Tanks that are able to dive...
 

As most people know that a Tiger Tank could "walk" under water for a while, i hope it would be in for FH2

Interesting suggestion, General Henry. :)

I have several links that deal with the subject of the submersible Tiger tank. It was equipped with a schnorkel and could dive up to four meters. Even more interesting is that the Germans converted Panzer 3's and Panzer 4's for diving up to fifteen meters depth.

Here are a few link with not only pictures of diving Tiger tanks but also with pictures of diving Panzer 3' and Panzer 4's.

Axis History Forum :: Tiger Tanks & the Battle Doctrine of 'River Crossing'

Axis History Forum :: Sumersible Panzers?

Axis History Forum :: Tauchpanzer III and Flammenpanzer III

Tauchpanzer III Ausf M/L

Tauchpanzer IV

These vehicles could be used aswell for a crossing of the Bug river map. But AFAIK they werent used in North Afric, though.

That is truly incredible.

Reminds me of a map in Galactic Conquest where players could exploit a bug to walk an AT-ST around on the bottom of a lake. Big fun. Would be nice if this was implemented in a map in Forgotten Hope 2, although the tanks would need a Limited Oxygen system like submarines to keep players from just driving them into the water and hiding them there.

Like i said before the Tiger tank could dive up to four meters with the Schnorkel. And the Panzer 3 and 4 up to fifteen meters. And i dont really see a problem a tank hiding in the water. Its not as if he somehow can attack while in the water.

Who doesn't know about these submergable tanks? Would be nice if the appreriate map would be created for them.

I remember going "WTF?! Cool" years ago when I first saw the famous pictures which also happen to be posted here: Axis History Forum :: Tiger Tanks & the Battle Doctrine of 'River Crossing'

but give them a oxygen meter?...? lol

the tanks won't have much targets when dive underwater

I second that.

Interesting isnt it? I even posted several links wich also have interesting information regarding submersible tanks in my previoust post in this thread. Check 'em out i'd say. :nodding:

To Pietje or anyone else who knows their stuff. What type of protection did the front driver's slit or if you want to add, the commander's cuppola have? Since it was probably bullet proof glass and sealed was the tank pretty much impervious to light arms fire at any range(which is what I expect)? I just need clarification since all I've seen is pictures of the inside and some sort of glass shield and to further complicate things, SPR...
It would be nice if we had a map in which we could appreciate these tanks.=p(just a few errors...)

My laptop's keyboard has some fubarred keys (the S the ' and the C). Very frustrating, especially since sometimes they work just fine. :uhm:

Well, tanks where equipped with bulletproof, although a better word would be bullet resistant, glass wich provided excellent protection against small arms fire. The cupola was also equipped with bullet resistant glass. I have no idea how thick the glass generally was though. Generally speaking trying to take a tank out with small arms is rather pointless.

Ofcourse, there are exceptions such as the T-38 or the T-40 amphibious tank but these tanks had less then then 12mm armor (12mm is the minimum armor a vehicle needs to make small arms fire pointless) wich meant that they where vulnerable to small arms, with the exception of SMG's and pistols.

Crossing of the Bug river would make for a nice map, i'd think. Can't think of any other map where we could use these vehicles, though.

Any tank that I drive can already go underwater. It's just that it doesn't last very long.

I've gotten tanks to fly as well (the notorious 2006 WOLF tank-launch-fest -- we got so good at it that we could pretty well aim where the things were going to land, halfway across the map.)

(Come to think of it, devs, *please* include the deployable machine gun - tank launching bug in FH2. *beg*)

Cute:rolleyes: If you pull anymore "grandpas", you'll be labeled as an old man.

You just wish that you could fly in tanks like I can, you snotty-nosed little shit.

Tiger tank can not shoot and drive! The Tiger have a Flakgun! And can not drive and shoot! When the tank shoots, is the tank destroys.

