Boys AT Rifle

[bigjim]

Does anyone have the spec's on these weapons??? They seem awfully strong at LONG distances??? I mean a 14 hex range with 25mm penatration seems a bit much but if they are high velocity I guess it is possible??? just wondering

[rjmsx]

Hi bigjim

Take a look at this site BoysAT
It seems that the Finnish army used these rifles to and according to the data 25mm at 14 hexes is quite impossible.

[john g]

Originally posted by bigjim:
Does anyone have the spec's on these weapons??? They seem awfully strong at LONG distances??? I mean a 14 hex range with 25mm penatration seems a bit much but if they are high velocity I guess it is possible??? just wondering

They have 26 pen at point blank range, and a max range of 15. Remember they do lose penetration as they reach max range.

Compare them to .50 cal mg, 23 penetration at point blank range but a max range of 35 which means it loses less penetration at 15 hexes than the boys at rifle does.

The same midrange bump occurs for the British 2pdr at gun and 25pdr GH. The 2pdr is better at point blank range but even at 10 hexes the 25pdr has better penetration due to its greater max range.
thanks, John.

[gdpsnake]

BigJim,
Get used to the bizzare. Boys AT rifles slaughter armor and halftracks alike at LONG range. Even worse is the 2pdr AT gun which kills Panzer 4's consistently at 15+ hexes despite the literature. I've asked these same questions many times on this forum and everyone agrees they are 'too good' but the folks who change the OOB's are working on other projects and fixes are a way off.
I don't know how to edit the weapons. If anyone is listening? Can you tell me how to change the values?

[soldat31]

I personally think that the Boys AT rifle is too strong. At close ranges, I'm sure they can do some damage to halftracks and the like, but at they are much too accurrate and deadly at long range. 15 hexes, that's like 750 yards right? Just a bit under half a mile. I'm tired of losing halftracks at that distance.

[john g]

Originally posted by soldat31:
I personally think that the Boys AT rifle is too strong. At close ranges, I'm sure they can do some damage to halftracks and the like, but at they are much too accurrate and deadly at long range. 15 hexes, that's like 750 yards right? Just a bit under half a mile. I'm tired of losing halftracks at that distance.

If you are talking about 251/1 halftracks, they only have 15mm front and 8mm side and rear armor. That is the sort of armor that an at rifle was spec'ed to penetrate. Why do you think that the Canadians used obsolete Ram tanks as personnel carriers? They actually had enough armor to protect against more than rifle and mg fire.
thanks, John.

[bigjim]

Thanks for the info guys, it just confirms my thoughts that it was abit over done in the game, and when playing vs Brit forces the AI kind of "games the game" by choosing numerous squads of BoysAT (knowing full well it amounts to "cheap" tanks)

[Grumble]

If you are talking about 251/1 halftracks, they only have 15mm front and 8mm side and rear armor. That is the sort of armor that an at rifle was spec'ed to penetrate. Why do you think that the Canadians used obsolete Ram tanks as personnel carriers? They actually had enough armor to protect against more than rifle and mg fire.

Well the 250/251's armor was sloped at 15-20 degrees frontally and about 30 degrees and the sides-which effectively doubles its protection.
The Canadians used the Ram because it and the surplus M7s had better cross-country performance than the M2/3 halftracks. In the lowlands of Belgium and Holland they found that the underpowered US halftracks could not keep up with the armor. The only other alternative was the bren-gun carrier and that was too small to carry a full squad. The additional protection was part of it, but the MAIN reason was tactical mobility equivalent to the tanks.

[Kluckenbill]

The Soviet PTRD Anti Tank Rifles are also very effective against 250/251 Half Tracks.

I don't know if changes were made to the calculations or if its just my own experience, but it does seem that the early war AT weapons are more accurate and deadly in 6.1 than they were in earlier versions of SPWAW. It may just be that in earlier versions it was easier to spot and thus attack the firing units. Now the AT guns regularly get to shoot 6 or more times in a turn with no return fire. This may (or may not) be realistic, but it sure is hard to get used to.

[Alexandra]

Both the 2 pounder and the Boys ATR are, in fact, over powerful in SP:WAW. I don't know the tecnhical specs of the weapons, but I do know after thier dismal performance in France, the British Army wanted new weapons.
Like the Pz IIIs long barreled 50mm gun, the project was stopped because it was easier to make the weapons already in production - this decision would cost Churchill's first Minister of Armaments his job, and nearly led to a vote of No Confidence against the PM himself.

From what I've read, the Boys wasn't effective, even against HTs at more than 50 or so meters, and the 2# was also considered a very short range weapon. The UK made up for this with well designed and impimented long range arty fire, until the 6# and later the PIAT came on line.

How to fix for SP? I dunno.

Alex

[Warrior]

The best thing to do with these is set their range to fire at 1 hex. Select unit, hit "Y."

[Possum]

Hello All.
I have just done some research into the OOB's and here is what I've found......

