Picture of the day

fingers284 said:
The only time a 2x4 will even come close to a 4x4, whether bathtub bottomed or rail framed, is if you drive the bag off the 2x4 resulting in drastically reduced life expectancy of the machine. if you hit a tough spot hard enough with a 2x4 to get though you can hit the same tough spot with a 4x4 and virtualy ease your way through it not harming the machine at all.

That might not make any difference in a battle-field situation where completion of the mission is tantamount to equipment salvation but in my world you will never convince me that a 2x4 can equal any 4x4 in off-road use...in 50 yrs of construction, oil field exploration, farming, and rough country hunting I've pulled a few miles of winch line to stuck 4x4's...not so much to 2x4's, we just hook a cat to them because that's the only way to get anywhere.
Click to expand...

4 x4's rule the roost in the bush. But in truth for the most part they are more expensive, with poor mileage and added complication to boot.
I've blown by a few 4 x 4's laying belly down in the mud...in a 2 x 4.
I ran a 7.3 IDI diesel 2 x 4 with a set of tire chains in the toolbox + winch in the front all over western Canada working rigs. North country too, you have to be more cautious than the 4 x 4 guys obviously. But the 3-5 % of the time that a 4 x 4 is advantageous is somewhat negated by the expense and complication of design.
A fleet of those Klubwagons would have been fairly easy to keep fueled, serviced and in the field in WW2
 
The notion of a two wheel drive care being superior to a four wheel drive is just silly.
At least by those with experience off road. Not your Sunday drive in a milsurp parade, or driving down a country road (even in Baja -lol).

 
beltfed said:
The notion of a two wheel drive care being superior to a four wheel drive is just silly.
At least by those with experience off road. Not your Sunday drive in a milsurp parade, or driving down a country road (even in Baja -lol).

Click to expand...

I am going to be blunt, give it a rest, you don,t have a clue what you are talking about in regards to wartime kubels Vs wartime jeeps. I have laid it all out there as to why a wartime kubel is every bit as capable and in many regards better then a wartime jeep. We are NOT comparing a vehicle built today against the cars designed and built seven plus decades past. Now lets take a look at the picture. first off that is not a true Typ82 Kübel judging by the Beetle front beam on it plus that wonky low in the nose stance hence it has no Posi rear end. I would even wonder if the car was even running or possibly getting push started, cars do act up. Feel free to keep banging the 4X4 Vs 4X2 drum all you wish but from my experiences with both (Kübel/Jeeps) I cannot say the kübel is less capable.
 
Winter pastoral scene:

150427-Kubelwagen-3.jpg
 
XRCD011 said:
I am going to be blunt, give it a rest, you don,t have a clue what you are talking about in regards to wartime kubels Vs wartime jeeps. I have laid it all out there as to why a wartime kubel is every bit as capable and in many regards better then a wartime jeep. We are NOT comparing a vehicle built today against the cars designed and built seven plus decades past. Now lets take a look at the picture. first off that is not a true Typ82 Kübel judging by the Beetle front beam on it plus that wonky low in the nose stance hence it has no Posi rear end. I would even wonder if the car was even running or possibly getting push started, cars do act up. Feel free to keep banging the 4X4 Vs 4X2 drum all you wish but from my experiences with both (Kübel/Jeeps) I cannot say the kübel is less capable.
Click to expand...

Looks like I hit a bit of a nerve with you. You related to Ferdinand or something?
You are right, I don't have a Kubelwagen, so couldn't possibly know what they are not capable of.
I do have some experience however with the GPW, and own a stock 55' Willy's CJ-5 which is pretty close to comparable.
I've also been around and in a Meyers Manx a fair bit. Of which while I can't say for sure, but I would dare to say is every bit as capable and more so than the Kubel. One could say it is almost a Kubel on steroids.

And I've been off road with them - lots. You are of course entitled to your biased opinion.
Back to photos:



 
Dark Alley Dan said:
I'm having a hard time finding any data on survivors, but there appear to be plenty, including one rescued by Farley Goddamned Mowat and delivered to the CWM, later restored by the lads at Weald.
Click to expand...

The Soviets refurbed an undisclosed number of Stugs and sent them to Syria as military aid, back in the day. The Syrians promptly used them against Israel, which worked out about as well for Syria as all their other endeavors against Israel. At least one captured Syrian Stug is on display as a gate guard at a base in Israel.

The Finns, ever fond of taking whatever weapons they could acquire from anyone and having them face in an easterly direction, kept Stugs in service until the 60's. Apparently, Finnish Stugs represent the bulk of the Bovington collection of Stugs, one even retains Finn markings.

If the Middle East ever settled down long enough for the Milsurp dealers to operate safely in the region, it would be a treasure trove of historical arms of all varieties. It seems that every weapon created by man, seems to end up in the Middle East at some point.
 
Spotted Ass Ape, 458th Bombardment Group

Unfit for combat duty, but still airworthy. Repainted and repurposed as an assembly aircraft.

