bellezza03

Member
  • Content count

    8,797
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

bellezza03 last won the day on July 3 2016

bellezza03 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,257 Outstanding

1 Follower

About bellezza03

  • Rank
    Italian Guns Consultant
  • Birthday 02/10/1999

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    WWII, panzer divisions, luftwaffe, u-boots, super props
    Apollo missions,space, anime ,history books

Recent Profile Visitors

8,262 profile views
  1. i know the tactics of you trolls... you want that i start to insult you because you want to trigger me with those affermations. Sorry you are failing at this... and just saying. You didn't brought a single document or anything to prove your claims. Nothing.
  2. updated with HE rounds for every gun and 90 mm cockerill mk3
  3. T-10M, IS-4 ( if the player has a brain ), IS-3...should i go on? Don't start telling me about IS3 cupola or i will rage....
  4. Ahahahaha i ve showed multiple multiple sources from jentz which is an authority in this field and official reports of units that still exist today in bundeswehr archivies. You showed only one thing. You know nothing i know everything. You are wrong and i m right. That's level of your discussion. Now before i say something that mods can punish i jump out from this thread.
  5. And what do you want a video of engaging tanks at 2 km? With maybe the camera fitted inside the scope to see that it was at 2 km? Russian (enemy that confirm) and german reports plus instruction given to tankers are nothing? Admit you where wrong and you would do a better figure... also every report passed trought the OKW that "fixed" overclaims and stuff like that. According to your way of thinking Villers bocage never happened and kursk engaments too
  6. Updated with HESH and HEAT for both 75/32 and 75/34. Correct muzzle velocity added to hesh and heat. Explosive type specified for those ammunition
  7. Confermato? O rumor?
  8. Seriusly panther II is a medium tank guys. It s really fast and 88 pierce really well. Sure when uptiered it s a bad day but with a clever use some kill can come too. When top tier it s basically a 6.7 match where panther II excels. So just develop new tactics, adapt to the new and kill
  9. Si di essere carini sono carini, ma sul fatto che l abbiano sparata grossa è un dato di fatto. Spero sappiano trovare la via di mezzo
  10. e sono oltremodo irrealistici. DI GIORNO i traccianti non sono neanche lontanamente cosi luminosi. Dai sono assurdi, quando di sparano le cal 50 sembrano laser ti star wars che ti passano di fianco. Generano un fottio di luce...
  11. official reports of Tiger battalions say so as i writed. Orders on the eastern front say they HAD TO.Those are official. If those where stories they would not be reported. Hell we have russian reports about T34s being engaged by a new weapon similar to the T34 ( Panthers) and IS-2 knocked out at 1200 meters from the front by Tigers. This facts are confirmed by the enemy too ( and we know that russian struggle to admnit enemy superiority...). Also stop with this fact that tanks have to fight infantry... Yes and no. From 1939 since blitzkrieg THOUSANDS of tanks are the backbone of the armies in the role to sustain the attack. Tanks main role is to kill other tanks and spray infantry with HE shots and MGs. So it's both. Jentz tiger tanks books. All this stuff is german official reports, those ones where from 503° schwere panzer Abateilung.
  12. 6 march 1945: Area of Seregelyes ( Hungary ). 2 Tiger II destroy 6 JS II at 2000 meters range Battle of Oka River, Russia, part of the battle of Kursk, 1943 30 TigerI engage a large (over 100 tanks) Russian armored formation on the open fields. They opened fire at over 2km, scoring hits early. 42 T-34 destroyed, the rest fled. 1 Tiger was lost to enemy tank fire. Hauptmann Lange, commander of 2/sPzAbt 502 in his report dated 29 January 1943: …Fire fight: The most favorable distance is 1,500m with well adjusted weapons we got clear hits only. Impact and penetration is so far without any complaint. The ratio between HE and AP rounds must be 1:1… From an after action report of sPzAbt 503 dated 15 March 1943: The following experiences of the Abteilung are available: 1.) 7.5cm (Kurz) Granatpatrone 38 Hl (as used with the PzKfw III Ausf N) 2.) 8.8cm Panzergranate 1.) Success against enemy tanks at minimal ammunition consumption was possible only at ranges under 1,000m… 2.) Success against enemy tanks was possible at any ranges, the most favourable range was between 1,200 and 2,000m.is possible to engage enemy tanks in clear visibility at more distant ranges. One PzKpfw VI destroyed five T-34 (three crossing in front) at ranges between 2,500 and 3,000m. Only 18 rounds were fired… An after action report of 13.Kp (Tiger-Kp) of PzRgt “Grossdeutschland” dated 27 March 1943 reveals: The 8.8cm KwK proved to be a reliable and effective weapon. No faults or damage to the electric firing mechanism or similar occurred. No more than three rounds were necessary to achieve direct hits on marching artillery columns at 5,000m range using HE shells. Horses and men lay in the snow immediately. At ranges of 1,500m and more we achieved many hits on T-34 using the Panzer- Kopfgranate (AP round) with low ammunition consumption… The Paderborn training courses (Tiger-Lehrgang) noted proudly in a report dated 29 May 1943: ….The KwK 8.8cm shows extraordinary good impact and penetration. The most favourable firing ranges are around 2,000m. In one case in Russia, a Tiger with good observation and raised slope position managed to destroy five T-34 (three in parallel movement) and a 7.62cm AT gun at ranges between 2,200 and 3,000m using only 18 AP and HE shells. In North Africa, the General Sherman (M4) was destroyed at the following ranges: 3,400m frontal penetration in the gearbox; at 600m punched penetration and torn out exit at the rear. All other emerging enemy tanks were penetrated as well. The crews are fully satisfied with this gun… …General and technical experiences: During a scouting missions two Tigers encountered some 20 Russian tanks frontally. Further enemy tanks attacked from the rear. An encounter developed, in which tank and weapon performed outstandingly. Both Tigers received ten or more hits at ranges between 600 and 1,000m, for the most part from 7.62 cm guns. The armour protection withstood from all angles. No penetration was achieved. Even hits in the running gear, which tore away torsion bars, did not cause a breakdown. While the hits struck the armour, the commander, gunner and loader could designate, aim and fire at targets unchallenged. Weak smoke emissions and flakes of interior paint could be extracted by the turret ventilator. Result: Kill of ten enemy tanks by two Tigers within 15 minutes. Most times the first shot was a hit at ranges between 600 to 1,000m. At these ranges the Panzergranate produced an absolute destructive penetration to the frontal armour, and demolished the engine in the rear, too. In only a few cases the T-34 was torched. Hits at the same ranges to the sides or rear led to an explosion of the fuel in 80 per cent of all cases. Even at ranges of 1,500m and more, with favourable weather conditions, similar results were achieved with low ammunition usage. Experiences with HE shells could not be made due to the severe shortage of this ammunition. Should i go on?