1st the 2 Lbdr
2Lbdr IX, Max. Pen = 64, Max. Range = 35 , Accuracy = 11
37mm KwK L46.5 (the gun on the Pz-IIIe)
Max. Pen = 64, Max. Range = 35, Accuracy = 10
37mm KwK 38 (Gun on Pz-35 & Pz-38)
Max. Pen = 56, Max. Range = 40, Accuracy = 11.
So you can see, in game terms there is no effective difference between the 2 Lbdr and the gun on the Pz-III. But the Gun on the Pz-38 does have a small disadvantage.
(In fact the Gun on the Pz-III is superior as it usually comes with plentifull HE, and much better Fire control and Rangefinder than the 2 Lbdr)

On to ATR's

Boys ATR, AP Pen.= 26, Range = 15, Accuracy = 7
PzB-39 ATR, AP Pen.= 38, Range = 10, Accuracy = 4
PTRD ATR, AP Pen. = 35, Range = 18, Accuracy = 8
Wz-35 ATR, AP Pen. = 27, Range = 12, Accuracy = 18
Solcthurn ATR, AP Pen. = 40, Range = 20, Accuracy = 7
Hotchkiss ATR, AP Pen.= 34, Range = 15, Accuracy = 6
Lathi ATR, AP Pen. = 27, Range = 12, Accuracy = 7
Type 97 ATR, AP Pen. = 39, Range = 20, Accuracy = 6
So you can see that the Boys ATR is the worst one in the game already in AP penetration, average range, and above average accuracy.
I think that people are suffering from "The enemy's equipment is better than mine" syndrome. A common occurance, and one that I often feel myself. I have played both sides in North African scenarioes, and I can assure you that the inferiority you are feeling is both real and Imaginary.
Please see this link to a short article I posted months ago about my impessions on the uberweapons of the North African Front.
http://www.matrixgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=004605

In short, I think the 2 Lbdr and Boys are fine as they are, as any dedicated Commonwealth Forces player will tell you, they are virtually useless......

[Belisarius]

I agree on the Boys being overpowered.
It has (according to what I've read) a max penetration of 12mm @ 100m (2-3 hexes) and only 10mm @ 500m. That will NOT take out even a SdKfz 251 at 14 hexes. Nooo way. Although it's practically worthless beyond 300m..

As a comparison, the Gerries captured quite a number of these in Dunkirque and they outright deemed it unworthy for AT use. (And the poor chaps in the British army that had to use them probably did the same - from experience )

However, it was useful for fixed emplacements like machineguns and stuff.

[Richard Harris]

The .55cal Boys ATR using the AP W Mk2 cartridge (steel core, mv 3250f/s) should theoretically penetrate about 29mm of armour at pointblank range and 0deg impact angle. (This is extrapolated back using the geometric ratios of the game engine from the datum: 20mm/500m/0deg, which is the value for this particular cartridge from Hogg, Infantry Weapons of WW2.) Lead cored ball ammo was also widely available (with quite dismal penetration characteristics) and it is possible that many of the low values associated with this weapon are due to the ball ammo being used.
It is interesting to note that a tungsten cored AP round was developed and issued in small numbers from 1940 (AP W Mk3). This had 'rather better' performance than the conventional (steel cored) AP W Mks 1&2. No figures given by Hogg unfortunately.
On a personal note I had an opportunity some 10 years or so ago to take a potshot with a Boys rifle. (The ammo at the time was about $5 a shot, i.e. semi collectable ) The target was an old slant-six engine block from a Chrysler Valiant (225 cu.in IIRC).
I put a round into the side of the block from 100m, it went straight through and blew a fist sized crater in the rock wall behind it (old pyrite quarry)... I was impressed at the time.
I suspect the main reason that ATR's (not just the Boys) fell out of fashion was because of their marginal behind armour effects just as much as their admittedly limited penetrative characteristics... The Australians hung onto them (Boys) for busting bunkers and log pits in the jungle until the end of the war though.
P.S. The PzB-39 should only be able to penetrate 25mm/300m/30deg, so a pointblank pen of 38 is definitely overdone!

[panda124c]

Originally posted by soldat31:
I personally think that the Boys AT rifle is too strong. At close ranges, I'm sure they can do some damage to halftracks and the like, but at they are much too accurrate and deadly at long range. 15 hexes, that's like 750 yards right? Just a bit under half a mile. I'm tired of losing halftracks at that distance.

If you will look at the penetration for ATRs at ranges of 10 or less you will find that they all have better penetration than 20mm auto cannnons at the same range. I not sure why this was done, a game limitation or an attempt to give the infantry some sort of AT weapon that is useful. The Boys is no whimp since it is .55 cal. And 15 range isn't so bad look at the Russia ATR, 18 range.