:confused:
I do not recall saying anything about it 'having targets underwater'. However, I do have some actual objections which I believe justify my view:

1. FH2 will be a realism mod, and in reality, a tank could not just sit underwater for eternity. Well, it could, but it wouldn't be very healthy for the crew, which only survived if the tank got out of the water relatively quickly;).
2. Would you be very happy if you damaged a tank by a river with your Sherman and it just fled into the river where you couldn't hurt it, and then re-emerged once you'd been destroyed or driven off? Doesn't sound like a very good and balanced way to play the game if you ask me, unless you also implement planes or destroyers with depth charges, mines and sub nets for balance's sake.
3. Likewise, what about driving alongside a river and suddenly being ambushed from behind by u-tanks that had been lurking underwater, biding their time until a spotted report told it an Allied tank was on its way?

This sounds like scenarios out of some bizarre futuristic world, certainly not real-world World War II. Is that really the type of game-play we want in FH2?

Wow, those pics are pretty sweet i must admit. I could see a great map with these tanks in it, could do a historically accurate one as well as perhaps a map along the lines of Alpenfestung (ie. not real).

The focus of this topic reminds me of that FH map where the German forces were equipped with night-vision equipment (including their tanks and half-tracks).

Safe Keeper, about point 1. I pretty much answered this one already in two of my previous posts. Please read those posts, ok? Great.

Point 2. Well, If that tank can do that then perhaps you should try adjusting your tactics. Or better yet simply drive off he cant wait there forever. Or you could make it so that you can still fire at the tank while its underwater.

Point 3. Even if someone does that then i do think you should get the idea after the first time that you should watch out near the water. :lol:

Am I totally off my rocker here, or have I completely failed to ever read any account of diving tanks being used in combat? It was my conviction that all Tauchpanzer, from the Pz.III variant to the Tiger's operational "diving" capability were either purely experimental or incidental (i.e. they could do it, but didn't under fire.)

I'm unsure about amphibious tanks (that famous pic of the Pz.III crossing the bug was not under fire, as one of the axishistoryforum posters correctly points out -- just look at the dudes standing around, gawking) but as with the above, I believe that the Germans never, or only rarely used amphibious tanks for actual crossings of any body of water under combat conditions. While several units were issued water-capable variants, I am pretty sure these were just deployed as normal tanks.

I wouldn't want to see anything this exotic and historically unclear in FH2 until other stuff (DD Shermans) is sorted.

I'm assuming that these tanks couldn't just drive into the water, surely there were some adjustments needed to be made before submerging?
If they could just emerge from the water with guns blazing (which I find really hard to believe but then again, I don´t know that much about WW2 era tanks), they would have probably been used a lot more, and we would have some evidence of this tactic being used in combat.

Well, if you find that hard to believe then it might be a good idea to search for proof. Its better then just assuming things. I can tell you that. :)

Well, in that case there is unfortunaly little point in adding them. I have to admit however that submersible tanks are rather interesting. Apparantly that the reason that they where not used in combat was that the tank would be rather vulnerable leaving the water.

Ughh, lets Normandy 1944 in general out of for FH2 for a LOOOOONG time. Preferably after all other theaters are completed. Instead lets focus on other amphibious vehicles such as the Russian T-40, for example. Or the German LWS (LandWasserSchlepper).

See link: Achtung Panzer ! - Vehicles of the Wehrmacht

The Tauchpanzer, to my knowledge, were designed to do just that, seeing as how the Germans expected an extremely hot reception during Operation Sealion. So if someone makes a fantasy Sealion map, there's no reason why you couldn't have Panzer IIIs "emerge from the water with guns blazing."

But like I said, I've never heard of any actually doing that in combat -- I could be wrong! To my knowledge, DDs, Ka-Mis and as Pietje said, some Soviet models (which I'm unfamiliar with) were the only amphibious tanks operationally deployed and used in their intended combat role in substantial numbers.

Again, I'm no saying the Germans did not use amphibious/diving tanks to cross bodies of water under fire and in combat, just that I have never ever seen a reference to it.

