Tiger & Panther Accuracy

[Mikimoto]

Heil Sven.

I am actually abducted by Red Spanish Wine, the best in the world (sorry Burdeaux). And by Pesto spaguetti.
Well, you are right, but if undocumented, it was really rare and strange. And in the game it happens really a lot!!! It's only a matter of probabilities. The frontal armour of some panzers were almost indestructible (only destroyed -documented- by aircraft and bazooka armed infantry assault, and side or rear shots by BIG guns, 17 pounders or 85mm or +). Sorry if I you think I am arrogant. It's my poor english.

[sven]

Never said you were arrogant, and believe me your English skills are better than my Spanish ones. The armor values make it tough to take out a Tiger with a Sherman. I think that is as it should be, but to my knowledge the M26 never went head to head with it.(what a fight that would have been!)

In my opinion the Panther was by far the best German tank of the war, and the Comet the best Allied tank.

cheers,
sven

Originally posted by Mikimoto:
Heil Sven.

I am actually abducted by Red Spanish Wine, the best in the world (sorry Burdeaux). And by Pesto spaguetti.
Well, you are right, but if undocumented, it was really rare and strange. And in the game it happens really a lot!!! It's only a matter of probabilities. The frontal armour of some panzers were almost indestructible (only destroyed -documented- by aircraft and bazooka armed infantry assault, and side or rear shots by BIG guns, 17 pounders or 85mm or +). Sorry if I you think I am arrogant. It's my poor english.

[Mikimoto]

Hello Sven.
Your Opinion is Highly respected by me. I agree in most occasions. It is not so important... the game is great and depicts Worl War II in a realistic and funniest way. And the Panther was the best tank in the world until the M47 appeared, IMHO.
Hope you agre with me!!!
Tonight I feel like a "guerrillero" avid of french napoleonic blood!

[sven]

Thank you Mikimoto and have a good weekend.


Salud,
sven

[murx]

Aehm, just a short backdrop :

1. ACCURACY:


Gun 88mm KwK 36 L/56 88mm KwK 43 L/71
Ammunition Pzgr. 39 Pzgr. 40 Gr.39 HL Pzgr. 39/43 Pzgr. 40/43
Range
500m 100 (100) 100 (100) 100 (98) 100 (100) 100 (100)
1000m 100 (93) 99 (80) 94 (62) 100 (85) 100 (100)
1500m 98 (74) 89 (52) 72 (34) 95 (61) 97 (68)
2000m 87 (50) 71 (31) 52 (20) 85 (43) 89 (47)
2500m 71 (31) 55 (19) 74 (30) 78 (34)
3000m 53 (19) 61 (23) 66 (25)
3500m 51 (17)
4000m 42 (13)


This was the tab from Prado (and posted before) - the percentages in brackets are those of REAL COMBAT ! The only real accuracy drop on ranges up to 1000m is for the Gr.39 HL - where HL probably means Hohlladung -HEAT (or shaped charge) which has a completely different flight characteristic so the gunner/loader propbably just either forgot to calculate the height wrong or due to miscommunication the loader had the HL in but the gunner thought he fired 'normal' AP ammo.

With this numbers the Tiger should hit (stationary, unsupressed/very low suppressed) from 400m to 1000m with around 85% always ! On stationary targets as targets moving up to 10mph - at 1000m even at 20mph (with good optics it is easier to follow a distant moving target then a closer one).

But the main problem in SPWAW is really the range - I posted a thread about vision ranges ... and the landscape as it is too irregular... and LOS is sometimes very weird due to the hex limitations...

murx

PS: The small flamings read nicely, but boring after a while, so please get some manners

[Pack Rat]

The date on those flames were a while ago. Delta and I have since buried the hatchet. I was afraid this would come up when the thread showed itself again. But yes you're right manners should be paid attention to here, we are all guests of Matrix.

[Paul Vebber]

May not have happened often in combat but Russian testing showed the front of a Tiger II was hardly invincible:

3. Impacts of 3-4 armor-piercing or high-explosive fragmentation shells from 152, 122, or 100 mm artillery pieces caused cracks, spalling and destruction of the weld seams in the tank's 100-190 mm thick frontal armor plates at ranges of 500-1000 metres. The impacts disrupted the operation of the transmission and took the tank out of service as an irrevocable loss.