[Colonel von Blitz]

Originally posted by Richard Harris:
On a personal note I had an opportunity some 10 years or so ago to take a potshot with a Boys rifle. (The ammo at the time was about $5 a shot, i.e. semi collectable ) The target was an old slant-six engine block from a Chrysler Valiant (225 cu.in IIRC).
I put a round into the side of the block from 100m, it went straight through and blew a fist sized crater in the rock wall behind it (old pyrite quarry)... I was impressed at the time.

I wouldn't be impressed, I mean that engine block is probably cast iron, which has very low hardness (some 200-300HV10, if hardened maybe somewhat more) and also cast iron is quite 'fragile' if one tests it using for example Charpy V -test. So no wonder that shot went right through, but when fired at face-hardened (probably bainitic or martensitic microstructure), alloyed steel armor plate, the result is quite a lot different.

Colonel von Blitz

[ August 09, 2001: Message edited by: Colonel von Blitz ]

[TheZel66]

In the MCNA, I've seen the Boys take out PzKWIIIe's at ranges of >10 hexes. Front facing, and its not a minor incident; happens with quite a bit of frequency.

[ August 09, 2001: Message edited by: TheZel ]

[11Bravo]

Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz:


I wouldn't be impressed, I mean that engine block is probably cast iron, which has very low hardness (some 200-300HV10, if hardened maybe somewhat more) and also cast iron is quite 'fragile' if one tests it using for example Charpy V -test. So no wonder that shot went right through, but when fired at face-hardened (probably bainitic or martensitic microstructure), alloyed steel armor plate, the result is quite a lot different.

Colonel von Blitz

Colonel von Blitz,

Are you a metallurgist?

Your post reminded me of a project I worked on where we needed to strengthen some cast iron cylinder liners for a diesel engine. They were gray cast iron, and breaking, and we looked at producing a bimetal liner with gray on the inside, and nodular on the outside. Incredibly strong! Also looked at a bainitic iron produced by heat treatment.

But back to the topic...

If the 2 pdr is the game equivalent of the PzIII's gun, then its a little too strong. Last book I read about fighting in North Africa revealed the perception by the troops that the 2 pdr was less powerful and had less range than the gun on the PzIIIe.

However, the AI needs all the help it can get when faced with the fierce warriors that frequent this forum. Let it keep the UberGun!

[ August 09, 2001: Message edited by: 11Bravo ]

[Colonel von Blitz]

Originally posted by 11Bravo:

Colonel von Blitz,
Are you a metallurgist?

I'm a future welding engineer, thus I have some knowledge of metallurgy too

Your post reminded me of a project I worked on where we needed to strengthen some cast iron cylinder liners for a diesel engine. They were gray cast iron, and breaking, and we looked at producing a bimetal liner with gray on the inside, and nodular on the outside. Incredibly strong! Also looked at a bainitic iron produced by heat treatment.

What was the cost of using bimetal liner and was there some other methods under consideration? First thing popping into my mind in this particular case would be using laser to face-harden the area that wears the most and breaks. Using laser one could lower the wear, at best, into 1/10th when compared to base material (grey cast iron or nodular cast iron). Laser-hardened microstructure of a cast iron usually is very fine martnesite and the hardness could be somewhere 55-62 HRC. One problem there is using laser: you can harden only very narrow bead in one pass, so if you want to have larger area hardened, then beads must overlap. This on the other hand results into tempered zones between beads and the wear-resistance drops a bit because of this.

Hmm, this went way off topic now, sorry guys...I got carried away

Colonel von Blitz

[Arralen]

Checked out the values given at http://www.wargamer.org/GvA/
..
says:
____________________________
Pz.B.38 7.92mm AP 1,175 m/s
Pen @ 30° 100m(30) 500m(25)

2cm Kw.K.30 & 38, and
2cm Flak 30 & 38 [V] [4]
20mm/L50 AP 780m/s
Pen/Acc @ 30° 100m(20/100) 500m(14/87)
APCR 1,050m/s
Pen @ 30° 100m(40) 500m(20)

37mm/L46.5
AP Pzgr.745 m/s
Pen/Acc @ 30° 100m(35/100) 500m(29/95) 1000m(22/47)

... based on german specification
________________________________________


Rifle, Anti-tank,
0.55–inch Boys Mk.1 [2]
14mm AP W.Mk.II 908m/s
Pen @ 30° 91m(15) 451m(12.5)

40mm/L50 (2 Pounder)
AP, Mk.1T 792m/s
Pen/Acc @ 30° 91m(55/100) 451m(47/67) 914m(37/26)
..based on british spec.
_______________________________________

While the test criteria for Boys Rifle and the german wepaons are comparable (50..66% of full-throughs), the 2 Pounder uses a penetration criteria that is totally idiotic "20% of Projectile passes through at 80% of the time".
Giving unrealistic high penetration values, this test may even have been the cause that they used the gun at all .. learning the hard way that the 'real figures' where about have that at best.

Sadly no accuracy data for the AT-rifles available ..

Arralen