Could America have used heavy tanks?

[Soren]

Originally Posted by syscom3

And its a wasted argument of yours saying that the German tanks that the Pershing destroyed were manned by Hitler Youth. The fact is the Pershing engaged them and knocked them out.

Seeing that its just the truth I can't see how it's wasted.

[Soren]

Originally Posted by glen

Right! General Mcnair of US army was the "murderer" of US heavey tank. His strategy(persitsed by himself) is just like that. On one hand, US tank destroyers did very well in knocking out german tanks, on the other hand, US medium tank suffered from german panther/tigers. If Mcnair had not been so stupid, the allied would got pershing @ D day.




Soren allways forget sth. which is "bad" for german. It's kingtiger not Tiger.






Pershing/Js2 and panther are of same weight, tiger nad kingtiger are much heavier. ....As we all known, Yamato class is the strongest battle ship in the world, but it's hard to say Japanese marine technology is the best! Note that Yamato class is much heavier than IOWA/bismark.... Stronger protection require more amor(weight), and stronger firepower requires bigger or longer cannons which renders more weight and space. Soren, if you are proud of germany 60 tons heavy tank's advantage over allied 30-40 tons medium tanks, enjoy it plz. I am also enjoying the BIG "marine technology advantage" of Japanese over germany.

With regard to firepower, 17pdr L58/76mm=L70/75mm, L50/90mm=L56/88mm, L70/90mm=L71/88mm...I can't find any advantage of German guns. For those thick target plate, the quality should be "bad" inevitably no matter which country produces it. Therefore the penetration of 17pdr/kwk43 is "fake", that is to say they can penetrate thick vertical amor(bad quality) in battle field, however, they are insufficient facing Panther's 80mm/55degree (good quality) or pershing's 102mm/46degree(good quality) .

You don't know how APCR works, soren. APCR's real diameter is quite small, so they are insuffcient facing high obilique/ enough thickness (>>40mm)plate because their poor T/D number. For example, the L56/88mm apcbc can't penetrate panther's 80mm/55 degree, neither can it's apcr. However, if the plate thickness or oblique is small such as T34's 45/47mm, js2 early version's 120mm/30degree, the apcr will show their power.

Optics, allied is not bad, they even have elevation stabilizer.

What a load of rubbish!

I see you have no clue what the Allies concluded after their trials at the Aberdeen proving grounds.

The Panther's 75mm KwK42 L/70 out-performed the M26 Pershing's 90mm M3 on all accounts.

The best AT gun of WW2 in terms of armor penetration & weight was the 88mm KwK43 L/71, consistantly punching through 153mm of 240 BHN RHA plates at 3km.

As for your once again ridiculous claim of the "fake" figures, you've got to be kidding me! You've got absolutely ZERO proof to this ridiculous theory, esp. when cmpared to the Allied & German conclusions beased on REAL LIFE tests!

Moving on Allied optics were VERY poor by comparison to German optics, the Germans being amazed at how the Allies could permit themselves to mount such poor optics in their tanks.


In short: Glen, get a clue!

[Soren]

Originally Posted by glen

I don't know the quality of pershing amor, but if it is as good as M4A3E2's, the 102mm/46degree of upper front will be imune to Panther or Tiger's apcbc/apcr. Even the kingtiger's kwk43 can only pene. it within 500 meters. of couse, th turret front is only 102mm-110mm vertical which can be pene. by many late guns from far away.

Again complete bullshit from glen.

Using the std. Pzgr.39/43 the 88mm KwK43 could punch straight through the Pershing's glacis at 2km with ease.


The Pershing's armor wasn't better than the armor the KwK43 was tested against in Aberdeen USA or during the British trials.

[glen]

The Panther's 75mm KwK42 L/70 out-performed the M26 Pershing's 90mm M3 on all accounts.

