Talk:15 cm sIG 33 auf Fahrgestell Panzerkampfwagen II (Sf)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 15 cm sIG 33 auf Fahrgestell Panzerkampfwagen II (Sf) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The SP2 is not a Bison. edit
Essentially, StPz II was an analog of Bison (except of chassis) with larger house placed in back and stronger armor. Bison had 5-10 mm armor and StPz II had 15-20 mm armor. --Arbalestier (talk) 18:24, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
This isn't a tank. edit
These articles always put too much emphasis on what these sort of vehicles are lacking in compared to a tank, when they should be emphasizing how they were a great improvement on conventional artillery pieces. Because that's what this is, a field gun mounted to a mobile chassis. It isn't designed to head up to the front line and charge a pillbox, guns blazing while machine gun bullets ricochet off everywhere, it's meant to engage from a mile or several to the rear. If anyone is shooting at it with small arms fire, things are already going quite wrong. The crews of a normal 15cm gun fought just fine with nothing but a gun shield in front of them, to protect from the occasional sniper, stray bullets from the front, etc, but mostly for the psychological benefit. The Fahregestell has far better protection than normal gun crews, and isn't expected to engage from much closer than they are, but because it has TANK TRACKS everyone automatically compares it with a tank and decides the crew is "vulnerable" due to the low sides. No, they are much better protected than a typical gun crew, and are able to re-located to avoid counterbattery fire, which is very difficult for normal gun crews to do. I keep seeing this over an over again, people judging vehicles on the same yardstick as tanks, just because they both have guns and caterpillar tracks.03:26, 9 November 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.109.164.53 (talk)
- It's criticized on its own merits, namely because the crew was still very exposed to snipers and shrapnel from near-misses.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:55, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Image still needed edit
I noticed that an image of this vehicle was added, however of a damaged vehicle (apparently post-war?) so doesn't show well how the actual vehicle looked like. Will try to find a PD image which gives a good idea of the vehicle, please if anyone has one such image upload it to this article. Thanks and regards, DPdH (talk) 14:42, 17 March 2024 (UTC)