That would be interesting too but is that actually possible with the BF2 engine without serious problems? If its possible we could add vehicles such as the sdkfz 251/7 mittlerer pionierpanzerwagen or the Bruckenleger I/II/IV.

as you know most of the tanks in FH don't even can cross a shallow stream... lol

Why should I, when I have you and about ten other fanatics here who can answer my question in 10 seconds? :p

Well if these tanks could actually start firing as soon as the turret got out of the water, then salute to the engineers, I truly am amazed!

this could be solved by making a heat bar for the gun when you are in water it heats up and takes a while to cool down, if this is codable it's done

I doubt that even with a schnorkel, it could stay submerged for very long.

So you really think it's OK that while you're vulnerable all the time, while he can just submerge himself like a submarine?

And yes, if I was in a tiger and knew that if I came back up I'd be destroyed I would 'wait there forever'. Sooner or later you'd be driven off or destroyed and I'd have a repair unit drive up to the river and repair me, or, better yet, repair myself. Then I'd be ready to take on Allies again.

If, however, attacking them is as easy as firing a panzerfaust at their snorkel, I'm all for it.

Your idea that I can 'watch out near the water' for tiny snorkels from inside a tank notwithstanding, it's still a very arcadeish tactic and just doesn't fit FH2.

I dont know how long it could stay under water. A Tiger equipped with a schnorkel could dive up to four meters and the Tauchpanzer III and IV could dive up to 15 meters depth.

I have searched for this myself but its nowhere mentioned how long the tank could go without oxygen. However, Tauchpanzers where however equipped with a fresh intake for the engine and the crew.

Well, you could always try to fire upon him.

I think you worry a bit too much about this. You have to keep in mind though that the tank is pretty vulnerable while leaving or entering the water and chances are he has no idea of the situation around him. :)

Mwah, i dont think its all that arcadish, really. Like Fuzzy said these vehicle where intended to land on the beaches while receiving a hot reception.

in the first 500 tigers they build ''diving equipment'' they can dive to a dept of 4-5 meters and it can stay at least 2.5 hours under water i have seen a small video of a tiger underwater on an NGC docu about tanks

Deep Wading Tanks

found this on the net:
Deep-wading equipment for armoured fighting vehicles was developed in the Second World War, to allow them to come ashore and support infantry during an amphibious Landing.
During the planning of the proposed invasion of Britain in 1940 (Operation SeaLion), the Germans developed the Tauchpanzers, modified Panzer III and IV tanks, to be dropped from a landing craft around 1,500 metres (1 mi) offshore. A rubber hose supplied the engine and crew with air and allowed the waterproofed tanks to drive on the seabed up to fifteen metres (50 ft) deep, making it an extreme example of a wading tank. Some were used by the 18th Panzer Regiment during River Bug crossing in Operation Barbarossa
The German Tiger I tank, too heavy to be supported by many bridges, was designed to ford four-metre deep water. This required unusual mechanisms for ventilation and cooling. Submersion required about thirty minutes of preparation. The turret and gun had to be locked in the forward position so they could be sealed.

So no gun ussage underwater

Nonetheless, I think my point was that they were never deployed in a situation where they did a combat underwater assault. From what I understand, when tanks _did_ cross rivers amphibiously, they were prepared, entered the river, left the river, and then readied for "normal" use -- because it wasn't in the middle of a battle. I think the whole discussion is kind of moot.

But PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong -- I would love to see historical evidence of actual combat assaults by amphibious tanks.

Now what I _would_ like to see is allowing tanks to cross shallow bodies of water without taking damage. As General_Henry correctly implied, it's pretty silly that you can't wade through a stream -- for example, when attacking the central island on Philippines with tanks, it's bizarre that a tank should be damaged. Agreed, there ought to be a limit for each vehicle, based on where the engine is, what type of chassis it is, but having cars blow up just because you park them in a few inches of water is...you get the point.

yeah and look at the winter maps snow = water and on water = damaging vehicles so they'r little bit wrong in how i see it =p

Good luck finding any information on that. Most of the time you wont read anything other then that amphibious tanks participated in a amphibious operation but that doesnt really answer the question.