8b6f13733bf1583432434fc8ff626c5b.jpg
 
Last edited:
beltfed said:
Looks like I hit a bit of a nerve with you. You related to Ferdinand or something?
You are right, I don't have a Kubelwagen, so couldn't possibly know what they are not capable of.
I do have some experience however with the GPW, and own a stock 55' Willy's CJ-5 which is pretty close to comparable.
I've also been around and in a Meyers Manx a fair bit. Of which while I can't say for sure, but I would dare to say is every bit as capable and more so than the Kubel. One could say it is almost a Kubel on steroids.

And I've been off road with them - lots. You are of course entitled to your biased opinion.
Back to photos:



Click to expand...
Glad to see you are coming around to the prowess of the little wartime kubel. Now lets take a look at your two very common pics the top one was taken in Tunisia and the car has the desert balloon tires mounted, which are about as well threaded as a drag racers slicks so zero "gription" going on there, but I bet it is still running the tow cable out to recover a bogged captured jeep none the less even if the tires are nothing more then balls of mud. The second picture shows the lightness of a kubel being an advantage with a gang manhandling the kubel to firmer standing even in knee deep mud. Am I related to Dr.Porsche ? No (strange question indeed), but I can see they got it right with the Typ82 for what the wartime Germans asked for in a little wheeled vehicle. So while its to easy to dismiss the kubel because its not some jim dandy, gear jamming, 4By, it certainly got the job done all in rear wheel drive.
 
In the Sennelager training ground in Germany, we came upon a Bundeswehr DKW 3 cylinder two cycle vehicle (Kubelwagon look alike) bogged in the mud. We had a laugh and offered to pull them out with our Dodge 3/4 ton.
The four Soldaten got out, each picking up a corner of the bumpers, lifted it, put it aside a couple of metres and drove off waving and laughing.

He who laughs last .....
 
tumblr_o4c2qzok6v1ugf4xso1_1280.jpg


Shipyard workers gather at the bow of USS Ward (DD 139) on the 17th day of construction at Mare Island on June 1, 1918. After a mere 17 days of construction, Ward was completed and launched. This record for fastest USN destroyer built still stands today.
 
Gibbs505 said:
Shipyard workers gather at the bow of USS Ward (DD 139) on the 17th day of construction at Mare Island on June 1, 1918. After a mere 17 days of construction, Ward was completed and launched. This record for fastest USN destroyer built still stands today.
Click to expand...

Interesting service history. I usually associate "Liberty Ship" with WWII cargo ships cranked out to keep England alive and fed. But the USS Ward was a WWI "Liberty Ship" - I didn't even realize that was a thing until I looked her up.

Name: Ward
Namesake: James H. Ward
Builder: Mare Island Navy Yard
Laid down: 15 May 1918
Launched: 1 June 1918
Commissioned: 24 July 1918
Decommissioned: 21 July 1921
Recommissioned: 15 January 1941
Reclassified: High-speed transport, APD-16, 6 February 1943
Fate: Sunk by kamikaze[1] 7 December 1944

She got the first ship kill of the Pacific Fleet - 3 hours before the Pearl Harbor attack she spotted and sunk a Ko-hyoteki 2 man Japanese midget sub. A kill that was contested until the wreck of the midget sub was finally found in 2002.
 
Dark Alley Dan said:
Sunk exactly three years after she sunk that mini sub.
Click to expand...

Never noticed that, good catch. Kind of a shame she went down as a transport instead of a fighting ship.


So... You want to be a machine gunner on a bomber? First, you'll have to survive some government approved training videos.

 
grelmar said:
So... You want to be a machine gunner on a bomber?
Click to expand...

Thanks, no. I remember reading this one in a first-year college English.

The Death of the Ball Turret Gunner
Randall Jarrell, 1914 - 1965

From my mother’s sleep I fell into the State,
And I hunched in its belly till my wet fur froze.
Six miles from earth, loosed from its dream of life,
I woke to black flak and the nightmare fighters.
When I died they washed me out of the turret with a hose.
Click to expand...

That last line's a grabber, ain't it? Jesus.
 
Dark Alley Dan said:
Thanks, no. I remember reading this one in a first-year college English.



That last line's a grabber, ain't it? Jesus.
Click to expand...

When I was growing up, I dreamed of being a tank commander. That was "the thing" that I wanted to do. All that steel rumbling across the battlefield, cutting loose with a giant cannon. Struck me as the modern day knight in shining armour.

I've mentioned elsewhere on the forum, but I was declined service for medical. So be it, life goes on.

But my interests stuck with me, and I read up and collect. Later on, I remember reading about survival rates for the various combat arms, both historical, and projected for future modern combat.

Bomber crews and Tankers topped the list as about the worst combat arms, if you wanted to survive a conflict. Sure, both pack a whallop. But because of that, they're the things that the other side focus their firepower on.

In spite of massive casualties during specific operations, infantry actually fairs quite well. It's a numbers game. There's just so much infantry in any given military, the overall survival rate is far better than you might expect.

Tanks and Bombers... Limited in number, used constantly. Everyone and everything that can, shoots at them.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom