I thought I'd play the tutorial using a Tiger I. What do I find ? At less than 1,000 meters....my first FOUR shots at T34s "richocheted" right off ! Should slice thru them like a hot knife thru butter ! So, as far as I'm concerned....nothing has changed and the vaunted 88 is still a Steel Panthers failure.
Delta 3-2
Will someone explain what I wrote in this post that is offensive ? Several writers to this thread have attacked me....regarding this post...and I don't quite understand what is wrong here ? God forbid I questoned Matrix' Spwaw !
Anyhow.....what is the problem ?
Delta 3-2
[ May 19, 2001: Message edited by: DELTA3-2 ]
RICHOCHET FACTOR....NOTHING FIXED !
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
The T-34s are not on a hill, are at a decently close range, and are facing directly towards the Tiger. I know because it took me SIX shots before I got enough hits on target that didn't ricochet to kill my first T-34. I also was having problems getting my Stugs with the 75L48 to no ricochet off of those Soviet tanks with 20mm armour while on the same level of terain during the Stalingrad campaign.
I'm not complaining, but it IS frustrating.
[ May 17, 2001: Message edited by: Slayer ]
I'm not complaining, but it IS frustrating.
[ May 17, 2001: Message edited by: Slayer ]
Try the same with western tanks and I think you find any tank with boxy designs "blow up real good!" I think that sloping armor is modelled well you'll still get some richochet on the frontal armour of Shermans and Grants (sometimes 3 or 4) but 50% or more you'd light'em up first shot you hit. I'll sure heed your advice when Bear rears it's head in my present campaign. 
Ya only live til ya die!
The problem here is the 88 is not depicted in it's deadly form of long-range killer. When confronted with hordes of armor at long range....the Tiger to be effective has to achieve killing shots...or otherwise you have no chance against the hordes of SOV or Allied armor you meet later in the war. More details...and argument will follow....
Delta 3-2
Delta 3-2
I consider anything over 600 meters "long-range" for tank gun engagements during WW2. Now...as far as "that sloped armor" goes...I'll discuss that later. But Panzergranate 39 and 40 should have no problem with the T34s frontal armor. That is why Tiger was introduced...to counter the armor of T34. Details later.
Delta 3-2
Delta 3-2
Well, your reasoning is definately wrong....the shorter the range, the greater the kinetic energy, the greater the armor piercing ability of AP. Defeat of enemy armor is a combination of accuracy, target acquisition, and penetrative power. All of which deteriorate as distance grows to the target.I think they do quite well at long range, at close range, sure, they will bounce off that nice slope!![/QB]
Delta 3-2
-
CardinalFang
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Virginia, USA
Howdy,Originally posted by DELTA3-2:
I consider anything over 600 meters "long-range" for tank gun engagements during WW2. Now...as far as "that sloped armor" goes...I'll discuss that later. But Panzergranate 39 and 40 should have no problem with the T34s frontal armor. That is why Tiger was introduced...to counter the armor of T34. Details later.
Delta 3-2
I always thought that the Panther was introduced as a counter to the T34 and not the Tiger. Hence the sloped armor on the Panther. A quick check at www.achtungpanzer.com seems to confirm this.
About the Tiger it says "The project that dwarfed all previous German tanks started in 1937 and first massive Tigers emerged in July of 1942. " While it has this to say about the Panther "When in June of 1941, Germany invaded Russia, Panzertruppe encountered KV series and T-34/76 tanks which were far superior (firepower and armor protection) to any Panzer at the time. It was then decided (because of the constant reports from the Eastern Front) to design a new more powerful medium tank, which could be quickly put into production. On November 25th of 1941, Adolf Hitler ordered Daimler-Benz and MAN to design new tank as a response to the T-34/76. " Could you point me to some sources (preferably online, I can always use more bookmarks
) that say that the Tiger was a response to the T34?CardinalFang
Have Comfy Chair. Will Travel.
