Destroyer500000

Make The MAUS The Way It Was

I want to let people know that the ingame maus has nothing to do with its real counterpart.I want to make the ingame tank the way it was supposed to be.I have all the documents a man can find and get his hands to.

HERE.WE.GO. :017::vanga:

 

Here are the documents that prove that the pzgr43 had more penetrating power.In there you can also see that a pzgr ts is listed.That is the apds round that this tanks gun used in some tests.It did indeed exist and it could work.It was not a standart round but that is not a problem in war thunders realm.According to my calculations done with the below formula the pzgr43 shell reaches 248mm of penetration at 1000m 0 degrees angle and the pzgr ts reaches 324 at 1000m 0 degrees angle.All these documents come from krupps and porches firing ranges.The sources are written in the documents so dont start yelling that they have no source.And dont tell me that i dont have at least 2 sources.I have listed 3.

Here is the formula for calculating armor penetration in angled or not plates  angle_multiplier.thumb.jpg.ad64f0ab40fe2

Spoiler

128mmpzgrts.thumb.jpg.dd0c6805f6b730638e798820860_discardingsabottypes.jpg.b4596

pg39_penetration.jpg.8eaed0c3f42c2eadd0a401985_bd58bf6a9f991b936d1125b943aa8fe6.

 

9n4rxh23.jpg.f181e73f73a493676ff94d50e2e

rbkpkdku.png.659b080ede9bab1b5d115430e0d

pzt63.jpg.826c841e3cb8edc3b0ae0cfec44b8a

Capture.thumb.PNG.7f37a303ce8ef166bd5247

 

Next comes the armor thickness on the turret front and on the tank in general.The armor was wotan hart n/a for a reason.Yes the modifier may have been the same as on rolled homogenous steal but it was mcuh stronger from that because it was ment to be equipped to battleships.But much greater tensile strength and endurance was delivered.The turret front  was supposed to be 240mm thick wotan hart.Some times tanks got more thickness due to cherry picking.Some times the armor was higher,by a few mms,from what it was supposed to be some times lower and some times it was exatly (no absolute exists lets say it was as close as possible) as much as it was supposed to be.If the turret front in real life came out to be 236 or 238 or 231 or 245 or 280 i dont care.If it was supposed to be 240 wotan hart then thats what we should get.No more no less and no other version.In this case the ingame armor should be 260 or something or just 240 wotan hart but withstand and ricochet shells as if it is 260.Or at least most shells listed against it should say "protection from this shell is 260mm".In the end even the 240 is good.

The sources are michael frontlichs book and an american book about the maus.The first picture is from the first link i posted if i am correct.

Here comes the proof

Spoiler

7.thumb.PNG.a12a85157088d04c16955b72db4b

https://www.makettinfo.hu/forum/upload_20060921/299.1116.1_ARMOR.HTM

58d9c9760db81_Mausturm4.thumb.png.8c2ec3

58d9c96044a76_Mausturm2.thumb.png.4ca456

a6bum3yf.thumb.jpg.9d143447d797a54e75dba

http://www.kbismarck.com/proteccioni.html

20171205_143819.thumb.jpg.c69ea6ad1f99a3

For the upper picture look on the right pages bottom right corner

The books are 

03784.jpg.630e36ccd9107827a1e9073d75d180

pzt63.jpg.cb729d9809d02b690bc9f34691ba8d

txfvZQs.thumb.png.8e4452756206ffc1f33b15

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/maus/index.html

And 2 allied reports

igEZlLp.thumb.png.a2dc0871bbaa0f95d6b790

o6EuKRI.png.7e13d866629fa15548595a2f32a5

 

Now we go to the rangefinder the 360 smoke launcer and the much much better scope this tank had.The zoom was x10 and the tank did indeed have a rangefinder up to 1000 meters.Also the smokelauncer could rotate 360 degrees unlike what we have in game.It was the exact same smoke launcer that was used in the tigers.

Here they come

Spoiler

Unbenannt3.PNG.825daec933baf4aa98daae696

Unbenannt2.PNG.78d6249b46c6f64fb29153033

pzt63.jpg.b2f98845589191dfa5befb1f2d272e

20171205_143832.thumb.jpg.8b729c3496f6f7

jmgdfegj.jpg.7dab0226fe6b6746884cc9d006b

20171205_144341.thumb.jpg.0e2be60c68b7f4

03784.jpg.b3d0054df4089f25f1ed3cf388e69c

And a link telling it was the same as on the tigers http://www.custermen.net/nahvert/nah.htm.You can clearly see from the above pictures that it was the same.

