ITT: Movies where they didn't do their research
>a pistol can blow up a tank
>>68142069
yeahbutno
>>68142138
>pistol pointed right at the commander's viewport when he fires
>tank explodes
are you kidding me? He's 100% responsible for that.
Bravo Spielberg you hack.
>>68142138
Woooosh
>>68142138
I bet you believe in flat earth denial too.
>>68142069
It only had 1hp left
>>68142138
>the tank was CG
why does it look so good bros?
>>68142430
No it wasn't.
>The Tiger Tank used in this movie is a converted Russian T-34/85, which explains the non-interweaving wheels. The mantlet is also much narrower on the movie's Tiger than on both models of the Tiger 1, which gives the turret a more pointed look rather than the round shape which the turret historically had. Additionally, the placement of the turret near the front made the Tiger used in the movie look more like a Porsche Tiger instead of a Henschel Tiger, and is also an artifact of the T-34/85 chassis.
Overrated
>>68142138
reminder that this scene was still highly inaccurate
p47/p51 pilots regularly lied or misreported about how many tanks they destroyed by dropping bombs on them from the air. most bombs missed, bounced or did not detonate properly as hitting a tank while diving at 500mph in a plane not specifically designed for divebombing is basically a 50/50.
also he would have been killed from the explosion, anything smaller then a direct hit from a >250lb bomb the tiger would have laughed at.
most tanks were destroyed by other tanks or anti-tank guns, not by air bombardment.
>>68142580
>also he would have been killed from the explosion
Well he died later so meh.
>>68142069
>Angels on our shoulders.
>>68142580
this is genuine autism right here.
>>68142837
we all have our hobbies m8
i get autistic over ww2, fighting games, space sims, RTS shit etc
not saying the movie is bad or anything though
>>68142138
>that plane = kill stealer
>>68143021
>kill stealer
Long time since I heard this, all those memories of Gears of War 1 & 2 came flashing back.
>>68142580
If the bomb hit the rear or behind the turret he could have been shielded from shrapnel.
Also the perspective makes it look way closer than it really was.
I was a kid when I saw that and thought he shot a sticky bomb that didn't go off.
>>68142069
>p51 tankbuster
>>68142926
I mean you could still have that one in a million shot to blow up the tank. There is only one account of a submarine sinking another sub underwater but I'm not gunna cry bully on U571 just because it features two subs fighting each other
>>68142487
>The mantlet is also much narrower on the movie's Tiger than on both models of the Tiger 1, which gives the turret a more pointed look rather than the round shape which the turret historically had.
when will they learn
>>68142069
Jesus Christ Anon. Everyone knows he shot down the turret and hit the shell, blowing up the tank
Shouldn't the plane have passed over first, and then the tank explode?
>>68142487
>The mantlet is also much narrower
When will mantlets learn?
>>68145975
>>68148509
fuck I stole your meme
>>68142580
so how did tigers get destroyed
>>68148676
Americans never really faced any Tigers. There were only about a thousand ever made to begin with ando n the Western front the few they had were concentrated in the British sector. They were often confused with the very common later Panzer IV models.
>>68149006
>Americans never really faced any Tigers.
Not true.
I'm digging for numbers now, but of the 557 tanks and 667 TDs the Germans brought into the battle of the bulge, some 400 were Panthers. That means there's 157 or so tanks split between Pz. IVs and Tigers.
There are also documents on Pershings engaging Tigers.
The main discrepancies is that, as others posters mentioned, the Tiger I and Pz. IV were similar, while the Tiger II and Panther were similar. The only way to confirm was to score the kill. Early war, the yanks had little to kill heavy tanks with while the Brits got the 17-pounders up and running by late 1940. That means more confirmed tiger kills through Tunisia, Italy, and Normandy.
Prior to that, the most the yanks had was artillery, pic related
>>68148676
Brits used 17-pounders.
Russians used either 100mm, 122mm, or 152mm.
USA had artillery, as only 20 Pershings were in Europe.
Contrary to popular belief, the Brits had the best armor on the western front. It was the infantry they lacked. When you make almost anything a sherman though, it's easy to claim American superiority.
>>68142197
That's cute.
this was a TRAVISTY
>>68142069
The Last Airbender.
>>68149936
I did some wiki checking for you.
Starting in February 26 of 1945, Pershings are credited with two Tiger kills, one Panther, and three Panzer IVs.
One Pershing was knocked out by firing from a Tiger. Gunner and loader killed, Pershing was able to retreat and be repaired.
One was knocked out by a Nashorn, and another by a 150mm field gun. I have no information on whether these tanks were able to be repaired or not.
20 Pershings were sent over, split between the 3rd and 9th Armored Divisions. All accounts of combat I have state that only four Pershings were used at once, between both Divisions. The rest either never saw combat or were down for repairs.
An up-armored Super Pershing meanwhile, destroyed three unknown tank or tank-like vehicles. One was at 1500 yards, one was of "unknown type", and one was claimed to be a tiger, although there are doubts.
A few years later they shit on everything in Korea, namely T-34-85s.
>>68151135
Was it a good movie that was underrated or a bad movie ?
>>68148676
Wait until their low on fuel then swarm them with t 34s
>>68151727
bad movie
t. American.
We take credit for british actions. It's hilarious, but since this is actually a good, serious thread, I won't joke around. Stolenvalor is a big no-go. It would be like making the relief column and air support in Black Hawk Down into british commandos or something.
>muh UN forces didn't get no credit don't go lecturing about stolenvalor
they got shown. writing them into the narrative does nothing for the message the movie was conveying to american audiences. We can go further into that topic, but not here. That's a discussion for a separate thread, since the opportunities it offers for shitposting will kill this one.
>>68148676
a good many never were actually destroyed in combat, but hat mechanical failures and were abandoned. this is how a good many king tigers were taken out
>>68145975
>>68148509
