Sign in to follow this  
_Yorkie_

Why don't Tommy Cookers brew up regularly?

Why are the Shermans not brewing up in spectacular style like they did historically due to the aviation fuel [high octane] they used in the aviation engines. 

 

Or is this just coming down to a case of confirmation bias? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't half of Panthers brake down in the middle of the fight? How come Ferdinands don't wreck their transmissions when going up-hill?

  • Upvote 24
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't half of Panthers brake down in the middle of the fight? How come Ferdinands don't wreck their transmissions when going up-hill?

 

Thank you for your outstanding contribution. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shermans with the radial engine used the same octane of petrol (80 Octane) that every US Army petrol powered vehicle used.

  • Upvote 6
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are the Shermans not brewing up in spectacular style like they did historically due to the aviation fuel [high octane] they used in the aviation engines. 

 

Or is this just coming down to a case of confirmation bias? 

Most of the time a german gun penetrated the sherman it would hit and ignite the ammo which would cause these explosions this however was fixed when they added the wet storage ammoracks.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are the Shermans not brewing up in spectacular style like they did historically due to the aviation fuel [high octane] they used in the aviation engines. 

 

Or is this just coming down to a case of confirmation bias? 

 

Tanks "brewing up" is usually due to ammunition being hit, not due to fuel fire.

 

That issue was in the first Shermans until the WET ammo racks.

 

*At least this is to the best of my knowledge....

  • Upvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the time when you hear about a Sherman 'brewing up' it was most likely a British one.  The Brits just loved packing anything they could with as much ammo as possible (both tanks and ships, the H.M.S. Hood was destroyed due to poor shell storage) so when a German tank fired on a British Sherman, the Sherman was most likely going to become sweet fireworks.

  • Upvote 6
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That issue was in the first Shermans until the WET ammo racks.

 

But...but...but my sherman with wet racks gets killed by ammo rack >60% of the time in game.  :(s

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But...but...but my sherman with wet racks gets killed by ammo rack >60% of the time in game.  :(s

 

Wet ammo does not confer immunity to shells.

 

:p

 

Wikipedia quote (Please dont kill me) -

 

"Research conducted by the British No. 2 Operational Research Section, after the Normandy campaign, concluded that a Sherman would be set alight 82% of the time following an average of 1.89 penetrations of the tank's armor"

 

"A U.S. Army study in 1945 concluded that only 10–15 percent of wet-stowage Shermans burned when penetrated, compared to 60–80 percent of the older dry-stowage Shermans."

 

Ofc, 10-15% chance when hit per time helps A LOT, but with in-game hit cam, it is not hard for me to smack a Sherman repetitively. In addition, it is unknown in this case whether the tests are generalized between ALL forms of shells. (I find 15% burn chance from 75mm + shells to be.... unlikely. It probably included weapons such as Panzerfaust, Panzershreck, AT guns ranging from 50-128mm)

 

Also, just because it does not result in a catastrophic brew up does not mean people inside survived. If it takes 8 shells to cause a brew up, I am sure by the 4th shell everyone "wont be feeling so well". The 8th shell probably turned everyone into mince.

 

----

 

PS: For this topic, what RoflSeal or Sakuzhi say takes preference over what I say. They know more.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the Shermans used petrol.

 

Just like every single German tank.

 

[spoiler]

panzer-iv-burning-in-french-or-belgian-c

 

panttreffer.jpg

 

Burning_Panzer_V_at_Periers_1944.jpg

 

Tiger-burning-px800.jpg

[/spoiler]

 

Yeah.

  • Upvote 8
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember reading that the early Panthers suffered from a lot of engine fires due to design issues..

Any tank packed full of ammo, a high amount of ammo, is gonna go up. Think of the amount of rounds in a Sherman, or Panther, Tigers etc.. pretty sure that was the thing with Shermans also.

  • Upvote 2
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember reading that the early Panthers suffered from a lot of engine fires due to design issues..

Any tank packed full of ammo, a high amount of ammo, is gonna go up. Think of the amount of rounds in a Sherman, or Panther, Tigers etc.. pretty sure that was the thing with Shermans also.

^Exactly.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because the modules in game are way too strong. Shrapnel should be able to set off near by ammo rack, but they don't right now, you need a direct hit. Wet ammo rack is supposed to protect ammo from shrapnel, not direct hit, in game the wet ammo rack can survive a direct hit regularly.

And crew modules are even more ridiculous, shooting a crew with 30cal in the head only turn him green aka minor damage :facepalm:
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the time when you hear about a Sherman 'brewing up' it was most likely a British one.  The Brits just loved packing anything they could with as much ammo as possible (both tanks and ships, the H.M.S. Hood was destroyed due to poor shell storage) so when a German tank fired on a British Sherman, the Sherman was most likely going to become sweet fireworks.

 

I would call you out on that, but I'm afraid excessive movement may set off a small explosion.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's more of a case of historical myth.

 

Sherman's weaknesses and flammability is greatly exaggerated.  Same with the "5 shermans per 1 Tiger" thing.  I'm not sure why people are so quick to fall for the "Shermans were inferior" line, beyond just sensational cable channels and bad Hollywood movies.  Maybe people like to think of the Americans as the underdogs, so they're quick to believe that myth.

  • Upvote 4
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what has petrol to do with shots in ammo rack ? except last one :Ps

Increased chance of going up in flames as far as im aware.

Edited by Zansibar
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are the Shermans not brewing up in spectacular style like they did historically due to the aviation fuel [high octane] they used in the aviation engines. 

 

Or is this just coming down to a case of confirmation bias? 

 

The early dry stowage Shermans do brew up after 1 or 2 hits to the ammo racks in game.  Which kinda fits with that 1.89 penetration average.  The late hull shermans 47deg single piece front glacis on the other hand, other than the 105, all had moved their ammo racks to the floor under the turret, and had armored wet stowage racks.  Right now, the only Late sherman in game that has the ammo racks in the wrong spot, is the Jumbo 75. 

 

Petrol has nothing to do with brewing up, it had to do with cordite fumes building up in the crew compartment, along with poor ammo stowage choices on the early hull Shermans.  Besides, the Petrol itself isn't what burns, it's the fumes when mixed with the proper amount of oxygen.  You could watch mythbusters and learn that for gods sake, the episode where they were trying to get the gas tank of a vehicle to explode by shooting it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wasn't shermans going up in flames all the time just a myth and not actually true to the extent that it was spread?

Early British Shermans did have a higher chance to explode when shot, but as I said earlier this is because the British stuffed their tanks full of ammunition to the point that basically any hit they took would cause an explosion.  Seriously, sometimes they would have cannon shells under their seats,or sitting next to them unprotected.  It was the same with their ships as well, they often brought extra shells that couldn't fit in their ammo storage and just left them outside of it.  Then they kept wondering why every vehicle they had was exploding so often until they realized they needed to stick with just the ammo bins to keep ammo in.

Edited by JacobIsHusky
  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.