Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a231604abef318aa

Jump to content

Talk:TOG1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Idumea47b in topic Seven foot thick?

TOG

[edit]

I could of sworn that a sign in the Bovington Tank Museum said it stood for 'The Old Gong'... But eh, whatever. 81.129.160.105 (talk) 19:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Appearance in Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade

[edit]

In that film a tank that looks very similar to the TOG 1 (EG WWI British design + Matilda II turret) makes an appearance partway towards the end of the film. Perhaps this should be mentioned in the main article. Graham1973 (talk) 15:14, 25 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I do not think that this particular connective detail is worth mentioning in this article. This appearance of a TOG1 tank in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (assuming that we can, in fact, verify that the tank in the film was a TOG1) may be noteworthy in the context of the article about the film (most likely, in the Production section) but it is not in the context of this article. See Wikipedia:Relevance of content#Interactions between subjects. -- Black Falcon (talk) 17:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
I'm pretty sure it was a masqueraded bulldozer. - 91.10.62.135 (talk) 21:57, 11 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Categorization in 'history of the tank'

[edit]

The TOG 1 and TOG 2 were a dead end in tank design. The effort spent on them could be classified as an attempt to keep some of yesterdays men gainfully employed while not interfering in development already underway. But they are not significant in the development of any armoured vehicle that saw service during WWII, nor contributed to the MBT and modern tank warfare. GraemeLeggett (talk)

Seven foot thick?

[edit]

"Main armament would be a field gun mounted in the front – effective against 7-foot (2.1 m) thick reinforced concrete "

What kind of field gun is effective against seven foot thick reinforced concrete? That's like 15" battleship gun penetration, isn't it? I mean a 75mm will maybe chip through it eventually, but a low velocity howitzer firing SAPHE or whatever? I would assume they would be shooting at openings and weak spots, not actually trying to shoot through the concrete. They would want the gun to be effective against fortifications that also featured seven foot thick walls, but not by just shooting straight though the walls. Unless I am totally underestimating the penetrative capacity of a normally sized artillery piece. Idumea47b (talk) 19:59, 5 September 2023 (UTC)Reply