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
DELTA3-2: Of course it would matter at what range you hit, where etc, but in the case oif the T34, assuming you're not talking about FT on the T34/85, richochet should be fairly nonexistent. What you ought to do is use HTs as targets at that range and see how many richos you get, that would definitively prove your point as they don't have enough armor to stop a peashooter. If you are correct, there would be way too much emphasis on slope and/or richochet, so that the HT could take numerous rounds and also richochet easily. I know sometimes we have a problem accounting for slope on vehicles at distance, because we're so used to shooting at vehicles who have little slope. Certainly, the slope should make less difference upclose than at distance.
I wish I could draw up a mm equivalent to slope. For example, recently the KTiger was given it's proper 18 degree side hull rating which bfore was zero. What goes through my mind, is that if a gun has an 81 penetration rating at 10 hexes firing at zero slope, then it has a good chance to penetrate. Now, with the 18 degree slope, in the same situation what would the slope up the flat armor rating to? Would the flat penetration need to be 90, 100, 110? Just how much protection, generally, would an 18 degree slope give (and of course how much would other slopes give)? Could you fairly cut and dry account for 10mm protection for every 10 degrees slope?
I wish I could draw up a mm equivalent to slope. For example, recently the KTiger was given it's proper 18 degree side hull rating which bfore was zero. What goes through my mind, is that if a gun has an 81 penetration rating at 10 hexes firing at zero slope, then it has a good chance to penetrate. Now, with the 18 degree slope, in the same situation what would the slope up the flat armor rating to? Would the flat penetration need to be 90, 100, 110? Just how much protection, generally, would an 18 degree slope give (and of course how much would other slopes give)? Could you fairly cut and dry account for 10mm protection for every 10 degrees slope?
-
Kluckenbill
- Posts: 258
- Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Lancaster, PA, USA
Originally posted by DELTA3-2:
Well, your reasoning is definately wrong....the shorter the range, the greater the kinetic energy, the greater the armor piercing ability of AP. Defeat of enemy armor is a combination of accuracy, target acquisition, and penetrative power. All of which deteriorate as distance grows to the target.
Delta 3-2
Well, almost. Because of the ballistic properties of the round, it will be travelling at a downward angle at long ranges, the longer the range the greater the downward angle. Of course the velocity and penetration are also lessened at range, but all other things being equal, the likelihood of a ricochet against sloped armor will be somewhat less at longer ranges than at shorter ranges.
Having said that, I agree that we seem to get an awful lot of ricochets at short ranges, especially at one hex range. This has been debated repeatedly in this forum.
Target, Cease Fire !
The downward angle is not coming in like a mortar round. For a flat shooting high velocity weapon like the 88 the down angle would be less than 10 degrees. Remember for a rifled barrel the first part of the flight of the round tends to rise above the line of the bore. For a T-34 with its 60 degree slope on the front that subtracts next to nothing.Originally posted by Kluckenbill:
Well, almost. Because of the ballistic properties of the round, it will be travelling at a downward angle at long ranges, the longer the range the greater the downward angle. Of course the velocity and penetration are also lessened at range, but all other things being equal, the likelihood of a ricochet against sloped armor will be somewhat less at longer ranges than at shorter ranges.
Having said that, I agree that we seem to get an awful lot of ricochets at short ranges, especially at one hex range. This has been debated repeatedly in this forum.
thanks, John.
For physical thickness consider that a 60 degree slope will double the distance that the round has to pass through the armor.Originally posted by Charles_22:
I wish I could draw up a mm equivalent to slope. For example, recently the KTiger was given it's proper 18 degree side hull rating which bfore was zero. What goes through my mind, is that if a gun has an 81 penetration rating at 10 hexes firing at zero slope, then it has a good chance to penetrate. Now, with the 18 degree slope, in the same situation what would the slope up the flat armor rating to? Would the flat penetration need to be 90, 100, 110? Just how much protection, generally, would an 18 degree slope give (and of course how much would other slopes give)? Could you fairly cut and dry account for 10mm protection for every 10 degrees slope?[/QB]
Ballistic thickness is a little greater, the thicker the armor the better it is, armor twice as thick will hold back more than twice the kinetic energy.
If you want a way to visualize this, get a toilet paper tube and close one end off with wax paper. Fill it partially with salt and then try to poke an unsharpened pencil through the salt. Past a certain point you can't pass the pencil through the salt. The same applies to a thick metal skin, the more you have opposing the penetration the harder it is to penetrate.
thanks, John.