 

We must also take a look at the ventilation shafts that in game are extremely underarmored (if that is even a word) for some reason.I have been killed a multitude of times from people that shot a heatfs round that exploded near the vent shafts.Take a look at these ventilation shafts and tell me if they seem to you as 10mm thick.I suggest making them 50mm thick

And finaly

Spoiler

58d9cedd25528_Roof2.jpg.861493c67813a4de

Roof.thumb.jpg.5bcb35cc560f882538a503208

 

I will end this post with a picture about a suggestion and some final words.This tank was supposed to receive a second turret (i dont count the mockup turret as first) that was better suited for its era.A turret backwards angled that would negate all the shot trap problems and add to the tank a bit more protection to its most frontaly vulnerable spot.A maus 2 or a tier 4 upgrade would not be bad at all considering that many tanks have many of their variants in game.It would not be game braking and it would certainly not give maus players a massive advantage.Its like the porsche-henschel tiger 2 variants.In the extreme case add it as a premium cause why not.This is my suggestion.

Spoiler

20171205_143909.thumb.jpg.d20afae84fbedb

03784.jpg.ca7eab3d073d040939b79e433bfe76

9tgzmg.thumb.jpg.59c134f5aab2ac49268711f

A really long post that was not actually made in an hour but in a year because thats how much i needed to gather all the required documents about our overweight friend.I thank everyone that took the time to read and go through all my documents.

Have a great day ! :017::salute:;):D

 

P.S.According to what is said on this thread about the reload times of the 128mm gun,the reload time of the maus(and the jagdtiger)should be a lot lower from what we have in game,the guy states 16 seconds,on a stock maus let alone an expert and aced one !

 

Edited by Destroyer500000
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for all the hard work. I hope it goes somewhere because I just got my Maus and love it, but its not a great tank. It sees 8.0+ matches nearly 80% of the time and is basically useless in those games.

  • Like 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nell_Lucifer said:

I think the Maus II turm you have there is with the 128 mm L66 or the 170 mm ?
E-100+tank+%25282%2529.png

Edit
WPrsJpcl.png
it seems to be the 15 cm L/67

On frontlichs book its the 150mm gun.On the other picture i guess its the standart maus gun 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just showing my support. That's nice to sum up all the things that are wrong in the game model with a clean new thread.

 

Here are some other sources for that turret front :

Spoiler

OGIqgkx.png

 

o6EuKRI.png

 

Two Allied post-war reports about the Maus. The first one is from the Intelligence Bulletin of March 1946 :

txfvZQs.png

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/maus/index.html

 

igEZlLp.png

 

PS : Interestingly enough, the thickness of the rear hull vary from 160 mm to 180 mm depending on the source. Actually, the only source stating 160 mm for the rear hull is the first Allied report, all the other documents state 180 mm. Anyways, that's not 150 mm like we have in the game.

@Destroyer500000 Maybe could you include that in your post as well ?

Edited by KontaKT
  • Like 4
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for creating this. Let's hope it brings more attention to these issues. You have my full support! :salute:

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, KontaKT said:

Just showing my support. That's nice to sum up all the things that are wrong in the game model with a clean new thread.

 

Here are some other sources for that turret front :

  Hide contents

OGIqgkx.png

 

o6EuKRI.png

 

Two Allied post-war reports about the Maus. The first one is from the Intelligence Bulletin of March 1946 :

txfvZQs.png

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/maus/index.html

 

igEZlLp.png

 

PS : Interestingly enough, the thickness of the rear hull vary from 160 mm to 180 mm depending on the source. Actually, the only source stating 160 mm for the rear hull is the first Allied report, all the other documents state 180 mm. Anyways, that's not 150 mm like we have in the game.

@Destroyer500000 Maybe could you include that in your post as well ?

Sure friend.Ill add your documents tommorow as soon as i wake up :)

3 hours ago, Stuhlfleisch said:

Thank you so much for creating this. Let's hope it brings more attention to these issues. You have my full support! :salute:

Glad to have you on my side :salute:

7 hours ago, SickSix said:

Thank you for all the hard work. I hope it goes somewhere because I just got my Maus and love it, but its not a great tank. It sees 8.0+ matches nearly 80% of the time and is basically useless in those games.