That doesnt mean that we shouldnt add tanks like the T-40 amphibious tank and the Type 2 amphibious tank Ka-Mi as they where used even outside of amphibious operations.

Agreed.

How the tanks react in bf2? (yes, I haven't played bf2, just bf42+FH :rolleyes: cause my comp sucks)

Absolutely. As I said, the Ka-Mi was actually used amphibiously with reasonable frequency; the Ka-Chi was also encountered in combat at Kwajalein in 1944, but I'm not sure whether the amphibious capacity (less than 20 were built) was used. As they entered service after 1942 (1943 for Ka-Chi), I can't see these as more than an oddity.

However, I _love_ the idea of launching a Ka-Mi from a submarine, or the version with torpedoes attached to its hull.

http://www.sam.hi-ho.ne.jp/t_fukuda/...sya/kami_f.gif http://www.sam.hi-ho.ne.jp/t_fukuda/...ensya/kami.gif

(1337 icons, wot?)

Google images has tons of pics of both the Ka-Chi and Ka-Mi puttering around the water. These guys have some info about the Ka-Mi and Ka-Chi:

Japanese Ordnance Material of WW II

If Taranov is paying attention, this is a site with a few interesting tidbits of info about Japanese tanks:

Q&A

As for the T-40, not that many (222) were built and they were only used in 1941 and early 1942. Many more were built as modified, non-amphibious T-60s.

The main thing I'd be concerned about, and what I think Safe-Keeper is talking about, is not so much the existence of amphibious tanks as the absence of realistic circumstances that kept them from being uber-weapons in RL (i.e. the need to deploy stuff, wave conditions, realistic explosive behavior when it hits water, etc.) Aside from the fact that it looks like very very few were used in action, it would just weird me out as excessively arcade-y if you all of a sudden started seeing disproportionate numbers of Tauchpanzers emerging from some random river and shooting up your shit.

Correction 225 where produced and thats alot for a amphibious light tank, though. The PT-76 design was influenced by the T-40. And early in the war Russians produced alot of light tanks due to the fact that it was cheaper and easier to build.

The Russian Battlefield has alot of information about the T-40 but its in Russian and the translation option doesnt work redirects me to the frontpage, damn it.

Well, i can assure you that your concerns are entirely unnecasery. But i explained this all before. Ofcourse, Tachpanzers arent a high priority compared to other vehicles. Personally, im more interesting in seeing amphibious tanks such as the T-40 and the Type 2 Ka Mi. :)

NOT FOR ONE MADE OF CARDBOARD WHEN 50,000 KRAUT PANZERS AND STUKAS AND OTHER SUNDRY MURDER MACHINES ARE BANGING DOWN YOUR FRONT DOOR, IVAN. MUHAHAHHAA.

*gasp* Fuzzy has gone BERSERK! RUN, EVERYBODY!!!!!! :lol:

Launching the Ratte is much more fun. ;)

Anyhow, submersible tanks would be interesting. The only problem I can think of is that I don't think the BF2 engine supports shells going into the water, so essentially a tiger can hide in the water with nothing but its turret sticking out. It would be a major pain to take out.

Also, don't forget the 1500 amphibious T-38 and the T37 (No idea how many of those were built, probably a few hundreds)!

Generally however, those tanks were meant more for amphibious scouting (a role in which their actual efficiency was limited by rarity of radio equipment), and were seldom used in assaults because of their weak armor and armament.

...Submersible Panzer..

Usless unless we're going across the Channel, and then...

"Sir, ze Voryal Navy hast been spotted, ze Prince of Wales closing in..."

"DIVE! DIVE! DIVE!"

*several divisions of Tigers submerge*

The Invisible Panzer Army!

<.<

Or, the first Luftpanzer division...section of teh Luftwaffle.

I want a Flying Tiger.

Lol just imagine floating tiger tanks taking on battleships