It's very natural that kwk42 outforms L50/90mm in penetration because M3 90mm gun=L56/88mm(kwk36) and kwk42> kwk36 in penetration. Don't you know panther has better penetration than tiger? BTW, if the plate is high obilique, the kwk36/m3 will get the same pene as kwk42 due to their higher T/D.

Let's compare kwk42 with 17pdr soren, they have nearly same cailiber.

The best AT gun of WW2 in terms of armor penetration & weight was the 88mm KwK43 L/71, consistantly punching through 153mm of 240 BHN RHA plates at 3km.

At the Aberdeen proving grounds, on REAL LIFE tests, please give me the clue of US L70/90mm penetration and compare it with kwk43.

[glen]

Let's check the "fake" penetration of Soviet 122mm D25T, oh, near 220mm @blank point while the "true" pene. is only 162mm. De marre theory says that D25T has 94% vertical penetration of kwk43 @blank point and has better pene after 800m far away. This figure comparation of 162mm:220mm has proved my thick plate=bad quality theory.

At Aberdeen the penetration performance of the 8.8cm KwK36 L/56 & 8.8cm KwK43 L/71 against vertical 240 BHN RHA armor at 100m was as follows:

8.8cm KwK36: 162mm
8.8cm KwK43: 232mm

Ok. on bad quality target plate, kwk43 has the 232mmvertical penetration @ blank point while 122mm D25T has nearly 220mm on bad plate(probably as bad as other countries.)

220/235=93.6%, this figure is perfectly proved by De marre's theory.


Pershing glacis is equal to around 165mm vertical amor when hit by 88mm apcbc round. However, I've said that I don't know exactly the K number of pershing's amor, so my conclusion is under the condition that pershing's K=2400. kwk43's penetration @ piont blank is 173mm on good quality plate( k=2400, impossible to made when >150mm thickness) ; 235mm on bad quality plate.

[Soren]

Sorry glen, but you're just not being realistic at all.

Try comparing the KE over surface area to give you a clue as to which gun is the best.

As demonstrated over and over again in real life tests the 88mm KwK43 L/71 has a much higher penetration performance at all ranges compared to the 122mm D-25T. The D-25T isn't even close..

German tests were carried out against 260 BHN RHA plates, and at 30 degree's from vertical. The British tests which yielded higher results were against 270 - 280 BHN RHA plates.

At Aberdeen where all the guns were tested against the same type & quality armor (240 BHN RHA) the 88mm KwK43 L/71 out-performed each and every other gun in penetration performance out to 3km, with the exception of the 128mm PaK44.

[freebird]

Originally Posted by comiso90

The Sherman did it's job but it could have used a bigger brother to hide behind when things got tough.

I'm with ya on that one.

[The Basket]

An interesting story...When the Soviets and Germans were allies as the beginning of the war, they were shown the German tanks and the Mk IV production line.

The Soviets asked where the heavy tank was being made...the Germans said the Mk IV WAS the heavy tank! The Soviets thought they were lying! Turns out the Mk IV was the German idea of heavy.

The KV was heavy...don't forget the Soviet tanks as tank warfare was mainly Eastern Front and the Germans could never match the sheer numbers of the Soviet tanks.

Numbers win wars...not quality.

[glen]

At Aberdeen where all the guns were tested against the same type & quality armor (240 BHN RHA) the 88mm KwK43 L/71 out-performed each and every other gun in penetration performance out to 3km, with the exception of the 128mm PaK44.

Agian, could you give me the penetration of US L70/90mm at Aberdeen ?
My data is below:

90mm Gun T15E2
70 Caliber
3420 lb total weight
Separated Ammunition
4 rounds/minute

Muzzle Velocity
AP T43 (APBC-T) = 3200 ft/sec (975 m/sec)
HVAP T44 (APCR-T) = 3750 ft/sec (1143 m/sec)
HE T42 = 3,200 ft/sec (975 m/sec)

I believe that kwk43 has NO advantage in penetration compared with 90mm Gun T15E2.

