bazooka over modelled?

[roqf77]

well ive been reading this website and it says, that the piat penetrated about 102mm of german steel but the bazooka was only about 77mm. also has the a test and it said the panzershreck would penetrate a tiger frontaly at 250m!
Here is the link(its not all zook bashing it puts the piat into perspective).
http://p081.ezboard.com/fforumonwarfrm10.showMessage?topicID=39.topic

[flamingknives]

Well, you'd expect a 'schrek to get through a Tiger front plate.

The figures in game are generally well sourced, so I'd personally want more compelling evidence than what some bloke has posted on a discussion forum.

[roqf77]

true just saying. wondered if anyone else knew?

[Flenser]

Originally posted by roqf77:
well ive been reading this website and it says, that the piat penetrated about 102mm of german steel but the bazooka was only about 77mm. also has the a test and it said the panzershreck would penetrate a tiger frontaly at 250m!
Here is the link(its not all zook bashing it puts the piat into perspective).
http://p081.ezboard.com/fforumonwarfrm10.showMessage?topicID=39.topic Minor point: the panzershreck uses a shaped charge, thus range is irrelevant when talking about penetrating power.

Major point: Never trust what you read in forums. Unless, of course, it's coming from me.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by flamingknives:
Well, you'd expect a 'schrek to get through a Tiger front plate.Provided of course that you could hit it at that range.

Michael

[Mike]

Basically - yes, everyone else knew that the 'shrek had better performance than the Bazooka - it's basically because it has a bigger warhead.

IIRC he post war 3.5" bazooka was a copy or development of hte 'shrek wasn't it? Or perhaps inspired by it? It's pretty much the same calibre - 3.5" = 88.9mm!

[Andrew H.]

Originally posted by Mike:

IIRC he post war 3.5" bazooka was a copy or development of hte 'shrek wasn't it? Or perhaps inspired by it? It's pretty much the same calibre - 3.5" = 88.9mm! The schreck was a copy of the bazooka (based on examples captured in N. Africa), but with a larger caliber; I don't think it's quite accurate to call the 3.5" bazooka a copy of the schreck just because the US later increased its caliber. Although I do wonder why 3.5".

[roqf77]

good stuff but i meant in comparison to the piat. i know the panzershreck was much better.

[SgtMuhammed]

It was found that the 90mm round was about the max size that the average soldier could handle repeatedly without wearing himself out. So the 3.5" gave good penetration, for its time, in a round that could be carried fairly easily. Or it would if it was the only thing you were carrying.

[V]

Is the bazooka in CMAK better than the PIAT?

I never play as the USA or UK in CMAK, so I have no idea...

[Other Means]

Originally posted by V:
Is the bazooka in CMAK better than the PIAT?

I never play as the USA or UK in CMAK, so I have no idea... I imagine it's personal preference but I think the PIAT is the best infantry AT weapon in the game. It's less accurate than the shrek/zook but a lot more stealthy. You can often get a couple of turns firing from a PIAT from the least amount of cover. You've got to wait for side shots sometimes but I think this is outweighed by it's good points. With a zook or shrek you get the distinctive sound plus the exhaust plume and often get spotted mid turn.

[Soddball]

Not to mention that you can fire them in buildings with no risk of the buildings catching fire.

[aka_tom_w]

How does the PIAT and the shreck and the 'zook compare to today's "standard" RPG that you see in Black Hawk down and all over Afghanistan and Iraq?


what are there similarities and differences?

thanks

-tom w

[roqf77]

hmmmm wheres flaming knives when you need him?

[Gromit]

Well, it is hard to compare the PIAT to the Bazooka and Panzerschrek evenly because the PIAT wasn't rocket-powered like the latter two weapons.

IIRC, the PIAT was a "spigot" weapon that actually threw the projectile at the target. It was a REAL bear to load- not unlike medieval heavy crossbows- that spring mechanism had to be pretty heavy duty.

Also, in battle conditions, PIAT men were trained to wait until the very last moment to fire- under 50 yards was considered best "effective" range, although it was claimed to be good out to around 75 or 100 yards, I don't remember off the top of my head.
If you're curious, there is a great account of PIATs used with great effect on D-Day at Pegasus Bridge.
G.

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by Gromit:
Well, it is hard to compare the PIAT to the Bazooka and Panzerschrek evenly because the PIAT wasn't rocket-powered like the latter two weapons.
I have a couple of snippets on PIAT and Panzerfaust hit probability, but, for reasons that will become obvious, they do not provide a comparison between the two.

