Talk:Lists of armoured fighting vehicles
I think the production numbers for the M4A3 are incorrect. I've seen the number 49.000 for M4s produced during the war, and that includes all models of the M4, not just M4A3. --Jniemenmaa
How should we disambiguate United States tanks? For example, the M1 could refer to either the modern M1 Abrams or the pre-WWII M1. --Carnildo 08:43, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Are you thinking about the Medium Tank M1, Light Tank M1 and Combat Car M1? Are there more M1 tanks? Hopefully all these can be sorted out at M1. -- Jniemenmaa 09:54, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- I think that Light Tank M1 and Combat Car M1 are the same vehicle -- the cavalry referred to them as "combat cars" to get around the restriction that only the infantry could have tanks. There are other examples, like the M3, which could refer to either the "Stuart" light tank, the "Lee" medium tank, the M3 scout car, or the M3 half-track. --Carnildo
Tanks --> AFVs
I've moved the page to a List of AFV's so that other vehicles can be included. I'll further break it up into sections as I add more items. Oberiko 16:18, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- I thought the list was too long allready, but we can always divide the list in smaller articles if it gets too crowded (and it will get crowded if all AFVs are to be added.) -- Jniemenmaa 07:16, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- If it gets to big, I'm in full agreement of breaking it up. Do you want to do it by primarily by era (WW1, WW2, post-WW2) or by catagory (tank, MRLS, APC etc.)? Oberiko
- Just to clarify, did you want to keep the main list like this, and then just create sub-lists off of it? Oberiko 14:06, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
AFVs and MLRSs
So, how come Katyusha should be classed as a AFV? It's neither armoured or a vehicle... :) Ok, I agree some MLRS could probably be classed as AFVs, but since the Katyusha is usually mounted on a ZIL truck I think it should not be classed as one. -- Jniemenmaa 07:16, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC).
- Part of my reasoning is that the Katyusha, while strictly speaking refers to only the rocket launching system, has essentially come to refer to the entire vehicle, both truck and rockets. As for its armor, I've read (I'll try and find the source if I can) that the Soviets would mount the rockets on an (rather thinly) armor plated truck if they could manage to find/build one. Perhaps we could compromise and leave the Katyusha in the list, but attach a footnote and explain at the bottom of the page that is sometimes not considered an AFV, going into further detail within the main Katyusha article itself? (BTW, nice updtate to the list). Oberiko 13:57, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
The AFVs are divided according to countries, should the list of AFVs of country someland should include only AFVs developed and manufactured by it? Or can it also include an AFVs purchased from other countries? MathKnight 17:20, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I think we should keep it to AFV's developed and manufactured by the nation. If we start with vehicles used by other nations, we'll essentially have to double-list nearly half of the vehicles on the page. (Especially in the WW2 era). What you might want to do is create a specific page for that nation, thereby not having to worry about it becoming to convoluted. (My guess is that this page will eventually just become a list of lists eventually anyway). Oberiko 20:48, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for the answer. MathKnight 22:04, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Tanks is not tanks, well they are but the Scorpion has never been a tank. Its made of aluminium with a low pressure gun. I'm putting it back under others.
GDL 3 Feb 2004
- It's not an MBT, but how do those attributes make it not a light tank? It has tracks and a two-man turret with computerized fire control. The 76mm gun fires HESH. Many light tanks have been less capable. —Michael Z. 2005-02-4 16:17 Z
- Usage mostly, it is intended for and has always been used for recce duties. It can't fight with a MBT, HESH is adequate for light armour and knocking buildings about. It may be better equipped than tanks of a earlier era, but not against tanks of its own age - look at the difference between it and its contemporary-the Chieftain.
Rather than argue the point too much, I clarified the UK listing of tanks as Main Battle Tanks. GDL
List is to big
May I suggest that we make this page a "list of lists" and then have seperate lists for nationality, type, and era? (Eras being those used on Category:Military equipment) Oberiko 22:52, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Not really that big yet surely? Yes to plit off the Pre-WW2 and post-ww2 in the same manner as the WW2 but don't bother splitting it down any further. GraemeLeggett 08:03, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- What I mean is to have seperate lists with somewhat redundant information (Panzer IV would appear in lists dedicated to German AFVs, World War II AFVs and tanks) Oberiko 11:39, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Too many lists. To some extent the categories can generate that sort of list, certainly of all extant articles. GraemeLeggett 12:22, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- What happened to the Interwar years list? GraemeLeggett 30 June 2005 13:47 (UTC)
There's a lot of duplication here. I've already proposed merging a few obvious lists on the respective pages.
We should agree on a coordinated scheme for reducing the number of lists here. Instead of a bunch of separate lists, the same information can be represented using subheadings or annotations. But what makes the most sense?
List of artillery is a universal series of lists by type, sorted by calibre, annotated with country and period. (Number produced could also be added.) Is this a good starting point for AFVs?