Allies and Soviets were producing new weapons and vehicles to deal with Germany's "super tanks". Only the war coming to an end prevented them from chewing up the Tiger. Case in point, on 8 August, 1944, A single Sherman Firefly destroyed three Tigers in an exchange of fire, killing the famous Wittman in the process. Tigers were having to be careful on the Eastern Front due the Soviet heavy tanks and tank destroyers. In 1945, a Pershing fitted with the T15E2 90mm gun fired at a captured Tiger. The round penetrated the front, passed through the crew compartment, and continued on through the engine exiting the rear plate where it eventually buried itself into the ground. When American ordnance personnel tried to recover the penetrator it was too deep for them to find. The Tiger was built to survive the guns of 1942, not 1945. Pershings and IS-III's would have tapped danced over the Tigers, Panthers and King Tigers (at least those that didn't break down because they were mechanically unreliable machines).

BTW, I need the kwk36's projectile volecity at 500m, 1000m 1500m....

[glen]

As demonstrated over and over again in real life tests the 88mm KwK43 L/71 has a much higher penetration performance at all ranges compared to the 122mm D-25T. The D-25T isn't even close..

Soren, you're just not being realistic at all. German test showed that Panther (D version I belive) glacis are safe when >600m far away from D25T. The russian battle field report had proved this:

Further, after the first encounters between the JS-2 and German heavy tanks, it turned out that the sharp-nosed 122 mm APHE round - the BR-471 - could only penetrate the frontal armour of a Panther up to 600-700 metres.(Panther G hadn't been produced then/Glen)

The soviet test showed that kwk43 can only pen. Panther's(D version I belive) glacis WITHIN 650m. Therefore, kwk43 and D25T are very close in penetration. Soren, you have been cheated by kwk43's fake penetration, while I think you woundn't accept D25T's fake penetration as the picture shows above.

D25T'as fake penetration is nearly 220mm @blanck piont range!

As we all known, Panther D's glacis is much better than Panther G's.

REPORT ON THE RESULTS OF TESTING OF THE 100 MM AND THE 122 MM TANK GUNS AT THE KUBINKA PROVING GROUNDS
September 12, 1944

Top Secret

Copy No____

To the chairman of the technical Council of the People's Commissariat for Armaments of the USSR, Comrade E.Satel.



According to the results of the test shooting performed against the German Panther tanks at the Kubinka Proving Grounds of the GBTU the guns tested in order of decreasing effectiveness against the frontal armor of the Panther are as follows:

1. The D-25 122 mm tank gun manufactured at the factory #9. Its ballistic characteristics are identical to those of the following guns: the A-19 122 mm, the D-2 122 mm (factory #9) and the S-4 (Central Artillery Design Bureau), giving it a muzzle velocity of 780-790 m/s with a 25 kg projectile. This gun reliably penetrates the Panther's "(G version/Glen)frontal armor at 2500 metres, and that is less than its maximum range.

2. The D-10 100 mm tank gun with ballistics identical to those of the BS-3 100 mm gun, its muzzle velocity being 890-900 m/s with a 15.6 kg projectile. This gun can penetrate the frontal armor of the Panther (G version/Glen)at up to 1500 metres, which is its maximum range.

3. The German 88 mm gun with muzzle velocity of 1000 m/s with a 10 kg projectile penetrates the Panther's (D version/Glen)frontal armor at distances of only up to 650 m.

The Panther's frontal armor is 85 mm thick and sloped at 35 degrees to the horizon. Therefore, when shooting at it from the above stated distances the angle of the projectile's trajectory at the point of impact is close to 0 degrees, and the difference between the axis of the projectile and the right angle to the armor's surface (angle of impact) is close to 55 degrees.

The above test results are preliminary, as the testing was done on guns with varying levels of deterioration: the 100 mm D-10 had fired 400 shots, and the 122 mm D-25 was new. However the difference in our test results is so great that it is unlikely that any necessary adjustments will be more than minor.

