Jump to content


Painfully Innacurate (Journalism)


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

mortalsatsuma #1 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:00 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13286 battles
  • 1,644
  • Member since:
    06-13-2014

Just had a right old laugh reading this article which I will link from the Daily Fail. They're reporting on tiger day and my god, it's just glorious how hopeless this hack journalist is.

 

According to them the tiger 1; "used the destructive power of a gun which could fire shells each weighing nearly a ton, well over a mile". Christ! those German loaders must have been built like brick sh*thouses! As far as I'm aware not even the ammunition for Russian 122mm guns weighed even close to a ton.

 

They also can't seem to decide how it was captured; "it was captured after its crew fled to avoid capture."/"They crept up on it, killed the crew and took back to the British lines". Both are of course completely wrong, as far as I am aware the crew fled after the turret jammed from a 6 pounder shell getting wedged between the turret and hull and one of the crew was injured. The tank was combat innefective so they did was any rational human being would do and got the f**k out of dodge.

 

Anyway, some nice pictures of Tiger 131 in action just a shame the histocial accuracy in the article is about on point with WGs own interpretation of historical accuracy.

 

http://www.dailymail...ed-British.html

 


Edited by mortalsatsuma, 28 July 2018 - 09:42 PM.


ThinGun #2 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:03 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35516 battles
  • 1,390
  • [SHYLO] SHYLO
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014
Daily Mail and journalism.  Now there's some words you rarely see in the same sentence.

mortalsatsuma #3 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:06 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13286 battles
  • 1,644
  • Member since:
    06-13-2014

View PostThinGun, on 29 April 2018 - 03:03 PM, said:

Daily Mail and journalism.  Now there's some words you rarely see in the same sentence.

 

You're right, i'm being far too generous in labelling it as journalism. I understand a layman having limited knowledge of things such as WW2 era tanks but this guy must have done less than 0 research before posting this article.

 

I mean i'm not certain what the historical shell capacity of a Tiger 1 is but if each shell weighed over a ton, you would need a bloody crane to lift them into the breech and the tanks would probably weigh over 100 tons with all ammunition loaded.


Edited by mortalsatsuma, 29 April 2018 - 03:06 PM.


RamRaid90 #4 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:06 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 22151 battles
  • 6,625
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

A russian 122mm APHE shell fired from the D-25t weighs around 25kg.

 

A f***ing ton?! :teethhappy:


Edited by RamRaid90, 29 April 2018 - 03:08 PM.


Karasu_Hidesuke #5 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:14 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16169 battles
  • 3,880
  • [I-S-L] I-S-L
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013
When, if I may be as bold as to ask, can we expect to get the Tiger 1 buffed to similar levels in the game?

mortalsatsuma #6 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:16 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13286 battles
  • 1,644
  • Member since:
    06-13-2014

View PostBrowarszky, on 29 April 2018 - 03:14 PM, said:

When, if I may be as bold as to ask, can we expect to get the Tiger 1 buffed to similar levels in the game?

 

Don't really get how having 1 ton shells would be a buff. The match would have ended before the first shell gets loaded.

8126Jakobsson #7 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:19 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 67832 battles
  • 3,541
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View Postmortalsatsuma, on 29 April 2018 - 03:16 PM, said:

 

Don't really get how having 1 ton shells would be a buff. The match would have ended before the first shell gets loaded.

 

Ammo capacity: 72   

 

Now that would be a heavy load  :harp:



ThinGun #8 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:19 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35516 battles
  • 1,390
  • [SHYLO] SHYLO
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

Maybe it's a post-Brexit ton?



Bulldog_Drummond #9 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:22 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 29882 battles
  • 9,786
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

Any article in the popular press on any subject about which you know anything at all is invariably rubbish.  And that goes in spades for anything on TV.

 



RamRaid90 #10 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:50 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 22151 battles
  • 6,625
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

View Postmortalsatsuma, on 29 April 2018 - 02:16 PM, said:

 

Don't really get how having 1 ton shells would be a buff. The match would have ended before the first shell gets loaded.

 

Yes but the shell would pen a type 4 without even a sweat.

Enforcer1975 #11 Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:55 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,890
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014


Karasu_Hidesuke #12 Posted 29 April 2018 - 04:09 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16169 battles
  • 3,880
  • [I-S-L] I-S-L
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

View Postmortalsatsuma, on 29 April 2018 - 02:16 PM, said:

 

Don't really get how having 1 ton shells would be a buff. The match would have ended before the first shell gets loaded.

 

​Depends on which of the two tanks you are driving.

Brodie_ #13 Posted 29 April 2018 - 04:15 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 80117 battles
  • 549
  • Member since:
    10-21-2013
There is quite a famous FAKE account about the capture & return of Tiger 131.

It was published seriously as a true story.

However it is utter Bullshxt!

Maybe he read that?



TheOddRogue #14 Posted 29 April 2018 - 04:16 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 10062 battles
  • 451
  • Member since:
    08-08-2012
Mainstream mass media is the LAST place you should look for information. 

Fighto #15 Posted 29 April 2018 - 04:24 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 35191 battles
  • 913
  • [TAC] TAC
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011
Daily Mail , I wouldn't even rely on them to get the date and price on the paper correct.

Edited by Fighto, 29 April 2018 - 04:25 PM.


Snake_Keeper #16 Posted 29 April 2018 - 04:50 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9166 battles
  • 724
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016
AP rounds on the Tiger only weighed around 10kg. So even total ammunition weight did not add up to a ton.:amazed:

Karasu_Hidesuke #17 Posted 29 April 2018 - 05:30 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16169 battles
  • 3,880
  • [I-S-L] I-S-L
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013
There was a time when people could actually trust the printed word... :(​... or maybe even that is something I read somewhere....:sceptic:

Bulldog_Drummond #18 Posted 29 April 2018 - 05:47 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 29882 battles
  • 9,786
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View PostFighto, on 29 April 2018 - 03:24 PM, said:

Daily Mail , I wouldn't even rely on them to get the date and price on the paper correct.

 

The Guardian is even stupider than the Mail, although one would have thought that almost impossible.

Bordhaw #19 Posted 29 April 2018 - 06:43 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 11756 battles
  • 2,659
  • Member since:
    01-29-2017

View PostTheOddRogue, on 29 April 2018 - 03:16 PM, said:

Mainstream mass media is the LAST place you should look for information. 

 

Unfortunately many people don't know or care. 

D4wiD3K #20 Posted 29 April 2018 - 06:46 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 659 battles
  • 276
  • Member since:
    08-11-2012

View Postmortalsatsuma, on 29 April 2018 - 02:00 PM, said:

 "used the destructive power of a gun which could fire shells each weighing nearly a ton, well over a mile". Christ! those German loaders must have been built like brick sh*thouses! As far as I'm aware not even the ammunition for Russian 122mm guns weighed even close to a ton.

 

It's the aryan genes. As a prime specimen of the herrenvolk, I can confirm I could easily do such loading even with my left hand.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users