4. Armor-piercing projectiles from the BS-3 (100 mm) and A-19 (122 mm) gun completely penetrated when impacting the edges or joints of the "Tiger-B" tank's front hull plates at ranges of 500-600 metres.



and front turret:


5. Armor-piercing projectiles from the BS-3 (100 mm) and A-19 (122 mm) gun completely penetrated the "Tiger-B" tank's front turret plate at ranges of 1000-1500 metres.




See Russian Military Zone http://history.vif2.ru/library/archives/weapons/weapons7.html

Those accuracy data are from Guns v Armor? The following caveat is offered for the LOWER values:

Firing tests show the expected percentage of projectiles that will hit a 2.5m × 2m target by a gunner during practice firing on a gun range. It is obtained by doubling the dispersion pattern obtained from the dispersion test data. The British, Germans and Italians all considered this to be a close approximation of the accuracy obtained by troops in practice firings and, if they remained calm, in combat when the range to the target is known. Due to errors in estimating the range and many other factors, the probability of a first round hit was much lower than shown in these tables. However, the average, calm gunner, after watching tracer from the first round, could achieve the accuracy shown on subsequent shots.

The unmodifed hit with 0 suppression are not that far off from those for a Tiger 2 something like :

100 = 98
500 = 90
1000= 80
1500= 70
2000= 60
2500= 35
3000= 20
3500= 10

No supression and target movement and firer movement all reduce it.

[ May 20, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]

[sven]

Cmon Paul the Tiger 'cubs' will say those evil commies 'doctored' the photos...

I remember that website now thanks....

and flame mode off....

at least here.

thanks,
sven

[RockinHarry]

..not quite topic but maybe of interest:

Fighting Tigers:
http://rkka.domainvalet.com/h-tacts.htm

Panther damages:
http://history.vif2.ru/library/archives/losses/losses6.html

Notes on the (lack of) effectiveness of Allied WW2 ground attack planes:
http://www-online.shef.ac.uk:3001/mr-home/hobbies/rocket.txt

[Highway]

Originally posted by AmmoSgt:
Charles you missed my point... I am not advocating the changing of anything ...My Point was for all the talk about the german armor "should be better" "really was better" " i picked GermanTanks so i cam always win" "somethings wrong my German tanks don't always win" Nobody who thinks the German armor is better is saying they thing it should be priced higher ...they just want the advatages hollywood says german tanks have but they don't want to pay more .. they just think having Invincible Armor is a birthright of German Players or something ...
My Point is American Armor REALLY is that good it can kill German tanks inculding tigers and Panthers and King Tigers on a regular basis get used to it quit blaming the game and learn some tactics the tanks are priced as near as to fair as they can and American tanks have some serious advatages so get over thats why Patton kicked Rommels ass in two different Theaters of WW2

Well Patton kicked Rommel´s ass because the Allies had Air Superiority, were full euqipped, hadn´t the exhausted troops Rommel had. Rommel and his Afrika Korps lost the Afrika Campaign on the supply front, they lost the Campaign because (and i think this is a great luck for us all) Hitler was an complete idiot (in military things). German Armor (Tiger, Königstiger, Jagdtiger, Panther und Jagdpanther, most of the later models) compared to British and American and even Russian Armor was superior (not invincible),my Grandfather (he served with PanzerLehr) told me they not feared most Allied Armor, but the Air Power and the Artillery. There were simply to few of the Supertanks.

[sven]

Highway you are right.

I guess Patton(representing the Allies I suppose)should not have used his inherent advantages in order to be more 'manly'. The Panther was the best tank of the war, but it was not inwincible.(as soviet strike says) It seems to me that there is a group of people who act as though the Tiger should have 95000 base armor rating.(and sorry but it shouldn't)

regards,
sven

[AmmoSgt]

HighWay exactly my point .. it is tactics and not a 1 on 1 match up of tanks ..T-34's and Shermans are similarily no match 1 on 1 with Heavy german Armor .. but in this game as i think in real life it is the gestalt of the threat arrayed against the gestalt of the opposing force.... Air Arty Infantry on both sides affect the equation as do terrain and weather ..and a 40 ton GW bridge is not Neutral when it comes to a Sherman /Panther Duel , neither is mud mneither is cloud cover ... neither is a bazooka team .. or nebelwerfers for that matter .. you can't "fight" the germans the same way you do the americans or russian or brits each force has it's own timing and rythyms against the other... different degrees of threat from different elements , even different proportion or kills v suppressions in the overall scheme of a battle ..what is good tactics for americans with american gear is suicide for the germans with german gear , or the brits with brit gear... and heeding Pattons Mistake i will not leave out the Russians with Russian gear
In fact you could say that the Russians and Brits had similar infantry and cruiser tanks ideas while the Germans had yet another idea of what a tank did .. the French yet another .. and the Americans yet another .... ok so they looked alot alike , armor, tracks, turret, but the differences in purpose as reflected by capability and use , make them all so different that many direct comparisons can be frustrating to the point of meaningless

[Highway]

Originally posted by sven:
Highway you are right.

I guess Patton(representing the Allies I suppose)should not have used his inherent advantages in order to be more 'manly'. The Panther was the best tank of the war, but it was not inwincible.(as soviet strike says) It seems to me that there is a group of people who act as though the Tiger should have 95000 base armor rating.(and sorry but it shouldn't)

regards,
sven

Maybe they should give him that superior 5000mm/L100 KwK2050 long-barrel with armor piercing death-rays.

[AmmoSgt]

And yes i grouped the Brits and Russians together because it will start an arguement to say they aren't, and i will agree with the fact that is it argueable, ( I did it so Charles22 will still wonder if i am being seriously funny)

[sven]

Originally posted by Highway:


Maybe they should give him that superior 5000mm/L100 KwK2050 long-barrel with armor piercing death-rays.

Maybe.....

[Paul Vebber]

Ammo Sgt - I have to agree with you yet again (and having to argue against increasing Geramn firepower on other threads - what is this board coming to

The technology advantage went hand in hand with tactics and small unit leadership advantages to give the Germans the ability to fight out numbered, but not forever...

A battlefield exhibits "co-evolution" innovation is powerful, but only until the enemy figures out a counter. "Gestalt" is an ininteresting term in this context and captures the idea nicely.

[sven]

The gestalt you speak of is as old as warfare paul...

regards,
sven

Originally posted by Paul Vebber:
Ammo Sgt - I have to agree with you yet again (and having to argue against increasing Geramn firepower on other threads - what is this board coming to

The technology advantage went hand in hand with tactics and small unit leadership advantages to give the Germans the ability to fight out numbered, but not forever...

A battlefield exhibits "co-evolution" innovation is powerful, but only until the enemy figures out a counter. "Gestalt" is an ininteresting term in this context and captures the idea nicely.

[AmmoSgt]

Ok thats twice Paul I'm seeing a doctor ...I'll be fine really

[sven]

Originally posted by AmmoSgt:
HighWay exactly my point .. it is tactics and not a 1 on 1 match up of tanks ..T-34's and Shermans are similarily no match 1 on 1 with Heavy german Armor .. but in this game as i think in real life it is the gestalt of the threat arrayed against the gestalt of the opposing force.... Air Arty Infantry on both sides affect the equation as do terrain and weather ..and a 40 ton GW bridge is not Neutral when it comes to a Sherman /Panther Duel , neither is mud mneither is cloud cover ... neither is a bazooka team .. or nebelwerfers for that matter .. you can't "fight" the germans the same way you do the americans or russian or brits each force has it's own timing and rythyms against the other... different degrees of threat from different elements , even different proportion or kills v suppressions in the overall scheme of a battle ..what is good tactics for americans with american gear is suicide for the germans with german gear , or the brits with brit gear... and heeding Pattons Mistake i will not leave out the Russians with Russian gear
In fact you could say that the Russians and Brits had similar infantry and cruiser tanks ideas while the Germans had yet another idea of what a tank did .. the French yet another .. and the Americans yet another .... ok so they looked alot alike , armor, tracks, turret, but the differences in purpose as reflected by capability and use , make them all so different that many direct comparisons can be frustrating to the point of meaningless

Wasn't the French idea of proper use of a tank, '1. find a stack of paper, 2 place tank on it.'

Oh wait that was what the germans made the French tanks after they mopped up Gaul with Pierre's 4th point of contact.

:p

regards,
sven

[ May 20, 2001: Message edited by: sven ]

[AmmoSgt]

The Germans only attacked France to capture the Souma's so they could have them to fend off the Americans