The method of evaluating armor penetration at angles of impact ranging from 0 to 30 degrees that is currently in use appears to be inefficient in evaluating the anti-tank guns.

Therefore it is our opinion that it is necessary to reconsider the subject of the most effective caliber of the anti-tank guns.

In regards to fighting the Panther tanks the tests at Kubinka clearly show that the 122 mm D-25 gun (V=780-790 m/s; g=25 kg) is superior to the 100 mm D-10 gun (V=890-900 m/s, g=15.6 kg). Also superior to the later are the 122 mm guns on wheeled carriage (the A-19 of the factory #9 and the S-4 of the TsAKB). The 100 mm BS-3 gun turns out to be less effective.

As you know, currently there are available two types of 122 mm field guns of a reduced weight but equal ballistic characteristics compared to the A-19 gun, i.e.:

1. The S-4 122 mm of the CADB, which is due to be delivered for field testing. The S-4 gun has a lot of parts common with the 100 mm BS-3 gun and its production could be begun using the facilities manufacturing the BS-3. Thus currently we are only waiting for the positive test results from the proving grounds and, probably, field tests of this gun.

2. The D-2 122 mm gun of the factory #9, which has successfully completed proving grounds tests on numerous occasions. A series of four D-2 guns is being readied for field testing. I believe that it is urgently needed to consider the task of manufacturing the D-2, in case S-4 does not pass its tests.

The second important problem that surfaced as a result of the tests at Kubinka is that of the high muzzle velocity, particularly the problem of the 85 mm guns with muzzle velocities of 1000-1100 m/s.

The tests have shown the projectile of the German 88 mm gun to have only limited effectiveness when used against the German Panther tank. It is also known that a similar 85 mm gun comes out to be roughly equal in its size and weight to a 100 mm gun with V=900 m/s. Currently 85 mm guns with muzzle velocities of 1000-1100 m/s are being developed by the CADB and factory #9, however their effectiveness against actual German tanks becomes doubtful, especially given the fact that such a gun would require tank turret dimensions no less than those used for the 100 mm D-10 or S-34 guns.

In this regard it appears that after the completion of the Kubinka tests, and if their final results confirm the current data, it would be beneficial to hold a special meeting to discuss further plans for the development of guns with high muzzle velocity.

The only point beyond doubt at this time is the need for increasing the muzzle velocities of the anti-aircraft guns, where it will result in drastic increase in range and reduction in projectile's time in travel to target.

Requesting you further instructions.



Deputy Chief of the Technical Department of the
Peoples Commissariat for Armaments:
Major-General of Engineering and Artillery
/TOLOCHKOV/

Chief of the Test Designs unit:
/VOLOSATOV/

The tests have shown the projectile of the German 88 mm gun to have only limited effectiveness when used against the German Panther tank.

I can explain why kwk43 is insufficient facing Panther D. Due to the thin plate (80-85mm), panther D's glacis has better quality than kwk43's target plate(>200mm at close range).Don't forget that kwk43 and Panther D are of same period.

Soren, acording to your opinion, kwk43 can penetrate 170mm-180mm vertival plate @2km. Panther's D glacis is just 170-180mm vertical. So kwk43 can pen. panther D @2km, but that's not the fact.!Panther G glacis is inforior to D version, however, even Panther G can resist kwk43 @ 2km.

D25t has only 149mm vertical penetration @650m(true pen. not fake) while it can really pen. Panther D's glacis=170m+vertical. Now you know how bad the panther's amor and kwk43's target plates are.

Kingtiger's front protection is better than tiger, isn't it? however, tiger's amor quality is better than kingtiger's...... Soren, german tanks' better protection doesn't mean their amor quality is better than allied, German tanks benifit form the huge weight. For example., panther's glacis is as weigh as 140mm vertical amor while js2 early version's 120mm/30 section is equal to 139mm vertical in weight. Furthermore, 55 degree has much more extra slope effect than 30 degree espicially when hit by APCR.
Therefore, tiger's apcr can pen. 120mm/30 @1500m away but it can NOT pen panther's 80mm/55 at close range! When russian realize their fault, JS2 late version's glacis was midified to 120mm/60, so none of german AT gun can pen. JS2 late version's galcis at any range! You cann't find any picture showing the penetration of JS2 late's 120mm/60, I'll bet that.