WO 291/1060, "The A45 flame gun versus the Panzerfaust", mentions that "As the campaign in NW Europe progressed the proportion of tank casualties due to hollow-charge weapons (mainly of the Panzerfaust type) increased from 10% to 35%."

An indication of Panzerfaust hit probability from operational experience is given as follows:

Range (yds)_hits__misses__% hits
0-20_________17_____15_____53%
21-40________13_____14_____43%
41-100_______10_____22_____31%

"...it has been impossible to trace all misses so that the figures are only comparative."

Given that the people on the receiving end were presumably aware of all hits, but not of all misses, these figures may be taken as an upper bound on peformance in the field.

"The disproportionally large number of misses at close range is thought to be due either to the fact that short-range firing is nerve-racking to the firer, or to the large angular velocities of the target as it reaches crossing point."

WO 291/153 "The effectiveness of PIAT shooting" reports trials shoots on a Covenanter. 3 serials were fired, one by "average" trained soldiers and 2 by above-average users, one of staff from AORS 6. The results should therefore be regarded as an upper bound on possible performance. The serials were fired using an inert bomb with identical ballistics to the HE/AT round. The target was a Covenanter tank moving at about 10 mph, either crossing at 70 to 110 yards, approaching at 110 to 65 yards, or receding at 35 to 110 yards.

"There is no great difference between the percentage of hits with first, second and third shots, although the proportion is slightly greater with the second."

Percentages of hits at different ranges were:

Crossing target: 70% under 85 yds, 48% over 85 yds.
Approaching target: 42% under 85yds, 24% over 85 yds
Receding target: 80% under 65 yds, 68% over 65 yds.

"The effect of range on the percentage of hits is not very great; about two thirds as many shots hit above 85 yards as below. It is certainly not possible to obtain a hit with certainty by waiting until the tank is within say 70 yards. The reason for the unexpectedly poor performance at short ranges is presumably the increase in angular movement of the target, combined, perhaps, with the 'sense of hurry' already mentioned."

Of particular note was the high proportion of fuze failures in these trials:

"From these figures it can be seen that about 75% of hits detonate with the DA Fuze 425. No DA Fuzes 426 were available for trial, but it is assumed that a greater proportion of them, perhaps as much as 90%, would detonate."

I have no information on the expected angular dispersion of the projectiles from any hand-held anti-tank weapons, and so cannot do any P(hit) calculations based on their intiial velocity. However, it is a rule of thumb in the world of OA that the effective range of a hand-held anti-tank projector, in metres, is approximately equal to its initial velocity in metres per second.

All the best,

John.

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:
How does the PIAT and the shreck and the 'zook compare to today's "standard" RPG that you see in Black Hawk down and all over Afghanistan and Iraq?

what are there similarities and differences?

thanks

-tom w and
Originallt posted by roqf77
hmmmm wheres flaming knives when you need him?You called?

The standard RPG-7 used by insurgent forces the world over is, for the most part, a 1970's model with an effective range of 500m (300m vs. a moving target) and are able to penetrate ~300mm of Rolled Homogenous Armor (RHA)*. It uses an over calibre warhead, where the warhead is larger than the launcher tube, like the Panzerfaust, which is not surprising as it is derived from late-model panzerfausts.

So, we've got twice the range of everything and a 50% improvement on the German weapons, (warhead calibre is similar to the 'shrek) and 300% on the Allied ones.

There are further differences too. The extra range is due to a two stage launch The projectile is launched out of the tube by a change that burns completely within the tube, the rocket travel a safe distance (10-20m) before a rocket motor ignites, propelling it out to max range. The fin stabilisation and propulsion of the projectile means that in a cross wind the projectile will weathercock (turn to point into the wind) and it will deviate from the target in the opposite way to that expected.

Early RPG-7 projectiles (1960s) had problems with the fuse such that only 1 in 7 hits would result in a decent performance of the warhead. In addition the fuse was so sensitive that, once armed, it was liable to be set off by foliage. More modern warheads (1970s) do not suffer from this, but have a unique method of fusing and as such can be easily defeated by slat armour or something like chickenwire. Other HEAT weapons are not as sensitive to these defensive techniques.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Gromit:
Well, it is hard to compare the PIAT to the Bazooka and Panzerschrek evenly because the PIAT wasn't rocket-powered like the latter two weapons.

IIRC, the PIAT was a "spigot" weapon that actually threw the projectile at the target. It was a REAL bear to load- not unlike medieval heavy crossbows- that spring mechanism had to be pretty heavy duty. The round was actually launched by a ballistite cartridge in the tail of the bomb. The spring did not launch the bomb on its own.