  13. if you couldn't with APFSDS/APDS let alone other ammunition. Official US record about 105 L7 fitted over the M60. APDS surpass heavily both HEAT and HESH About the T62 115 mm cannon. Stats are a bit lower, but here the target is moving at 12 mph or 20 km/h. Since 1974 the T62 was also equipped with Laser FCS, while for example the Leopard 1 that was praised for FCS was still operating with steteoscopic rangefinders. So yea hitting a target at 2 km has the 44% of the chance of happening. Not bad at all and worth the shot.Especially when in the '70s more advanced FCS and laser came in and gunners knew the precise range. In the meanwhile HEAT and HESH are struck at 28%.... I would definely chose APDS or APFSDS. And those datas also confirm that High velocity rounds are the king of long range engagements ( what a surprise....). Camon even DURING WW2 if you could engage and you had the gun, you fired. Tiger batallions where instructed to fire from 1200 meters onwards. 2 km shots could and DID happen during WW2. Let alone more combats with much more advanced ballistics and FCS
  14. completly false. First of all NATO hadn't APFSDS ammunition until 1978 for 105 mm and 1985 for 120 mm L11. So we talk exclusively about russian guns against NATO armor that in both '60s and '70s was made only with RHA. Both 115 mm and 125 mm APFSDS could easily engage targets at 2 km ( And aside you are in the desert this is everything than common range. Estimated common range in eastern Europe was 1300 meters or less). 115 mm for example was praised for the ballistic propierties. Complete flat trajectory of the round even over 1 km. Taking for example the BM-6 from 1967 and it could defeat M60 hull at 2.3 km and was used during Yom Kippur war. The 125 mm is just brutal overkill against NATO armor. 3BM15 arrived in 1972. Flying at 1780 m/s and piercing 131 mm at 60° at 2km it wrecks anything on NATO side. A capability that increased even more in 1976 with 3MB17 that defeated 193 mm of armor at 60° at 2 km mark. Now about HEAT-FS . well this type of ammunition was widespread during cold war. All man portable launchers and APCs with small guns HEAT-FS are main shell ( only one with launchers). A 76 mm could pierce a M60 on the turret. That's the advantage. Russian heavily developed HEAT charges that could be launched with classical way or using ATGMs fired from main gun. HEAT-FS where also used by the Abrams on short range engaments during gulf war against Iraqi T-72s with devastating results. HEAT-FS are mainly used at medium-short range due the poor balistic compared to APFSDS that is out of discussion to be the best round for long range sniping. With the mid late '80s composite evolving HEAT-FS fired from tanks are becoming basically non effective. HESH for anti tank role half died with soviet introduction of both T72/64 and completly died when T72 was authorized for export. Considering everything APFSDS is the king round. And still so today. HEAT gold era was during mid'50 to about the '80s. During early mid'50s to '60 HEAT offered the advantage to pierce anything at any range, you just had to hit the target. Than with composite armor spreading more and more and APFSDS surpassing HEAT-FS in both accuracy and penetration HEAT became secondary on tanks but not on other platforms such as helicopters, infantry and APCs.
  15. Dopo il brummbar secondo calcio nelle palle. Grazie gaijin
  16. you are not alone...
  17. it has HEAT-FS. In fact heat-fs don't spin like said in the devblog. Non spinning HEAT rounds. Standard Heat rounds instead fired from a rifled gun will spin. So it has the same identical loadout of the jadpanzer 4-5 ( Well the gun is the same so...) Anyway the fact that it's premium along with brummbar being premium is the second punch in a short time frame....
  18. And money drops like bombs on germany in 45....
  19. Start ammo: HVAP)))))))
  20. Serously you talk about 1983 ammo and 1989 kits...... And 125 mm WHA APFSDS would still cut trought stillbrew. And chief still shares the hull of 1967... Hull of the T64 is 130 mm at 68°. Even most powerful L15A5 would do the job at 1000 meters at most. L7 would have to recieve 1983 ammo to counter a 1968 tank efficiently. And russian players then would claim for the standard add on armor of the T64 and **** will happen again... seriusly it s a Pandora box. For now keep it closed You know that gaijin is uncapable to do that. One patch of full hard clubbing and then maybe something to counter it
  21. You mean the ridicusly small area around the gun? Good luck. Do you know what a t64 player has to do? Point and click
  22. Don t spread BS. T64 mobilty was as good as the leopard. Turret of the T64 was 2 layers of RHA of 119 mm and 185 mm and between them 295 mm of STEF. STEF that is composite armor. Against KE it had a 0.3 resistance factor. You discover than that the T64 turret has 400 mm of resistance against KE. And it s curved. Against CE ammo better not talk.
  23. Yea the Swing upgrade was from the '90s... ))))
  24. Brummbar is premium tho...
  25. Aveva HE semi perforanti.... non credo molto utili. I want APFSDS))))))
  26. Ho fatto il check.. tetto da 45 mm sia scafo che torre. RIP. concordo sul fatto che basta il 115 ad aprire anche un chieftain. E adesso gli APFSDS da 115 mmunderperformano pure in perforazione... e nel caso 440 mm HEAT... L Otomatic se arriva gli daranno solo in nastri anti aerei. Io e tech abbiamo fatto una ricerca sugli APFSDS da 76 mm dell OTOMATIC. Un sabot al tungsteno da 2.1 kg a 1500 m/s. E rip i T62 a 2 km. Parliamo di 315 mm a 10 metri e 275 mm a 2000 metri. Clip da 6 colpi. Lo stesso cannone è usato dai blindati del Sud africa e in anti carro hanno stuprato T55/62... Ehm... no altrimenti PASTA too OP nerf e forum in fiamme
  27. gioco a tier V ogni giorno. I carri come il T64 differiscono e di parecchio rispetto al T62. Non puoi comparare i due mezzi e di conseguenza gli stili di gioco. Si a volte le HESH rompono la canna. Ma non ci ho mai ucciso nessuno cosi con quelle da 105. E tra l'altro non dovrebbe neanche accadere specie con le HESH. Per non parlare del fatto che basta che il T64 si metta a un pò di distanza per mandare all aria tutto dato che le HESH hanno una balistica merdosa. Se non ricordo male il tetto dello scafo del T64 è spesso 45 mm. E il turret ring è infossato. La vedo molto grigia. Si tratta di tecniche disperate. Al T64 basta che ti guarda male per farti esplodere. Ripeto i T64 come bottom tier dovrebbero vedere massimo gli 8.0 attuali. Non sotto
  28. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... NO.... Le HESH del chieftain erano inutili contro un T64 e un T72.... le HE da 120 farebbero il solletico ai mezzi con corazza composita. Io per i carri WWII ( Tranne il Maus poverino lui...) non ho paura. Le loro follie non arrivano a tanto. Ma avrei molta paura per i mezzi 7.0 in su che verrebbero mostruosamente clubbati da mezzi veloci come leopard, laser al posto di cannoni e 400 mm di armatura frontale. GG. Se devono arrivare categoria a parte. Comunque tanto per dirti i primi AIM9 della guerra di Corea era qualcosa di ridicolo. P/k molto molto basse. E spesso dovevi essere a ore 6 perfette molto vicino o IRST decideva che il sole era un target migliore..... Il vietnam invece è un falso positivo. Ovvero i missili negli anni'70 erano già semi-maturi. Erano i piloti dei phantom a non essere ben addestrati a usare bene i missili lanciando al primo lock senza aspettare posizioni migliori. Il 60% delle kill vietnamite furono via missile. Inoltre dopo la scuola Top Gun, quando i piloti della marina impararono a usare il sistema d'arma e si introdussero regole molto più severe su assemblaggio e manutezione serrata la K/d ratio sali dal 2:1 condiviso anche dalle forze a terra a 13:1...... Comunque non credo che si arriverà certo a questi sistemi d'arma. Il massimo sara qualche AIM9 primitivo. Molto figo e bello ma il cannone gli sarà preferito
  29. Si ma anche al T64 avevano detto No. Perché non bilanciabile. Anche gli ATGM era propio No agli inizi. Alla fine quando l hype per le forze aeree calerà arriveranno anche i mezzi supersonici. I carri compositi ormai sono quasi realtà. E sono pericolosi non solo per WWII. ma anche per la roba anni 50.
  30. L ultimo punto e fottutamamente vero
  31. Have you ever heard of M883 ammunition? 105 mm with right ammo can kill a T64 at 2 km
  32. Do you know that ERA blocks where found in game files and that gaijin at t64 reply if arrives it will have the counterparts instead of No. It s just a matter of time
  33. Già si stanno ammorbidendo sul t64. Da i no secchi e no ma adesso dicono che se arriva metteranno anche roba per counterarlo. Aka arriverà
  34. Anche le ammo più moderne. Attualmente il type 74 usa munizioni dall 84
  35. Lower plate? What lower plate? Aim at the god damn upper plate and watch fireworks. Or even more sure shot is turret. Instakill everything and often ammo burns. Also cheecks on the IS2 are fragile. 88 can go trought head on. If the is2 retreats behind a corner it basically exposes a 90 mm flat plate and behind that ammo racks. Seriusly IS2 it s not a danger for a Tiger tank. I met such tanks countless times. I fear much more the T34/85 since it s a much more plastic tank. It has speed, gun and rof.
  36. Seriusly 88 melts trought IS2 frontal armor easily. Even the 44. Jumbo is a much toughter target. I'm happy that now i have my Tiger E at 5.7 too. Time to get a free ace crew on it
  37. Arcade scrub ))))))
  38. non l abbia fullato tu... Il 108 è random al limite.. alcune volte tranci tutto, altre un b17 si è mangiato 360 colpi da 30 mm. Ieri uno yak17 si è mangiato tutti e 120 i colpi del 163 molti dei quali a segno con tanto di botto ed è tornato alla base. E via cosi. E so cosa faceva il 30 prima della presunta patch di miglioramento. Si adesso è meglio ma è indecente uguale per un cannone che dovrebbe oneshottare fighter...
  39. Succede a ogni caccia...
  40. Insomma servono 4-5 colpi da 20 mm per un caccia. E 15 per un bombardiere. Inoltre il 108 sparka ancora come un mostro. Si vede che il 262 non lo tocchi
  41. 30 k leoni per un 262.... assurdo come al solito un passo avanti e 2 indietro ( per ora...)
  42. Lo zero è sopravvalutato. Motore pessimo, velocità sul piano ridotta, capacità di diving scarse, una raffica di cal 50 e si accende come un cerino. L unica cosa che sa fare è mettersi in manovrato e pattugliare vaste aeree. I successi dello Zero sono dovuti alla non conoscenza della macchina e al fatto che i giapponesi non sanno fare nulla secondo gli americani. Dopo le prime batoste gli americani e anche gli inglesi che provarono ad andare in manovrato con gli spit capirono che dovevano andare giù di boom and zoom and energy fighting e mai manovrare con uno zero. Già con l F4F funzionò. Quando arrivo l F6F con un motore più decente xxxx un autentico massacro
  43. It s obvius that germans came back with heavy armor when thanks to composite armor it was again the best choice of doing a tank. But before that? I prefer to be at least mobile on the battlefields. Also turkish are using leoa4 in urban combat WITHOUT infantry support. Pure madness. Kornets and TOWs do the rest.. Also in iran-iraq war 115 mm APFSDS proved to be capable to pierce front turret of chieftain even at range. And the are photo too. In fact in theory APFSDS could pierce chief at 2 km.
  44. i don't know. But still today the soviet have the fastest rounds, since their rounds lose speed faster than Western ones
  45. i only know that leopard 2 arrived in 1979, abrams in 1980 and Challenger i 1983..... Also Leopard 2 composite armor was another type of armor, much more similar to the layered system of the URSS ( and by the way the leo2 was also inspired by chobam, since there was a common agreement in the '70s). Abrams instead was based on brits armor, and later assumed another way with DU armor
  46. for soviet union workhorse was the T62 before the T72. For other nations T55 was main tank indeed. And they where full of APDS and HEAT-FS. Those rounds where produced since 1955. BR412D was still in use too.
  47. And what areas? Best armoured spot is 140 mm at 60°. Stillbrew package arrived in late '80s.... When stillbrew arrived RPG-7R with 630 mm of penetration would still go trought the turret. Or just aim for the fantastic paper hull...
  48. by the time Leo2 and Abrams arrived the chieftain was like a panzer IV trown between a firefight between t54s. Also i agree that chobam armor concept was the base for western tank composite armor, but each nation used varius variations of chobam. Chieftain was slow, so in a firefight you expect that it can take shots, it couldn't. If you can't take shots, at least you use high mobility as your armor. Chieftain lack in both departments. That's why it was obsolete and completly owned by both T72s and T64s. The only good thing was that the gun was powerful.
  49. RPG-7 would slice trought chieftain turret and m60 turret like nothing ( 130 mm at 60° vs 150 mm at 60°, rip chief) Yea. By 1968 most common treath on the battlefield was 115 mm smoothbore gun. The warsaw pact workhorse was the T62. And the 115 mm could melt trought chieftain even with normal KE weapons. RHA armor was dead. what? the hell are you saying? Leopard arrived after the chieftain learning on the chieftain that RHA tanks where dead, and M60s even up to the A3 version refused to upgrade anymore the armor, concentrating much more their efforts to improve their FCS ( M60A3 had really good FCS). The NATO tactic was shoot first, hit first and kill. Leopard resumed this concept at his best. Amaizing mobility, advanced FCS, enaught armor to protect from autocannons and a good fast firing gun. Chieftain with heavy RHA, and his speed was literally a WWII dinosaur. Only good feauture of the chieftain was the main armament. Anything else mehhh
  50. the Leopard was based on HEAT making armor obsolete. A concept that for NATO forces was valid until 1979/1980 when first composite armor Nato tanks arrived. So Leopard I probably was the most advanced tank that NATO could field until 1979 ( they year when the leopard II arrived...). Chieftain armor was useless. extra weight ignored by both APFSDS and HEAT-FS. Even a modest BMP could frontally kill a chieftain. RHA armor was dead. Chieftain was born with the wrong concept. Not the Leopard.
  51. how you can't flank? The map is enormous. It's impossible with 16 tanks to control the whole front.It's the best map possible for flanking. T34s and cromwells or any fast tank can flank easily without being noticed at all with really good result. It's also the only map that require firing skill which War thunder has destroyed since usual ranges now are 200-300 meters. The village in the center offer good opportunity for a more close quarter skirmish, while heavy tanks can finally do what they did. Engage at range, take shots and lead the charge. Probably one of the 2-3 REAL tank maps of the game.When i have kursk even if i'm bottom tier it's just fun, i really enjoy the map. What i would pay to get more of those maps instead of those xxxx maps like abandoned factories/alps etc etc...
  52. You have to thank god that we don t have T64 in game. It would be the end. Don t forget. From 1967 to 1980 soviet ground forces could roflstomp NATO tanks. They had T80s while we still had RHA tanks...
  53. Still HESH heavily underperform in penetration at flat and low angles. A lot
  54. For 105 mm HEAT-FS is miles onwards the HESH ( Sadly). Hesh bounches too much in 54s UFPs for god knows what reason, it s not reliable (thank you RNG marvel based physics game). Yes sure when you hit and game is good with you have nice firework.. but i prefer heat-fs. At least penetration is assured in 99% of the cases. Btw i whish gaijin will get HESH performance right. Hesh performing at 0° like they do at 60° it s just ridicolous
  55. I got 16-0 in my tiger H1... any tank is capable of a super game. What a surprise. Usually it s 2-3 per game. And when uptiered you have good chances to die without doing nothing if you have bad luck ( aka t29 in front of you or stronk t34/100 and such)... panther is a tiger with **** reverse and has turret while not having it like M10... life at 5.7 it s not easy. Trust me i 2k games on my Tiger i mastered it as best i can and i basically never miss a shot with the 88 and my K/d ratio is still suffering from the first period of using tigers in a bad way. If you play right tiger is deadly as it should, charge in wittmann style and you die in seconds. And as every nation even the evil germany can t get their **** right in both DMs and gun performance.
  56. Panzer IVF2 is torn apart by T34s with APHE, but the same it can do. Cromwell spam rounds and flank like god i love them. Tiger I is perfectly countered by most tanks at his BRs. It s powerful only if the tiger can enjoy range advantage. Flakbus now can be oneshotted with HE rounds. King tiger reign ended long time ago.
  57. And what are those superior seal clubbers? Aside leopard that if played in a very clever and calm way can be devastating i see no one. Armor is no more a important factor. It's heavily situational. If all maps where kursk like i would agree...but..Anything can pierce anything at wt standard ranges. And with next br changes it will be even more balanced
  58. German sealclubbers... ahahaaha oh boy...
  59. Jesus that nerf....
  60. Solo uno può... Zio Josef
  61. This situation is getting more and more ridicolous. The chieftain APDS that we have now could even slice trought T64 hull up to 500 meters. Here we can t pierce a IS-4... when based on brits charts the L15 APDS pierce 152 mm at 1000 yards at 60° and 142 mm at 60° at 2000 yards. As i said the penetration system is becoming more and more a fantasy world based on balistic rules made by balancement and tovarish rather than real world physics.. hell we have all the possible data from this period of armoured warfare and we get this trash of system.. i m really angry for this
  62. Lol... le ragazze sono ancora più vendicative dei ragazzi. XD bel lavoro Hertz. Certa gente che si crede la masterace scesa in terra va insegnata un po' di umiltà ( a botte di chieftain )))))) )
  63. le portaerei americane erano in esercitazione nel pacifico. Le corazzate vecchie che dici tu erano tutte le corazzate di punta della US navy el pacifico. L'isola aveva una tonnellata di difese aeree tra terra e navi senza contare le basi aeree. Gli USA furono presi dalla sopresa. Non credevano che il giappone avesse le palle di attacarli. Gli usa provarono fino alla fine per la via pacifica. Il giappone già da tempo sapeva come doveva finire.Guerra. E non sottovalutare il P40... ottima velocità sul piano e boom and zoomer ottimo. Non ricordo il nome di 2 aviatori americani che a bordo di 2 P40 fecero vedere un pò di sorci verdi agli zero rappresentando l'unica reale opposizione in aria
  64. Mister ritardo sospetto i servizi segreti US non centrano un benamato tubo. Furono i delegati giapponesi alla casa bianca a consegnare volutamente in ritardo la dichiarazione di guerra per far si che Pearl Harbour fosse una sorpresa. Se gli stati uniti avessero ricevuto la dichiarazione di guerra come volevano i diplomatici giapponesi a Washington ad attendere gli zero ci sarebbero stati p40 e compagnia e un fuoco di sbarramento mostruoso...
  65. Non crederai davvero a pearl Harbor voluta ed inscenata dagli americani vero?
  66. Cosa non capisci del censurato automaticamente? Per impedire che sull internazionale fioriscano i xxxx etc etc hanno introdotto questa feature. Non stiamo a guardare la pagliuzza quando ci sono grattacieli di problemi seri... altro che travi...
  67. Adottammo le mg151 per migliore logistica. I 20 mm italiani erano ottimi e con balistica superba. L unico campo in cui eravamo dietro erano i motori. Quando equipaggiammo il macchi 202 col db601 andava più veloce dei 109E3... ahhh l airframe quanto conta
  68. Perché è l inizio della parola xxxx che è censurata automaticamente dal forum
  69. don't spam T34 and Co. even here. Stay on topic please....
  70. )))))))))))) Anyway getting serius, this is the situation. The T33 round of the 90 mm series is actually fake and it perform like the M77 AP round according to WWII Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery. The situation was reported multiple times to gaijin with official documents and sources from the already cited WWII Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery, that Gaijin claim to use as main source. Still nothing. The community can do nothing aside reporting it. It's all on the hands of the game company. This game it's not a simulation or something like that, it's kind of realistic at most. The actual penetration system is a basically a made up world based on god knows what physics laws ( aka fantasy ) for sloped armor and anything related to this. This is the real situation. Messed up DMs ( Tiger,sherman Jumbo... etc), penetration system that fails in multiple areas ( even to report correct penetration, like in this case, or 128 mm, 120 mm and other guns)
  71. Don t ask me why. Ask gaijin why.
  72. basically in war thunder the T33 shot it's the M77 AP round
  73. concordo... Dopo tutto quello che ci avevano dato i tedeschi ( aiuti tecnici,carri, salvato il xxx in africa e grecia) con un voltagabbana cosi, quando ancora sulla linea Gotica l'italia era difendibile pensava che i crucchi ci avrebbero dato un bacetto e dire, ok torniamo oltre le alpi portando gli alleati a un tiro di schioppo dalla germania? Assurdo
  74. beh tecnicamente l'8 settembre l'italia si è arresa agli alleati e i tedeschi si sono incazzati. Che poi il sud occupato abbia partecipato attivamente pro alleati e il nord si sia """"schierato"""" coi tedeschi con lo stato fantoccio della repubblica di Salò era inevitabile. Ho letto alcuni trattati su come avremmo potuto finire il conflitto. Tutti concordano che l'8 settembre xxxx un completo e assoluto disastro. L'esercito sbandante e senza ordini, il re che fugge, una resa che cade cosi all improvviso. xxxx un vero e propio disastro.
  75. si ma non fa l'aereo tedesco pure... tutto qua
  76. that was needed too. 6.3 for the m36 was to much with the current 90 mm performance. I'm kind of surprised that they removed the D shots from the 122s...
  77. Mi esprimo per la parte carri. Tutto davvero azzeccato. e tiger I E a 5.7 vs IS-2.Storico e si gode. Per la parte aerea gli spit sono stati alzati dato che adesso davvero sono xxx di UFO. Mi sembra giusto.
  78. ahaahahaha IS-2 manage to kill one and then gets stomped. Armor is worse than Tiger one, the 88 goes trought like butter while firing 3 times faster... i think it's time to crush sovietboo with my Tiger E now at 5,7
  79. Ah..tu intendi novità. Beh l 801D xxxx una novità dal punto di vista di potenza e compatezza sistema propulsivo
  80. Per non parlare del bmw801d...
  81. Beh però viene un po' italiano no? Era prodotto di qua.. era un semplice motore di licenza. Madonna che scandalo...
  82. E comunque il DB605 non era neanche tedesco sul g55 o altro. Era prodotto in Italia dalla FIAT. Vi dice nulla il tifone? Infatti i motori in uso erano di licenza. Wow.. se solo per questo è tedesco il tutto è ridicolo....
  83. Godono di fascino perché si fecero trucidare fino all inverosimile nel Pacifico resistendo in condizioni disumane. E per pearl harbor che xxxx eseguita quasi alla perfezione. Noi invece siamo stati giudicati da un singolo episodio.. operazione compass nella quale le abbiamo prese malamente. Gli altri 3 anni di guerra infangati da un singolo episodio. Giusto una piccola correzione. L aereonautica era si in codizioni logistiche molto spesso penose ma tecnologicamente non eravamo messi indietro. Il macchi 200 era alla pari in velocità con l hurricane e più manovrabile. Il macchi 202 col DB601 era persino più veloce del 109E4 e ovviamente degli spitfire. Dobbiamo aspettare lo spit mk9 per avere un aereo superiore. E comunque da noi arrivò G55,re2005 e macchi 205 che erano anche superiori allo spit mk9. Chissa cosa avrebbe combinato il g56... col 603 full throttle faceva i 700 e passa orari a 7 km...
  84. Maybe allowing the production of the jadgtiger to have already there a tested TD against the new generation of soviet armor
  85. Basically i pilot a 4 ton fockewulf because of the **** load of armor on it , and it doensn't count anything.... GG gaijin
  86. Ottima osservazione
  87. kugel doesn't fire double APHE 57 mm nuke rounds... and face much much tougher tanks than the ZSU does i fixed that.... i was ranting about crew...
  88. ok... hanno aumentato il tempo di riparazione culatta ( giusto ) e diminuito ancor più il tempo di rimpiazzo equipaggio.
  89. i think that this post is the rappresentation of the community double standards...also clubbing at every BR? God open your PC and start playing the game. Also If you noted gaijin is changin belts for every spaa. First ones to be hit where the german SPAA that now don't enjoy full APCR belt anymore. Everyone didn't say a word. This happened to the russians... oh my god german bias, supreme german tank can't be touched blablabla.... please stop... this is getting ridicolous... Soon they will change other SPAA belts too. So shut up and stop screaming at everything like this...it's ridicolous. I would cry much much more about the crew that now can be replaced faster than a formula 1 tyres change making the whole system even more un realistical... but nope, we have to stop the evil german first
  90. Lol adesso le culatte si riparano alla velocità della luce...
  91. Ma rimuovere l istruttore che vantaggi comporta?
  92. XD oggi la mia ragazza non esce e quindi non ho niente da fare )))))))))
  93. le corazze aggiuntive le iniziarono a mettere IN FABBRICA SUGLI SCAFI GIA' COSTRUITI... lo so che brinell serve principalmente per la durezza, e non l'elasticità, ma IN CAMPO BALISTICO PARLANDO DI ACCIAI, il numero brinell, fornisce dati anche riguardo alle capacità elastiche di una piastra, ovvero assorbire i colpi senza riempire il fighting compartment di schegge. Per materiali tipo compositi invece la cosa non funziona. Ma parlando di carri armati..
  94. più leggo sta roba è più mi sale il mal di testa. A parte il fatto che le corazzature imbullontate non sono cosi terribili come si pensa, diventano inferiori nel post penetrazione e vennero usate dai britannici fino al 45. Comunque il Brinell non è come l'hai liquidato tu. Il valore brinell rappresenta il rapporto durezza/elasticità, in poche parole la qualità del materiale usato. Un valore standard brinell è compreso tra 220-240. Le corazze italiane rientrano in questi valori generali. L'M43 a parte il fatto che sono 75 mm base a 11° ( aumentati a 25° nel 75/46). I semovente in questioni ricevettero piastre aggiuntive divenute poi standard da 25 mm. La protezione generale sul frontale era 106 mm considerando l'inclinazione, per un 105/25 e 126 mm per un 75/46. Comparabile o superiore al tiger e in grado di prendere sberle da qualsiasi cannone alleato. Il tiger poi è un caso a parte. Esso riceveva piastra costruite a posta, un trattamente speciale. Il panther come corazza non era superiore alla media degli altri veicoli della WWII come qualità. Inoltre per la trillionesima volta, le corazze al vanadio non riducono la resistenza balistica. Riducono l'elasticità, quindi la probabilità di schegge all interno del veicolo. Con la resistenza non ha nulla a che vedee. E P.S. .... ci vogliono meno di 30 secondi per tradurre quelle 2 righe di post...
  95. Usa google traduttore e un semplice copia e incolla.
  96. da WWII ballistics armor and gunnery risulta che le corazzature italiane si attestavano sui 220-230 BNH, che per corazze balistiche è il velore standard. Quello a cui ti riferisci tu è il metodo di fissaggio. Allora si i bulloni sono inferiori rispetto alla saldatura. La qualità delle corazze era nella media. Inoltre lo spessore è molto importante. Più è spessa la piastra più è neglibile la peggior della qualità deglia acciai usata. Come dice Jentz thickness is a quality of his own Kind. E gli italiani sapevano fare gli acciai... Acciaio terni coff coff. Inoltre perchè improbabile la serie M43? ne abbiamo sfornati a decine. Il p43 avrebbe superato il panther in protezione frontale.
  97. il crusader che xxxx per tutto il nord africa la spina dorsale dei royal armoured corps, era un mezzo certamente poco corazzato, ma era veloce e armato con un 40 mm. Alla pari di potenza di fuoco dei panzer III. e Comunque Beda fomm xxxx la battaglia nell ambito di operazione Compass, nel quale le truppe italiane finirono circondate e senza rifornimenti. Questo spiega la bassa efficenza e la netta sconfitta durante operazione compass. xxxx un errore di comando, non colpa della macchina. E comunque la vendetta non tardò ad arrivare. Con uomini esperti e a piena efficenza e non senza rifornimenti e accerchiati: 19/11/1941, Bir el Gobi(Gubi) The opening move of Operation Crusader found the 22 Armoured Brigade launching an attack against the Ariete’s fixed positions at Bir el Gobi. Before long, truck mounted artillery claimed about fifteen cruiser tanks. Meanwhile, Ariete’s M13/40s launched a counterattack into the tanks of the 22 Armoured Brigade. The tank losses for the Italians are widely known and accepted. Thirty-four M13s are knocked out and fifteen more suffered repairable damage and mechanical breakdowns. Eight M13/40s were reported in base workshops at the start of the battle. The British losses are still debated to this day. While British war diaries reveal accurate losses for the 6RTR and 4CLY, the losses suffered by the 3CLY are not completely revealed in their war diary. One squadron reports four tanks lost, but other squadrons seem to vanish from the pages for several days. Correlli Barnett’s, ‘The Desert Generals’ places the British losses at fifty-two[8]. The British retrieved some of their knocked out tanks during the night, further complicating any accurate counts. Although the battles importance should not be exaggerated, it was the first time the British faced a fully fledged Italian tank division. Outcome/Losses: 29 x M13/40, 5 x Light tanks / 52 x British cruiser tanks 23/11/1941, Battle of Totensonntag (Sunday of the Dead), Sidi Rezegh [10][11] After spending the next several days in the area of Bir el Gubi, Ariete finally comes under German command (the first time during Operation Crusader). Meeting the 15th PZ. Division coming from the northeast, Ariete falls behind (the 3CLY war diaries reveal they were refueling). While the tanks of the 15th PZ. Division plunge into the guns of the 5th South African Brigade, Ariete clashes with a composite regiment of “some thirty” British tanks (remnants of previous battles)[12], including eight from 3CLY. The tank battle erupts at 800 yards when, for some unknown reason, Lt. Col. WG Carr orders his tanks to assault from left to right across the path of Ariete’s sixty M13/40s. The composite regiment is left with only four battle worthy tanks, down to one towing another the next day. Later, they were joined by two more tanks from a separate leaguer. Outcome/Losses: 0 Italian Tank Losses recorded / 24 x British tanks knocked out 10/6/1942, South of Knightsbridge, Semovente 75/18 vs the Grant [15][16] In his Book, ‘Italian Armored Vehicles of World War Two’, Nicola Pignato briefly describes a battle at Bir Hakeim (Hacheim) between Semovente 75/18s and about forty Grants, leaving twenty British tanks destroyed. Actually, the battle in question occurred between Bir Hacheim and Knightsbridge, on the 10th of June 1942. Lined up abreast thirty Grants and ten Stuarts, from both the 6th and 1st RTR, launched an attack on a position held by the Ariete. On the British right, 6RTR came under fire from some tanks and truck mounted guns, while on the left (1RTR), a tank attack was reported at 10:30. When it is over three Grants and two Stuarts from 6RTR are knocked out and twelve Grants and three Stuarts from 1RTR are lost. Later that night, tanks from the 15 and 21 PZ. Div. arrive and shoot up several trucks and five or six more tanks. Author Liddell-Hart claims the British only lost sixteen, but appears to only be counting the losses from 1RTR. Outcome/Losses: 0 Italian Tank Losses recorded / 9 x Grants and a single Crusader (10 total) 12/6/1942, South of Knightsbridge, Trieste’s M13/40s and the Grants Capt. Buxton and his Crusader from 3CLY are sent out to meet a squadron of ten Grants from the 4th Hussars. Together they attempted to engage a group of eight armored cars and nine M13/40s of the Trieste Mot. Division. Ten tanks were overwhelmed by a large number of Italian tanks and destroyed, minus a single Grant which managed to escape. Capt. Buxton and his crew were captured and remained prisoner until they managed to escape the following day. The war diaries of the 3CLY report Capt. Buxtons version, while the 4th Hussars war diary claims it was twelve Mark IIIs and eight Mark IVs supported by eight 88 millimeters and 50mm guns. It is possible the single frantic Grant believed German tanks must have done the damage, but Capt. Buxton was captured and remained in the area, making him a far more reliable witness. Outcome/Losses: 2 x M13/40s / 15 x Grants and 5 x Stuarts (20 total)
  98. Nessun mezzo era ed è invincibile.. neanche un tiger nel 42 lo era. Neanche un abrams lo è. I nostri semoventi erano belli corazzati sul frontale, quanto un tiger nelle versioni del 43 e il p26 era superiore al panzer IV in ogni sua versione. Il problema erano i numeri. Ti devo coreggere sul 47 mm. Le ep non bruciavano cosi tanto. Forse sui 70-80 mm. Massimo.
  99. Continui ad andare avanti di retorica e facendo il grammar nazi ( sai cos è il T9?) .. Ma i fatti? Questi sconosciuti
  100. Ripeto.. quando non si conosce l argomento si fa una figura migliore standosi zitti.. siccome i mezzi italiani della ww2 non gli conosci neanche lontanamente e parli per stereotopi meglio se la finisci qua..