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by Soren

Seeing that its just the truth I can't see how it's wasted.

Soren, let me rephrase it into something you can understand:

Panther or Tiger crewed by highly trained and experienced men, 90mm shell goes through armor.... tank destroyed.

Panther or Tiger crewed by inexperienced men, 90mm shell goes through armor.... tank destroyed.

Panther or Tiger crewed by mice and rats, 90mm shell goes through armor.... tank destroyed.

Panther or Tiger crewed by no one, 90mm shell goes through armor.... tank destroyed.

What part don't you understand?

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by Soren

Using the std. Pzgr.39/43 the 88mm KwK43 could punch straight through the Pershing's glacis at 2km with ease.

Thats nearly one mile.

Not many chances for that to happen.

[Soren]

Glen,

Please quit it, you're wrong and it has been proven time and time again.

Furthermore I haven't been fooled by any "false" figures, the 88mm KwK43 & 17 pdr's figures (As-well as all the others) are all very real, they are all derived from real life tests, so deal with it glen.

Also do you understand the benefits of the T/D effect ? The larger the diameter of the projectile the better its performance against sloped armor is.

The 88mm KwK43's penetration figures aren't fake, the US, British and yes even the Soviet tests proves this.

Also why would they be fake ??? Simply doesn't make any sense glen.

In the Soviet tests the 88mm KwK43 managed to punch through 285mm of armor at 400mm!

I have already shown the US test results from the Aberdeen trials, go to the Tank Gun comparison thread to read them. The 122mm D-25T was tested as-well, and it didn't even come close to the 88mm KwK43 L/71.

Originally Posted by syscom3

Thats nearly one mile.

Not many chances for that to happen.

Oh really ?

One mile is 1,600m.

The 88mm KwK43 punches through 132mm of 260 BHN RHA armor laid back 30 degree's at 2,000m, and 139mm of 270 - 280 BHN RHA armor at the same range. The Pershing's armor was no where near that tough, and the oblique was just 46 degree's, not enough to compensate for the thinner armor.

Against 240 BHN RHA armor (About the best the Allies could produce) the 88mm KwK43 L/71 consistantly punched completely through vertical 153mm plates at 3,000m.

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by Soren

One mile is 1,600m.

Youre right, 2KM is actually 1.25 miles.

And finding open lines of fire for that distance is unusual and infrequent. Not to mention being able to hit a moving target in the pre ballistic computer days was being "lucky"

[glen]

The 88mm KwK43's penetration figures aren't fake, the US, British and yes even the Soviet tests proves this.

The real test of kwk43 is 232mm+ @ 100m, it's completely true. however, you havn't understand what I mean or my expression is not clear, my opinion is that: the real thick target plate (>>150mm even>200mm) is quite inferior to those thin ones! Therefore, the penetration of 232mm,285mm etc...is of overvalued numbers. Wehn kwk43 fires at 80mm/55 or 60mm/60, we will find kwk43 insuficient.

For D25T, there was another test on thick plates(>>150mm), and the penetration is quite high: 220mm@blank point/180mm@1000m whilst common test on thin plates is 142mm@1000m.

The 88mm KwK43 punches through 132mm of 260 BHN RHA armor laid back 30 degree's at 2,000m, and 139mm of 270 - 280 BHN RHA armor at the same range. The Pershing's armor was no where near that tough, and the oblique was just 46 degree's, not enough to compensate for the thinner armor

just 46 degree's....Soren,your math is not very good.

Pershing gacis is 102mm/46degree, the straight distant of this plate is 102mm/cos(46)=147mm. Furhermore, the extra slope effect of 46 degree is much greater than 30 degree!