The weapon in theory recocked itself after each shot. Drop the bomb in and you're ready to go. However, the weapon often failed to recock itself, in which case the heavy duty spring mechanism you describe did prove to be bothersome - especially if under fire, as the only way to recock it was either standing up (optimally, not great to do under fire) or if possible lying prone.

[flamingknives]

Supine, surely?

[Michael Emrys]

I have a question about the PIAT. Why was that damn spring made so heavy? If all it is intended to do is to ignite the cartridge, one would think something lighter would have sufficed. There must have been a reason for this design choice, and I'm wondering what it was. Also, as the PIAT was continued in use for some time after the war, was there any thought of modifying the weapon with a lighter spring?

Michael

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by flamingknives:
Supine, surely? Position Grog. I bet you sleep on your back, too. :mad:

[flamingknives]

Like I'd tell a deranged mannequin fancier that.

[warspite]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:
I have a question about the PIAT. Why was that damn spring made so heavy? If all it is intended to do is to ignite the cartridge, one would think something lighter would have sufficed. There must have been a reason for this design choice, and I'm wondering what it was. Also, as the PIAT was continued in use for some time after the war, was there any thought of modifying the weapon with a lighter spring?

Michael It's the spring launches the charge. It's a ~200lb pull pressing on a 3lb warhead. There's no chemical propellant of any kind.

As someone else said, it's probably the best infantry AT weapon in the game due to the lack of noise and smoke trail. In some respects it feels a little overmodeled (using it repeatedly should tire out infantry rather quickly, and I think reload times could be longer - but this is merely opinion and not sourced), but other advantages, like the ability to fire from an enclosed space, are not modeled, so it all balances out IMO.

[flamingknives]

You might want to check that, warspite:
The PIAT is a spigot mortar, and hence has a small charge.
It simply cannot re-cock itself, which it did, without some form of propellant. Furthermore, a 200lb spring cannot propel the bomb at a sufficient speed.

[Michael Emrys]

FK is right. But still, nobody's answered my question. Why was such a bloody heavy spring used in the first place?

Michael

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by warspite:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Emrys:
I have a question about the PIAT. Why was that damn spring made so heavy? If all it is intended to do is to ignite the cartridge, one would think something lighter would have sufficed. There must have been a reason for this design choice, and I'm wondering what it was. Also, as the PIAT was continued in use for some time after the war, was there any thought of modifying the weapon with a lighter spring?

Michael It's the spring launches the charge. It's a ~200lb pull pressing on a 3lb warhead. There's no chemical propellant of any kind. </font>[/QUOTE]If you don't know what you're talking about, please don't post.

http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/weapons/piat.htm

Michael, mayber this answers your question.

From my own forum, by David Gordon, author of WEAPONS OF THE BRITISH TOMMY:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=28173&messageid=1110338354

The large spring in the PIAT absorbs most of the recoil of the bolt/spigot with firing pin and allows the weapon to recock in the process. Without the spring, the PIAT would be a shoulder fired mortar, which would likely break you in half in the process.(emphasis added)Also, from Art Johnson about recocking. (Art was 48th Highlanders in the late 40s, then 1 and 2 RCR in Korea, wounded on his last day in country in 1952 and lost a leg and an arm. Went on to be associate curator of the 48th Highlanders museum).

http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=28173&messageid=1110434949

Michael is right I have both trained and instructed on the Piat. Initialy the Piat had to be cocked by hand, well by feet actually. It was not easy to do. First you had to turn the shoulder pad to unlock it from the body, then depending wether it was a standing load or a lying load you placed your feet on the shoulder pad and the cradle over your shoulder and pushed like hell untill it cocked, if I remember right the spring had a 140lb resistance. If it was a standing load you basicaly just stood up and cocked the weapon. The lying mode you did essentialy the same thing while lying down. The problem was that if your foot slipped off the shoulder pad before the weapon was cocked the spring would expand and you stood a good chance of loseing a few teeth or a broken jaw.

The bomb itself as mentioned was a hollow charge propelled by a balastite cartridge. The blowback of the cartidge was supposed to recock the weapon, it didn't always work. The bomb was very delicate to handle, unlike other Mortar like weapons the fuze was live all the time and didn't require firing to activate it.

...There were two different types of bombs that I am aware of. The original on had three little wire fingers on it, the later ones had this brass nose sticking out of it.

The only blowback that I can recall was the guide ring.

[ June 28, 2005, 11:37 PM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[Tagwyn]

Thanks for the good explanation Dorosh. The sarcasm was, as usual, not warranted. Tag

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:
Michael, mayber this answers your question.

From my own forum, by David Gordon, author of WEAPONS OF THE BRITISH TOMMY:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=28173&messageid=1110338354

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The large spring in the PIAT absorbs most of the recoil of the bolt/spigot with firing pin and allows the weapon to recock in the process. Without the spring, the PIAT would be a shoulder fired mortar, which would likely break you in half in the process.(emphasis added)</font>[/QUOTE]Ah, very good. That makes sense. Thank you, Michael

Michael

[warspite]

Wow, Dorosh, that'll leave few people here who can post.

My MISTAKE.

We're allowed to make those, aren't we? I assume we can't all be omniscient gods like you.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by warspite:
Wow, Dorosh, that'll leave few people here who can post."Few" is subjective, however, I think most people (in fact, a majority somewhat greater than 50% +1) who post here do take the time to ensure they know what they're talking about, be it tactics, history, strategy, or recipes for biscuits. Quite the sweeping generalization on your part. Pity you hold the rest of the board in such low regard - or did you somehow subscribe to the theory that we all post here with misinformation for the fun of it? Or something? :confused:

My MISTAKE.Quite.

We're allowed to make those, aren't we? Allowed? Nothing in the rules against it. Check with the board admin, I guess. :confused:

Just curious that you would rush in with a pronounciamento without having any clue as to how incorrect you were.

[JonS]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:
... as the PIAT was continued in use for some time after the war, ...

Michael It may have been in service for some time after the war, but I don't believe it was used much, even in training. It was felt to be too dangerous to the user, so an order came out shortly after the end of hostilities that it wasn't to be fired anymore.

Regards
Jon

P.S. please don't ask for a source :(

[ July 01, 2005, 08:44 PM: Message edited by: JonS ]

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by Tagwyn:
The sarcasm was, as usual, not warranted. Tag Well, but as he doesn't charge for it, it doesn't really need a warranty, now does it?

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by warspite:
Wow, Dorosh, that'll leave few people here who can post.Oh, it leaves hundreds.

Originally posted by warspite:
My MISTAKE.No problem, really. One should always couch these things in 'qualifiers', such as: I thought, I believe so, If I recall correctly, it was my understanding, things like that. Then you don't look like you're handing down the revealed word of God.

One should save the 'Revealed Word of God' pronouncements for things that all know to be true and inarguable, like 'Grog Dorosh is a vicious swine', things like that.

Originally posted by warspite:
We're allowed to make those, aren't we? I assume we can't all be omniscient gods like you. Really, you can't let Michael get to you. It's just his crusty way. I mean, if you take offense at his demeanour, you'll probably burst an aneurism, or something.

Just do what I do. When he comes down too heavy on you, imagine that you're floating in a quiet pool filled with lily pads.

Well, actually, I mercilessly satirize the man. But I bet the 'lily pad pool' thing is almost as relaxing and fun.

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by Seanachai:
Just do what I do. When he comes down too heavy on you, imagine that you're floating in a quiet pool filled with lily pads.Reinforcing my basic belief that you are a toad

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by JonS:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Emrys:
... as the PIAT was continued in use for some time after the war, ...

Michael It may have been in service for some time after the war, but I don't believe it was used much, even in training. It was felt to be too dangerous to the user, so an order came out shortly after the end of hostilities that it wasn't to be fired anymore.</font>[/QUOTE]Ooooo-kay. At least that's not inconsistent with what I recall reading...somewhere.

P.S. please don't ask for a source.Oh darn! You take all the fun out of being an annoying nitpicker!

:(

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Berlichtingen:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Seanachai:
Just do what I do. When he comes down too heavy on you, imagine that you're floating in a quiet pool filled with lily pads.Reinforcing my basic belief that you are a toad </font>[/QUOTE]What's more, he doesn't reply to e-mails. The swarn.

:mad:

Michael

[Skolman]

If I remember correctly there has been a HE charge for the PIAT as well.
Right ?

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by JonS:
It may have been in service for some time after the war, but I don't believe it was used much, even in training. It was felt to be too dangerous to the user, so an order came out shortly after the end of hostilities that it wasn't to be fired anymore.

Regards
Jon

P.S. please don't ask for a source :( I am going to beg to differ slightly, based on that well-known source, the Man in the Pub -- slightly better than that, in fact, the landlord, specifically of, ooh, strains memory, the Queen's Head in Horsham (or it might have been the Hornbrook).