  101. L3 e CV33 sono carri da soppressione anti fanteria.. definiti anche tankette. Non sono fatti per il contro carro. Metti un panzer 1 al posto del CV e il risultato non cambia. Basta con questi luoghi comuni promulgati da fine conflitto
  102. Hi guys after some hard work that we had during those years is time to publish some datas about italian guns. Generally people when think about italians weaponary against tanks, that italy could field , immidiatly think about the 47 mm and nothing more....and on the Internet it's difficult to find something reliable about those guns. So In this topic i will post datas about penetration power and battle/test reports to give you an idea of how the italians guns will perform in game when they will come and obviusly from an historical point of view it will help someone who is searching for datas. So here we go. ( Those datas are from italian tests converted then to ingame criteria. Also from here onwards i will refer to HEAT shells as EPS ( Special ready effect ) and HESH as EP ( Ready effect ). those where the names given at HEAT and HESH rounds by italians Topic will gradually recieve all the datas since there is a lot of stuff) For any doubt or curiosity ask here : D 47/32 Mod 1935 APBC mod 35 round weight of the shell: 1,5 kg Filling: 30 grams of TNT penetration angle of attack : 0° 10 meters : 58 mm 500 meters : 50 mm 1000 meters : 42 mm 1500 meters : 36 mm 2000 meters : 30 mm APCBC mod 39 round Weight of the penetrator: 1.4 kg filling : 30 grams of TNT angle of attack : 0° 10 meters : 68 mm 500 meters : 60 mm 1000 meters : 52 mm 1500 meters : 47 mm 2000 meters : 41 mm Several T34s where knocked out thanks the great mobility of this AT gun that was really light. At kursk the range was 300-450 meters from the sides and all the hits pierced. The 47 mm was found to be useless against the T34 UFP, but turret could be engaged at short range. 47/32 HE M35 Weight: 2,37 kg Filling: 150 grams of TNT MV: 250 m/s 75/18 Mod 1934/35 75 mm APBC round weight of penetrator: 6,2 kg Filling: 270 grams of TNT MV: 476 m/s angle of attack : 0° 10 meters : 67 mm 500 meters : 58 mm 1000 meters : 50 mm 1500 meters : 44 mm 2000 meters : 39 mm 75 mm EP round Weight of the penetrator: 5.2 kg MV: 450 m/s penetration ( effects against a 90° plate) At all ranges: effects of spallings, damaged welds, cranks and armor breached for plates thick max 80 mm. ( effects against a 60° plate) At all ranges ( 30 mm max thick plate at 60° suffered spalling and cracks ) Some testing IRL Poland 1942 trials on captured T34/76: No major effect on T34 upper frontal plate North Africa 1942 trials. Targets where a Crusader and a MKII Matilda Crusader 75 mm EP round at 500 meters against crusader side: Armor completly failed, with a full laceration of the side armor of the tank and a enormous breach in the side. Half meter square plate was fully removed 75 mm EP round at 500 meters against crusader front: Welds destroyed with the frontal armor busted and a 30 X 50 cm breach opened in the front. Matilda MK2 75 mm EP round against Matilda mkII front: Deformation and laceration of frontal plate, welds also where broken and turret ring was destroyed. No breach in the armor was opened but huge spalling effects where observed. 75/18 EPS Mod 42 MV: 399 m/s Penetrator weight: 5.31 kg filling: 58% cyclonite, 40,5% TNT 1,5% wax Penetration: 120 mm against a vertical plate ( Was projected to pierce British heavy armor such as Churchill mk3 and Matilda MK2) 59 mm against a 60° plate ( Fully able to defeat a T34 from the front at any pratical range ). One of the greatest success of this gun was against the M3Lee tank at Gazala. 75/18 and flak88 together knocked out 25 British tanks. 75/18 HE M32 Weight: 7.725 kg Filling: 600 grams of TNT 75/32 Mod 1937 APCBC round Weight of the shell: 8.59 kg Filling: 270 grams of TNT MV: 594 m/s Penetration values against a vertical plate (90°) 10 meters : 102 mm 500 meters : 88 mm 1000 meters : 75 mm 1500 meters : 62 mm 2000 meters : 49 mm Historical notes: The gun was projected for an upgrade of the Semovente 75/18. The gun requirements where that had to be able to defeat a Matilda at least at 900 meters with standard AP round. The gun was fitted on the M42 semovente. The further development was the 75/34 that was more powerful and was fitted on the heavy armoured M43 chassis. The semovente M43 75/34 had 75 mm of armor at 11° and kits of add on armor where also produced ( that became standard for the 75/46 version ) and could be used reaching a 100 mm at 11° frontal armor. Thanks to those armor values the semovente M43 could outrange almost any treath, especially with the already mentioned EPS shells. 75 mm EP round Weight of the penetrator: 5.2 kg MV: 580 m/s penetration ( effects against a 90° plate) At all ranges: effects of spallings, damaged welds, cranks and armor breached for plates thick max 80 mm. ( effects against a 60° plate) At all ranges ( 30 mm max thick plate at 60° suffered spalling and cracks ) 75/32 EPS Mod 42 MV: 532 m/s Penetrator weight: 5.31 kg filling: 58% cyclonite, 40,5% TNT 1,5% wax Penetration: 120 mm against a vertical plate ( Was projected to pierce British heavy armor such as Churchill mk3 and Matilda MK2) 59 mm against a 60° plate ( Fully able to defeat a T34 from the front at any pratical range ). 75/32 HE M32 Weight: 6,350 kg Filling: 600 grams of TNT 75/34 gun APCBC Round Weight of the shell: 8.6 kg MV: 624 m/s Filling: 270 grams of TNT Penetration values against a vertical plate (90°) 10 meters : 118 mm 500 meters : 104 mm 1000 meters : 91 mm 1500 meters : 78 mm 2000 meters : 65 mm Historical Notes: This gun was the evolution of the 75/32 gun. New gun breech that allowed higher pressures, new firing mechanims for fast firing rof with those characteristics no surprise that this gun was choosed as the new main armament in 1942 for the semovente line and the P40. The gun was fully capable to deal with any allied armor and obviusly it could fire the EP rounds and the EPS rounds that as already cited where capable to deal with any tank armor. The Gun was fitted on the M42 chassis and the heavier M43 chassis with 100 mm front armor at 11°. In the upper image a rare photo of a M43 75/34 in Russia. 75 mm EP round Weight of the penetrator: 5.2 kg MV: 557 m/s penetration ( effects against a 90° plate) At all ranges: effects of spallings, damaged welds, cranks and armor breached for plates thick max 80 mm. ( effects against a 60° plate) At all ranges ( 30 mm max thick plate at 60° suffered spalling and cracks ) 75/34 EPS Mod 42 MV: 552 m/s Penetrator weight: 5.31 kg filling: 58% cyclonite, 40,5% TNT 1,5% wax Penetration: 120 mm against a vertical plate ( Was projected to pierce British heavy armor such as Churchill mk3 and Matilda MK2) 59 mm against a 60° plate ( Fully able to defeat a T34 from the front at any pratical range ). 