Would you think it was possible to build these two tanks today?

[Durian10]

P.1000 Ratte


P.1500 Monster

[ace16807]

I don't see why not. We build machines that are much bigger than these two super tanks nowadays. Haul trucks are more or less the same size as the P1000 and I'm sure the shuttle crawler dwarfs the P1500.

[Chogy]

The Land Battleship concept - fully as vulnerable to air attack as ocean battleships, without the freedom of movement that an ocean vessel has.

"Commander, there is a river ahead of us!"

"Fool, have the engineers construct a bridge capable of handling 1,000 tons. Piece of cake!"

Technically feasible but infinitely impractical.

[USSWisconsin]

IMO, They would never be built today - even in their day common sense prevailed and the designs were put aside.

[bigross86]

Aside from the fact that they are both impractical as MBT's.

The P1000 has two main guns, but they are both a part of the same turret, meaning if one hits, the other will hit, or alternatively, they will both miss. Either way it's a waste of ammo.

The P1500 just looks like a an overgrown self-propelled Arty piece

[ace16807]

The Land Battleship concept - fully as vulnerable to air attack as ocean battleships, without the freedom of movement that an ocean vessel has.

"Commander, there is a river ahead of us!"

"Fool, have the engineers construct a bridge capable of handling 1,000 tons. Piece of cake!"

Technically feasible but infinitely impractical.

Imagine what it'd take to deploy one of those suckers overseas. And the logistics required to keep it in action.

[USSWisconsin]

The P-1000 would have used guns from the Scharnhorst and Gniesenau (after the proposed upgrade of these vessels to 15" guns) - a true land battleship.

[Durian10]

There is also the problems of maintaining a land battleship due to its size and the large engine propelling the collosal weapons, how much would it cost? How long is the maintenance? Not to mention the C-5 Galaxy the pilots call FRED (Freaking Rediculous Economic/Environmental Disaster) the plane itself takes about a day or two to conduct maintenance.

[Durian10]

Aside from the fact that they are both impractical as MBT's.

The P1000 has two main guns, but they are both a part of the same turret, meaning if one hits, the other will hit, or alternatively, they will both miss. Either way it's a waste of ammo.

The P1500 just looks like a an overgrown self-propelled Arty piece

Like what Chogy said, it is more in the line of a land battleship concept than a super-heavy-tank, the P-1000 ratte also had two Panzer VIII Maus turrets on the back and several Mg42 emplacements around the hull and a duel barreled Flak 88 turret on top with smaller anti-air emplacements.

[Red Seven]

Too much of a good thing.

[Chunder]

Aside from the fact that they are both impractical as MBT's.

The P1000 has two main guns, but they are both a part of the same turret, meaning if one hits, the other will hit, or alternatively, they will both miss. Either way it's a waste of ammo.

The P1500 just looks like a an overgrown self-propelled Arty piece

I digress -Adding an extra gun to an arty piece (if you can sort out the reloading mechanism) effectively increases the rate of fire, does it not?

[zraver]

Cold we build them..... Yes, we build bigger, but why would we build them, they don't offer any combat advantage which is the primary focus of every weapon.

[jlvfr]

In this area of stand-off precision munitions, they'd be even more vulnerable to air attack. Sure, you could mount a Phalanx on top, but even that wouldn't make it last long...

[USSWisconsin]

the effort was better spent on building more numerous - smaller AFV's

still the plans are fascinating to study

[USSWisconsin]

I digress -Adding an extra gun to an arty piece (if you can sort out the reloading mechanism) effectively increases the rate of fire, does it not?

true - more guns increases volume of fire - but in this case - it was massive overkill and self induced target designation