This bloke (John? Peter? Can't even recall his name), having overheard the PIAT being mentioned in a grog discussion over grog in his pub, told us that he had fired the PIAT in Palestine, which must have been 1947 or 48. As he told it, his platoon was bushwhacked by three Haganah blokes in a bunker, and he, being the poor sap who was carrying the PIAT at the time, was told to deal with it. He fired 14 rounds (an odd number, given that the carrier holds three bombs) because that was all the ammunition they were carrying, and he was so dazed after the first couple of rounds that he kept on mindlessly following the firing drill until he couldn't any more, oblivious to the repeated shouts of "cease fire" from the platoon sergeant.

He claimed that he finished up two yards behind the firing position he'd started in because of the effect of the recoil. Enough of the rounds hit that there was very little left of the bunker or the blokes in it (they had to count the toes and divide by 10) , and he was duly put on a charge for "wasting ammunition".

My own slightly cynical impression of the British Army in the late 1940s suggests to me that if firing the PIAT was dicouraged, it was more likely to have been on grounds of expense rather than safety (remember Crown Immunity?)

The PIAT was eventually replaced by the 3.5-in Bazooka, with which another pub acquaintance of mine (back bar of the Stout House this time) once demolished a small house in training; I think he managed to avoid being put on a charge for destroying government property.

All the best,

John.

[jacobs_ladder2]

Originally posted by John D Salt:
The PIAT was eventually replaced by the 3.5-in Bazooka, with which another pub acquaintance of mine (back bar of the Stout House this time) once demolished a small house in training; I think he managed to avoid being put on a charge for destroying government property.

All the best,

John. Well, one thing is certain. Your pubs are infinitely more interesting than our own.

Cheers

Paul

[JonS]

John, I should have qualified slightly (and to be honest, I didn't even consider Palastine) - as I recall it was something along the lines of "not to be used unless someone is shooting at you".

Great stories smile.gif I happen to have a copy of Infantry Training, Vol I, Infantry Platoon Weapons, Pam 9, Pt II, 3.5-Inch Rocket Launcher floating around here somewhere ...

Editted in a bid to defeat evil.

[ July 02, 2005, 11:58 AM: Message edited by: JonS ]

[John Kettler]

I believe those of you with access to good Israeli
source material from the 1948 war will find an account of an attack on a kibbutz mounted by an
Arab armored column composed, as I recall, of
Hotchkiss R-39s (or was it Somuas?) and improvised armored cars. The attack was stopped by a PIAT and a WWI? or earlier 75mm field gun. I think the footage ran on the History Channel here in the U.S. and distinctly recall my shocked feeling when I realized the nature of the tanks I was seeing. Ring any bells? Might make an interesting scenario!

Regards,

John Kettler

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by JonS:
... "not to be used unless someone is shooting oat..."Shooting oats? Is that like projectile vomiting?

:D

Michael

[flamingknives]

Not quite...

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Skolman:
If I remember correctly there has been a HE charge for the PIAT as well.
Right ? The PIAT was successfully used as a mortar in NW Europe on occasion.

[llama]

Originally posted by John D Salt:
I am going to beg to differ slightly, based on that well-known source, the Man in the Pub -- slightly better than that, in fact, the landlord, specifically of, ooh, strains memory, the Queen's Head in Horsham (or it might have been the Hornbrook).
Depends how far back you go. Might well have been the Queen's Head. The landlord there in my time was ex-forces (finished in 22nd regiment at Hereford). Age wise he would have been right to have seved there but I never heard him mention Palestine. Had a beatutiful Alasation bitch. He went on to run the Dog & Bacon, retired and died a few years ago.

Mind you I never met anyone interesting in the Stout House, back or front bar. It must have come up in the world since my day.

Cheers

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:
What's more, he doesn't reply to e-mails. The swarn.Toads don't write

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by llama:
[Snips]Depends how far back you go.
In Horsham, I go back to 1967, and for legal drinking, to 1978.

Originally posted by llama:

Might well have been the Queen's Head. The landlord there in my time was ex-forces (finished in 22nd regiment at Hereford). Age wise he would have been right to have seved there but I never heard him mention Palestine. Had a beatutiful Alasation bitch. He went on to run the Dog & Bacon, retired and died a few years ago.
Yes, I know the man, and my memory wants to say he was called Paul, but I'm not sure -- had an SPG crest behind the bar 'cos his son was in it, if my memory fails me correctly.

Anyhow, not him, someone else.

Originally posted by llama:

Mind you I never met anyone interesting in the Stout House, back or front bar. It must have come up in the world since my day.
You're bloody lucky you didn't run into me. John and Margaret who were there since ever I could remember went on to run the Tanner's Arms, they must be retired by now, I had my last pint off them there a few years ago.

Another interesting bloke from the back bar of the Stout House was Major Frank Mumblemumble, who was always griping about his tin hips and tiny pension and trying to get you to buy him whisky. He got the MC (and his hips shattered by a Japanese grenade) leading a sneaky-beaky attack through the sewers into Fort Dufferin in Burma.

Now the really interesting pub to drink in, that was the Wheatsheaf at Plummer's Plain, when Jerry King was the landlord...

All the best,

John.

[warspite]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:
Just curious that you would rush in with a pronounciamento without having any clue as to how incorrect you were. Hardly curious, were you? I fail to see how telling me to stop posting is a sign of curiosity.

And obviously, if I'd KNOWN I was incorrect, or if I'd had reason to doubt my claim before this, I wouldn't have posted with such authority, would I? It's not like I was a dick to you and argued your counter-claim, was I? So why were you a dick to me?

Like I said, we obviously can't all be the omniscient Michael Dorosh. You'll just have to live with that fact.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Seanachai:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by warspite:
Wow, Dorosh, that'll leave few people here who can post.Oh, it leaves hundreds.

Originally posted by warspite:
My MISTAKE.No problem, really. One should always couch these things in 'qualifiers', such as: I thought, I believe so, If I recall correctly, it was my understanding, things like that. Then you don't look like you're handing down the revealed word of God.

One should save the 'Revealed Word of God' pronouncements for things that all know to be true and inarguable, like 'Grog Dorosh is a vicious swine', things like that.

Originally posted by warspite:
We're allowed to make those, aren't we? I assume we can't all be omniscient gods like you. Really, you can't let Michael get to you. It's just his crusty way. I mean, if you take offense at his demeanour, you'll probably burst an aneurism, or something.

Just do what I do. When he comes down too heavy on you, imagine that you're floating in a quiet pool filled with lily pads.

Well, actually, I mercilessly satirize the man. But I bet the 'lily pad pool' thing is almost as relaxing and fun. </font>[/QUOTE]Heh. You really do need to post more often, you swine.

[flamingknives]

Quite apart from anything else, stating that a 200lb spring will propel a 3lb bomb at much over 10m/s is nonsense.

Out of curiousity, why were you so sure that the PIAT had no propelling charge?

[Boo Radley]

Originally posted by Seanachai:
Just do what I do. When he comes down too heavy on you, imagine that you're floating in a quiet pool filled with lily pads.
Umm... those aren't lily pads.

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by warspite:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:
Just curious that you would rush in with a pronounciamento without having any clue as to how incorrect you were. Hardly curious, were you? I fail to see how telling me to stop posting is a sign of curiosity.

And obviously, if I'd KNOWN I was incorrect, or if I'd had reason to doubt my claim before this, I wouldn't have posted with such authority, would I? It's not like I was a dick to you and argued your counter-claim, was I? So why were you a dick to me?

Like I said, we obviously can't all be the omniscient Michael Dorosh. You'll just have to live with that fact. </font>[/QUOTE]It's all gone, lad. It's all been said and done. If you're going to have to readjust your underwear every time an idjit like Dorosh snaps at you, you're going to spend all the time you post on this Board fiddling with the fact that your knowledge is currently tucked up in a sweaty and uncomfortable way in the crack of your arse.

Let it go.

What is it you're looking for? Single Combat with Grog Dorosh? Get a girlfriend, or maybe invite friends over to a really nice barbecue.

Or simply get ****-faced drunk.

The World is full of possibilities. Pissing a broad arc of anger in a confrontation with Dorosh is like ruining a pair of jeans and shoes for no reason at all.

Don't hate his useless Canadian arse. Work with it.

Let me show you the way:

Ahem... Grog Dorosh! You Horrible Little Man! You Diseased Parody of An Actual Human Being! You Opinionated Puddle of Canadian Idiocy!

Do you think that Canadian troops thought better of the PIAT, or the Bazooka?

Please remember to reference your sources, eh, you annoying, arrogant, Canadian son-of-a-bitch!

There. Was that so hard? Did it involve an excessive amount of pissing and moaning about how you'd originally posted like an arrogant halfwit?

I think not.

I think the best thing about the Combat Mission Forums is, is that we're only as stupid as we want to be, eh?

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by Seanachai:
we're only as stupid as we want to be, eh? Musta been your overriding goal in life

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by Berlichtingen:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Seanachai:
we're only as stupid as we want to be, eh? Musta been your overriding goal in life </font>[/QUOTE]And you can no more ignore me than you can cease to breathe.

Who's for a jolly singsong, then, eh?!

[Michael Dorosh]

Good Lord, Sean, is it my birthday or something? I had quite abandoned my quest for a Mortal Enemy in the face of the parallel quest for True Love. And yet that quest seems to be petering out - Mortal Enemies are so much less work, or would do on the face of it. Hmmm - thanks for the assist but this one...just no style, no panache. He gave it a good try, maybe with your guidance...but how could I ask you to invest that much of your time and dilute your own white-hot impassioned dislike of me?

"Get a girlfriend." Such sage advice, really - let's hope it works our for our friend and he is put in the sad and all two familiar position of meeting the perfect woman unfortunately located in two seperate bodies; he would have plenty of time to spew hatred at me in that case, as I am finding the time to prick up my ears in wonderment at how positively unschooled he is in the ways of hate. Perhaps, Sean, just perhaps you and I in tandem can teach this young pup the way to true satisfaction and have him swinging at me below the belt from now to the end of time?

Or maybe I'll just go hiking today with girl number 1 and stay off the internet for awhile.

[flamingknives]

Now that's just cruel, Dorosh, you know how Seanachai has trouble getting a decent enemy, mortal or otherwise.

I mean, I can't even gather the enthusiasm to tell him to Sod Off back to the peng challenge thread.

[roqf77]

god i didnt realise this would become a flamepit. jesus im never posting again unless its important.

[flamingknives]

Ignore Berlichtingen and Seanchai, that's just spillover from the Cheery Waffle thread. Or is it the peng challenge? I forget the difference.

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by flamingknives:
Ignore Berlichtingen and Seanchai, that's just spillover from the Cheery Waffle thread. Or is it the peng challenge? I forget the difference. You'll roast in Hell for that one

[Egbert]

Originally posted by Berlichtingen:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by flamingknives:
Ignore Berlichtingen and Seanchai, that's just spillover from the Cheery Waffle thread. Or is it the peng challenge? I forget the difference. You'll roast in Hell for that one </font>[/QUOTE]Oh, oh, a weenie roast.

[Boo Radley]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:
Or maybe I'll just go hiking today with girl number 1 and stay off the internet for awhile. Good grief. OK, kiddies, hunker down and prepare to be bored to tears by at least a dozen long paragraphs by Grog Dorosh as he laments over which imaginary platonic girl friend he should spend more time with.
Jesus wept.
Confronted with the likes of you, Dr. Phil would first throw up his hands in disgust and then drop you with a deer rifle, figuring it was the only merciful thing to do.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by roqf77:
god i didnt realise this would become a flamepit. jesus im never posting again unless its important. LOL! :D

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by roqf77:
god i didnt realise this would become a flamepit. jesus im never posting again unless its important. LOL! :D </font>[/QUOTE]Does have an almost Cabronesque quality to it

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Boo Radley:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:
Or maybe I'll just go hiking today with girl number 1 and stay off the internet for awhile. Good grief. OK, kiddies, hunker down and prepare to be bored to tears by at least a dozen long paragraphs by Grog Dorosh as he laments over which imaginary platonic girl friend he should spend more time with.
Jesus wept.
Confronted with the likes of you, Dr. Phil would first throw up his hands in disgust and then drop you with a deer rifle, figuring it was the only merciful thing to do. </font>[/QUOTE]Given his hideous postings re interior deco, I'd say that anything that keeps him off the internet is a Good Thing. My god, what would happen if a child cruising the net should come across those pictures? It's too horrible to contemplate.

Michael

[Jaska.]

Originally posted by roqf77:
well ive been reading this website and it says, that the piat penetrated about 102mm of german steel but the bazooka was only about 77mm. also has the a test and it said the panzershreck would penetrate a tiger frontaly at 250m!
Here is the link(its not all zook bashing it puts the piat into perspective).
http://p081.ezboard.com/fforumonwarfrm10.showMessage?topicID=39.topic Look at what you've done !!!

We now have not one, but TWO <font size=0.5>challenged Penguin</font size=0.5> threads on the forum.

What a horror !!! :( :( :( :mad:

[Boo Radley]

Originally posted by Prinz Eugen_2:
Look at what you've done !!!

We now have not one, but TWO <font size=0.5>challenged Penguin</font size=0.5> threads on the forum.

What a horror !!! :( :( :( :mad: You guys in the <font size=0.5> wiffle thread </font size=0.5> are always talking about us and yet, we never talk about you.
What does this tell us?

[Berlichtingen]

They're easily ignored?

[Jaska.]

Originally posted by Boo Radley:
You guys in the Fine Cheery Waffle thread are always talking about usPfft !

In your dreams. :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Boo Radley]

Originally posted by Prinz Eugen_2:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Boo Radley:
You guys in the Fine Cheery Waffle thread are always talking about usPfft !

