:46:18 AM EDT
[#14]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Abrams is multi-fuel and could probably run on gas.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:


Quoted:

Merry Christmas, war's over!
this. accept for the fact that jet fuel wasnt invented. it would depend on how much diesel they could take from the germans. Turbines be thirsty yo!  



other than that. there is no real threat firepower-wise on the Germans side.





Abrams is multi-fuel and could probably run on gas.
they can for short periods of time. the main problem is that jet fuel is thick like kerosene (mainly because it mostly is kerosene) and the engine driven fuel pump is designed to be lubricated by the fuel it moves. Gasoline is far to thin to keep that part alive for long periods of time. It would be better if it ran on at least diesel being the closest thing to jet fuel they would have on the battlefield on either side

 
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 12:50:24 AM EDT
[#15]
The Abrams would tear a new bunghole in everything that got into range but eventually they would get worn down through attrition. It's not like they didn't have armor piercing rounds in WW2 and often times the solution to armor penetration was just use a bigger gun. The Abrams has good armor in front but eventually they will get hit in the sides/rear  and/or have track destroyed and become immobilized and destroyed in detail.

Bradleys would far much less well.  They would be dangerous, yes but just about any large caliber weapon would penetrate them so they wouldn't last much longer than any other light scout vehicle of the era.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 1:04:26 AM EDT
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
The Abrams would tear a new bunghole in everything that got into range but eventually they would get worn down through attrition. It's not like they didn't have armor piercing rounds in WW2 and often times the solution to armor penetration was just use a bigger gun. The Abrams has good armor in front but eventually they will get hit in the sides/rear  and/or have track destroyed and become immobilized and destroyed in detail.

Bradleys would far much less well.  They would be dangerous, yes but just about any large caliber weapon would penetrate them so they wouldn't last much longer than any other light scout vehicle of the era.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
View Quote


Hell, I think a Bradley would kick some serious ass!!! Just the thermal imaging and maeuverability would help to mitigate losses...
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 1:06:26 AM EDT
[#17]
Haven't seen the movie, but the Abrams eventually gets knocked out by arty or anti-tank guns.
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 1:19:09 AM EDT
[#18]



Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Hell, I think a Bradley would kick some serious ass!!! Just the thermal imaging and maeuverability would help to mitigate losses...



View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:



The Abrams would tear a new bunghole in everything that got into range but eventually they would get worn down through attrition. It's not like they didn't have armor piercing rounds in WW2 and often times the solution to armor penetration was just use a bigger gun. The Abrams has good armor in front but eventually they will get hit in the sides/rear  and/or have track destroyed and become immobilized and destroyed in detail.
Bradleys would far much less well.  They would be dangerous, yes but just about any large caliber weapon would penetrate them so they wouldn't last much longer than any other light scout vehicle of the era.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Hell, I think a Bradley would kick some serious ass!!! Just the thermal imaging and maeuverability would help to mitigate losses...



remember one thing macpherson, WE were the ones that were in the philosophy of greater numbers not the germans. its how we beat the tiger tank. The tiger was designed to take n and beat 6-8 shermans. but we fought them with greater numbers than even that (sometimes sending 12-16 tanks after 1 tiger) the german's wouldn't have the numbers to take on an armored group of abrams and Bradley. it would be to much to quick. and by 43 we were severely hampering the german's ability to produce with the bombing campaign.



 
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 1:23:40 AM EDT
[#19]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Hell, I think a Bradley would kick some serious ass!!! Just the thermal imaging and maeuverability would help to mitigate losses...
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Abrams would tear a new bunghole in everything that got into range but eventually they would get worn down through attrition. It's not like they didn't have armor piercing rounds in WW2 and often times the solution to armor penetration was just use a bigger gun. The Abrams has good armor in front but eventually they will get hit in the sides/rear  and/or have track destroyed and become immobilized and destroyed in detail.

Bradleys would far much less well.  They would be dangerous, yes but just about any large caliber weapon would penetrate them so they wouldn't last much longer than any other light scout vehicle of the era.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


Hell, I think a Bradley would kick some serious ass!!! Just the thermal imaging and maeuverability would help to mitigate losses...


It would be legitimate rape time when the sun went down
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 1:48:05 AM EDT
[#20]
Would be hell on tracks.

Until they ran out of ammo.

Or broke down.
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 1:54:38 AM EDT
[#21]
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 1:57:09 AM EDT
[#22]
I like tank movies
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 1:57:23 AM EDT
[#23]
I imagine the Germans wouldn't know what hit them at night.
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 2:04:13 AM EDT
[#24]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I imagine the Germans wouldn't know what hit them at night.
View Quote



Can you imagine a combined armor assault at night with Bradleys running anti-personnel and the Abrams taking out the armor?

Mucho jizz factor!!!
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 2:47:06 AM EDT
[#25]
They would still have a difficult time getting through the bocage country but once they were out their would sweep western Europe.
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 2:50:15 AM EDT
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
this. accept for the fact that jet fuel wasnt invented. it would depend on how much diesel they could take from the germans. Turbines be thirsty yo!  

other than that. there is no real threat firepower-wise on the Germans side.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Merry Christmas, war's over!
this. accept for the fact that jet fuel wasnt invented. it would depend on how much diesel they could take from the germans. Turbines be thirsty yo!  

other than that. there is no real threat firepower-wise on the Germans side.



Germans didn't use diesel for tanks. Our M10 tank destroyers used diesel, so we had a bigger on hand supply then they did.

Link Posted: 10/17/2014 3:01:19 AM EDT
[#27]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
But what if the Nazi's had mobile suits?

http://i57.tinypic.com/2zswwog.jpg
View Quote


08th MS Team?
Link Posted: 10/17/2014 3:32:26 AM EDT
[#28]
We would be like Germany putting our faith in mircle weapons.

Simple fact is who ever produces the most and is able to deploy the most wins, no matter how effective such a weapon is in combat.
The Germans had arguably the best tanks, gpmg's, the first modern assault rifle, and leading the world in jets and rocket technology. What did it get them?
It's not that their tech was bad, just that their ability to mass produce and deploy those weapons burnt up recourses that could have deployed 10 "good enough" weapons for 1 mircle weapon to turn the tide of the war.

A good example of this is the soviet T34 and mosin nagant. The t34 isn't a mircle tank, sure it had some nice features, but ultimately it was a tank just good enough to combat a tiger in numbers. The soviets were also able to man those tanks. Same can be said for the mosin. IMO it's probably the worst rifle out of all major players through out ww2. But the ability to produce huge numbers and arm the peasants was just good enough to keep them moving forward.

To bring it back to point, sure an Abrams would dominate the battlefield, especially at night. But how many recourses would it burn to deploy a single Abrams compared to a platoon of Sherman's. An Abrams requires special fuel, special ammunition, and non standard parts to keep them going. Germans would quickly learn to concentrate fire on the Abrams or just avoid the areas they are deployed in, or target their extensive supply lines. Not to mention if some of those systems went down on the Abrams it's beyond 1940s tech to repair them.

Tl;dr - if an Abrams was shipped back to ww2 the US still wouldn't deploy them. They would dissect them and learn the tech to create them, to make a better sherman or mass produce tank with a few modern features that were capable of being made in the 40s
Link Posted: 10/19/2014 11:33:46 PM EDT
[#29]
How many bridges of the era could the Abrams cross. What would pull it out of the muck when it got stuck?
Link Posted: 10/19/2014 11:37:32 PM EDT
[#30]
Our M1Abrams of WWII turned out to be an atomic bomb. A game changer so to speak.
Link Posted: 10/19/2014 11:39:40 PM EDT
[#31]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
they can for short periods of time. the main problem is that jet fuel is thick like kerosene (mainly because it mostly is kerosene) and the engine driven fuel pump is designed to be lubricated by the fuel it moves. Gasoline is far to thin to keep that part alive for long periods of time. It would be better if it ran on at least diesel being the closest thing to jet fuel they would have on the battlefield on either side  
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Merry Christmas, war's over!
this. accept for the fact that jet fuel wasnt invented. it would depend on how much diesel they could take from the germans. Turbines be thirsty yo!  

other than that. there is no real threat firepower-wise on the Germans side.


Abrams is multi-fuel and could probably run on gas.
they can for short periods of time. the main problem is that jet fuel is thick like kerosene (mainly because it mostly is kerosene) and the engine driven fuel pump is designed to be lubricated by the fuel it moves. Gasoline is far to thin to keep that part alive for long periods of time. It would be better if it ran on at least diesel being the closest thing to jet fuel they would have on the battlefield on either side  


Kerosene was available and if something like the Abrams was in use, you can damn well bet that logistics would have found a way to supply it to them.
Link Posted: 10/19/2014 11:54:41 PM EDT
[#32]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
How many bridges of the era could the Abrams cross.

View Quote


I was wondering the same thing.

Link Posted: 10/20/2014 12:06:31 AM EDT
[#33]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
But what if the Nazi's had mobile suits?

http://i57.tinypic.com/2zswwog.jpg
View Quote

They did. After the war, the government covered it up.

When the shock troops come to put you on the FEMA train, what do you think they'll be wearing?
Link Posted: 10/20/2014 12:18:52 AM EDT
[#34]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
But what if the Nazi's had mobile suits?

View Quote


The Nazi AT/AT corps would have won the war before they got to the front.
Link Posted: 10/20/2014 12:34:33 AM EDT
[#35]
What if the Nazis had nukes first and had a plane with the range to hit the US?
Link Posted: 10/20/2014 12:36:22 AM EDT
[#36]
Land mines would be their biggest threat.
Link Posted: 10/20/2014 2:10:01 AM EDT
[#37]
A 500kg WWII bomb would destroy an Abrams.

Ammo would be a problem, modern lubricants etc....

Until it ran out of ammo, it would reign hell on everything.


Best use of resources would be to hit tigers, king tigers and panthers. Leave the stug III's, pzrs 4's alone, they were on par with Sherman's and could easily be taken out by our weapons of the day.
Link Posted: 10/20/2014 2:26:56 AM EDT
[#38]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
What if the Nazis had nukes first and had a plane with the range to hit the US?
View Quote


I would say the war would have been ended pretty quickly after that, and not in our favor. As for the Abrams are we talking one single abrams? Or all American tanks replaced with Abrams and men knowledgeable to run it? If it was the latter the next question would be do they start producing rounds for the Abrams? Or does each one have a limited number of rounds and will eventually run out of ammo?

If they produced the Abram rounds and had the numbers of tanks and the men to use them I would say they could mop up all of Europe no problem with minimum casualties, as long as they didnt allow the Germans to devise some new anti-tank system that could punch through the modern armor. Bear in mind I have no military experience whatsoever and may be completely wrong.
Link Posted: 10/20/2014 2:51:52 AM EDT
[#39]
Whats the top speed of the Abrams vs the tiger? Seems to me it would run circles round them sourkrauts.
Link Posted: 10/20/2014 2:59:46 AM EDT
[#40]
Shipped off to a base to be dissected and influence future tank design
Link Posted: 10/20/2014 3:58:28 AM EDT
[#41]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Shipped off to a base to be dissected and influence future tank design
View Quote


Just think though. If that was used to upgrade the WWII tech, how awesome would it be to see iron bastards like this tank rolling into Iraq  Somehow I think our guys would feel safe behind a foot of armor, 4 100 cal machine guns, 2 lascannons, and a freaking plasma cannon big enough to blow up a mountain.

Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top