75/34 HE M32 Weight: 7.725 kg Filling: 600 grams of TNT 90/53 Mod 1939 The pride of italian WW2 army, the mighty 90/53 had 2 types of AP rounds. First where already usable since the war started, but where not really projected to pierce armor like the early Flak88 ammo. The later ones arrived as soon as the 1943 begun. AP round mod 1939 Penetrator weight: 12,160 kg MV: 758 m/s Filling: None Penetration against flat armor ( 90°) 10 meters : 138 mm 500 meters : 125 mm 1000 meters : 113 mm 1500 meters : 100 mm 2000 meters : 87 mm APBC round mod 43 penetrator weight: 12,160 kg MV: 773 m/s Filling: none penetration against flat armor (90°) 10 meters : 200 mm 500 meters : 175 mm 1000 meters : 143 mm 1500 meters : 121 mm 2000 meters : 102 mm 90/53 was fitted on many italians AFVs. On sicily a semovente 90/53 division engaged 3 shermans at 2500 yards with success and precise fireand had really good results during the sicily campaign ( A 90 mm that hit a sherman turret pierced and destroyed the turret ring for the energy moving the turrer). On north africa this gun along with the Flak88 was the most feared on the battlefield being able to take out any armor on the battlefield 90/53 HE Weight: 10 kg Filling: 1 kg of TNT MV : 840 m/s 100/17 Mod 14 ( this was an Austrian howitzer used on the mountain warfare during the great war. Italy acquired over 2600 of those pierces after the WWI as war damage reparation . Thanks to the high caliber and some modifications they where perfect for the AT role using HESH of HEAT rounds ) 100 mm EP mod 42 weight: 12.5 kg Weight of filling: 2 kg MV: 430 m/s penetration: devastating effects on plates thick up to 100 mm at flat angle of attack devastating effects on plates thick 45 mm at 60° angle of attack. IRL testing Combined Germany/italy tests in Poland 1942 against latest russian AFVs T34 and KV-1 KV1 100 mm EP against KV-1 turret angled at 25°: Great spalling effects, welds failed and a big piece of armor was cutoff from the turret 100 mm EP against KV-1 turret angled at 25°: Again great spalling effects with the armor that was torn and failed resulting in a breach of 10X2 mm opened Germans technical where surprised and judged the 100 mm HESH superior to the 105 mm HEAT round of their own Howitzer since the 100 mm not only could go trought the heavy KV1 armor but would also cause spalling all around with big damages that would for sure immobilize the tank hit. T34/76 mod42 Not too much to say. A regiment of 100/17 engaged at kursk T34/76s advancing. All the 5 T34/76 where knocked out with absurd amount of damage. Here the Photos: Turret side: 56 mm at little angle: Back hull: 40 mm at 48°. Engine was completly destroyed but the carnage doesn't stop here. In fact due the great results the 100/17 was fitted on a Cannon truck and a special unit was created. The 100/17 proved to be lethal against the British AFVs North Africa tests 1942 Crusader 100/17 EP vs Crusader front hull 500 meters: the whole hit zone was breached and the whole frontal plate was removed from the welds 100/17 EP vs Crusader front Turret 500 meters: The turret was hit and was knocked out from the chassis and landed near the tank Matilda mkII 100/17 EP vs Matilda mkII turret at 500 meters: Huge spalling effects observed with cracks that are spread in every direction from the point of impact. A piece of armor was removed by the turret 100 mm EPS mod 43 Weight: 12.5 kg MV: 430 m/s filling: 58% cyclonite, 40,5% TNT 1,5% wax Penetration 130 mm against flat angle 64 mm at angle of attack of 60° 100/17 HE M32 Weight: 13,49 kg Filling: 2,218 kg of TNT MV: 430 m/s 105/25 Fitted on the M43 chassis in 2 variants. The first M43 ( The one in the photo ) with 100 mm of frontal armor at 11° or the improved M43 chassis with the casemate 100 mm thick at 25°. It was projected to counted any allied armor at the time. The gun that was built on purpose only for the Tank destroyers can be also found in one fort in Italy, with a particular reinforcement of the barrel. APC mod 43 MV: 510 m/s Weight of the penetrator: 16,3 kg Penetration at flat angle of attack 10 meters : 131 mm 100 meters : 129 mm 500 meters : 110 mm 1000 meters : 90 mm 1500 meters : 74 mm 2000 meters : 56 mm EPS mod 43 MV: 390 m/s filling: 58% cyclonite, 40,5% TNT 1,5% wax Weight: 14 kg Penetration 140 mm at flat angle of attack at any range 121 mm at 30° angle of attack at any range 70 mm at 60° angle of attack at any range EP mod 42 Spalling effects up to plates 130 mm thick at flat angle of attack 102/35 This gun is a WWI naval gun used by regia marina on subs and destroyers. Thanks to the high MV velocity and shell weight could not only defeat ships armor but also tank armor. Italians decided to put the gun on a Cannon truck for anti tank role. Proved to be absolutely devastating against crusaders during north africa campaign destroing 15 of them at range without a single loss, but could easily take on much more heavily armored targets. APC shell Weight of the shell: 16 kg MV: 775 m/s penetration against flat angle of attack ( 90°) 10 meters : 206 mm 500 meters : 178 mm 1000 meters : 168 mm 1500 meters : 153 mm 2000 meters : 137 mm HE weight: 13,7 kg MV: 775 m/s Filling: 2.3 kg of TNT 37/54 AT gun APCBC round MV: 871 m/s Weight of the penetrator: 698 grams Weight of the filler: 23 grams of TNT Penetration at flat angle of attack 100 meters : 78 mm 500 meters : 67 mm 1000 meters : 54 mm 1500 meters : 43 mm 2000 meters : 34 mm 37/40 AT gun APCBC round MV: 640 m/s Weigh of the penetrator: 698 grams weight of the filler: 23 grams of TNT Penetration at flat angle of attack 100 meters : 56 mm 500 meters : 48 mm 1000 meters : 36 mm 1500 meters : 25 mm 2000 meters : 11 mm 37/40 HE Weight: 677 grams Filling: 41,5 grams of TNT 20/65 BREDA this 20 mm fast firing cannon was used on a great variation of italian vehicles, many on SPAA. This gun was also used on a sigle CV33 tankette modified for the Anti tank combat Rate of fire: 240 shot per minute gun weight: 69.3 kg max range: 5.5 km ( in anti air engagements) 1.5 km ( in anti tank combat) 20 X138B 20/65 AP MV: 850 m/s Weight of the Penetrator: 135 grams Filling: 1.6 grams of PETN Penetration 10 meters: 52 mm 500 meters: 35 mm 1000 meters: 18 mm 20 X 138B 20/65 APCR MV: 1216 m/s Weight of the Penetrator: 100 gr Penetration 10 meters : 86 mm 100 meters : 85 mm 500 meters : 48 mm 1000 meters : 30 mm 1500 meters : 25 mm 2000 meters : 22 mm 90mm Cockerill MKIII APFSDS-T Name: M652A1 APFSDS-T weight of sabot: 2.5 kg total round weight: 7,2 kg round lenght: 600 mm MV: 1200 m/sec Penetration:(10/100/500/1000/1500/2000 meters): 120 mm at 60° at 1000 meters 100 mm at 60° at 1500 meters HEAT-T Name: M620A1 HEAT Weight: 4,10 kg Filling: 0.50 kg of Comp B Penetration 260 mm all ranges 0° 127 mm all ranges 60°