In your dreams. :mad: :mad: :mad: </font>[/QUOTE]No.
Any dreams I might have concerning <small small small>wiffler's</small small small> invariably includes overheating power tools, the acrid smell of fear (Not mine) and the abject howls of soul wrenching pain (Again, not mine).
And steel drum music. Let us not forget the steel drum music.

[Jaska.]

Originally posted by Boo Radley:
No.
Any dreams I might have concerning <small small small>wiffler's</small small small> invariably includes overheating power tools, the acrid smell of fear (Not mine) and the abject howls of soul wrenching pain (Again, not mine).
And steel drum music. Let us not forget the steel drum music. Ooooh !

I'm so terrified. You torture us in your sleep. What a man you are. :mad:

Tell me, are all of the challenged Ping-pongs as brave as you, or are you just an exception ?

And please, I do not wish to know of other things you dream about. I don't think I could stomach all the horrors and depravities that go on about your tiny subconscious. :mad:

[Boo Radley]

Originally posted by Prinz Eugen_2:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Boo Radley:
No.
Any dreams I might have concerning <small small small>wiffler's</small small small> invariably includes overheating power tools, the acrid smell of fear (Not mine) and the abject howls of soul wrenching pain (Again, not mine).
And steel drum music. Let us not forget the steel drum music. Ooooh !

I'm so terrified. You torture us in your sleep. What a man you are. :mad:

Tell me, are all of the challenged Ping-pongs as brave as you, or are you just an exception ?

And please, I do not wish to know of other things you dream about. I don't think I could stomach all the horrors and depravities that go on about your tiny subconscious. :mad: </font>[/QUOTE]Down, Prinz, down!
Who's a good boy? Is Prinz a good boy? Is Prinz a good boy? Yes, he is! Yes, he is!
Prinz is a good boy!

[rleete]

Face it, Boo. You have been outclassed by a waffler. We should revoke your kniggithood.

[Boo Radley]

Like I ever listen to anything YOU say?
You spew out more hot gasses than a politician riding in a punctured hot air balloon trapped in a volcanic vent.

[rleete]

It's a gift.

[Jaska.]

Originally posted by Boo Radley:
Down, Prinz, down!
Who's a good boy? Is Prinz a good boy? Is Prinz a good boy? Yes, he is! Yes, he is!
Prinz is a good boy! I thought you would notice that you've made an arse of yourself already...

But please, do go on. I find you amusing. Tacky, maybe, but amusing.

[Boo Radley]

Originally posted by Prinz Eugen_2:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Boo Radley:
Down, Prinz, down!
Who's a good boy? Is Prinz a good boy? Is Prinz a good boy? Yes, he is! Yes, he is!
Prinz is a good boy! I thought you would notice that you've made an arse of yourself already...

But please, do go on. I find you amusing. Tacky, maybe, but amusing. </font>[/QUOTE]My Dear Unguent,
Sorry, but I haven't noticed anything of the sort. What I have noticed although, is that even though you began this little pas de deux, you seem to be getting quite cranky.
To become a true mortal enemy, you must learn to roll with the punches, go with the flow, give and take, spank the monkey... no, wait... that's something else.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Boo Radley:

To become a true mortal enemy,

<font size=99 font color="red">GO WORK YOUR OWN SIDE OF THE STREET!</FONT>

[rleete]

What? And let you be the only one whoring yourself out? Boo has already admitted he's cheap...

[Boo Radley]

And easy. Don't forget that part.

[Brent Pollock]

You still owe me a PBEM file that works the streets of Ortona...although you're still stuck on the outskirts tongue.gif

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Boo Radley:

To become a true mortal enemy,

<font color="red">GO WORK YOUR OWN SIDE OF THE STREET!</FONT> </font>[/QUOTE]

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Brent Pollock:
You still owe me a PBEM file that works the streets of Ortona...although you're still stuck on the outskirts tongue.gif

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Boo Radley:

To become a true mortal enemy,

<font color="red">GO WORK YOUR OWN SIDE OF THE STREET!</FONT> </font>[/QUOTE]</font>[/QUOTE]I sent it days ago!!!

Resending....

[roqf77]

well this raps it up for this post. heres an idea. next time i post why dont i just put it in the general forum straight away to save time.(just kidding).

[Jaska.]

(snipped)

[ July 06, 2005, 03:52 AM: Message edited by: Prinz Eugen_2 ]

[Battlefront.com]

Yuck... what is that smell... OOOO!!! I know... it's this thread. Now, back to the various pits of Hell you've already made on this Forum, the lot of you!

Steve

P.S. forgot to tick off Peng... so without further ado... :D