Youre welcome.Indeed it faces 8.0 tanks all the time.I fight with mine every day and it really hurts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, ANDROMADA said:

An impractical machine that would have shortened the War by months from economic hemorrhaging? 

 

Or a tank that would have been lost to mechanical failure long before it would ever see the front lines?

 

First, War Thunder doesn't include reliability in its game, and second, during tests, the tank behaved well due to its efficient suspension and powerpack. The V1 even took a trip inside Berlin.

 

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, KontaKT said:

Just showing my support. That's nice to sum up all the things that are wrong in the game model with a clean new thread.

 

Here are some other sources for that turret front :

  Hide contents

OGIqgkx.png

 

o6EuKRI.png

 

Two Allied post-war reports about the Maus. The first one is from the Intelligence Bulletin of March 1946 :

txfvZQs.png

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/maus/index.html

 

igEZlLp.png

 

PS : Interestingly enough, the thickness of the rear hull vary from 160 mm to 180 mm depending on the source. Actually, the only source stating 160 mm for the rear hull is the first Allied report, all the other documents state 180 mm. Anyways, that's not 150 mm like we have in the game.

@Destroyer500000 Maybe could you include that in your post as well ?

Added

Edited by Destroyer500000
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice post :DD, I hope Gaijin will compensate your efforts.

Just one thing. The 12.8cm KwK44 is indeed underperforming, but not that much. If you use DeMarre, you'd get a penetration of 230mm at 30°. At you get 283mm.

  • Like 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cpl_Stalinium said:

Just one thing. The 12.8cm KwK44 is indeed underperforming, but not that much. If you use DeMarre, you'd get a penetration of 230mm at 30°. At you get 283mm.

True but the armor hardness the value was obtained from was most likely below 240 BHN (82kg/mm² tensile strenght).

German armor plates above 150mm slowly go from ~240 BHN to around 190 BHN depening on the thickness.

So ~270mm, like in-game, is actually correct.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, VahooDJ said:
Spoiler

Roof.thumb.jpg.5bcb35cc560f882538a503208

 

It is full of holes and wouldn't provide sufficent protection against HE shrapnels or aircraft cannons.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gaijin, please for the love of all of the Rubles we give you make this canon.  At the VERY LEAST fix the armor metal composition, smoke launcher and scope.

This tank was added long, long ago and I have to agree it could use a re-work.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Cpl_Stalinium said:

Nice post :DD, I hope Gaijin will compensate your efforts.

Just one thing. The 12.8cm KwK44 is indeed underperforming, but not that much. If you use DeMarre, you'd get a penetration of 230mm at 30°. At you get 283mm.

I know that it aint gonna add a lot of penetration but it is much better from the 269 we have right now.But if the apds baby is added athen we are talking about a completly different maus.Well sorta.Because of all the nerfs the apds received but its still better from nothing,324 mm of pen at 0 degrees at 1000m is pretty darn good.

 

12 hours ago, KillaKiwi said:

It is full of holes and wouldn't provide sufficent protection against HE shrapnels or aircraft cannons.

Yea but that doesnt mean that it wouldnt protect the fuel tanks from igniting.Its Some srapnels may enter but it is not a one shot kill.

 

15 hours ago, KillaKiwi said:

True but the armor hardness the value was obtained from was most likely below 240 BHN (82kg/mm² tensile strenght).

German armor plates above 150mm slowly go from ~240 BHN to around 190 BHN depening on the thickness.

So ~270mm, like in-game, is actually correct.

Explain in greater detail please

Edited by Destroyer500000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, KillaKiwi said:

It is full of holes and wouldn't provide sufficent protection against HE shrapnels or aircraft cannons.

 

And so, the T29, T32 and so on and on has holes to, behind the tank, where the engine is, but still it gives armor of 25.4 mm of armor for T32 and 38.1 mm for T29 and you can actually see the engine through the ventilation holes.

Edited by VahooDJ
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, KillaKiwi said:

True but the armor hardness the value was obtained from was most likely below 240 BHN (82kg/mm² tensile strenght).

German armor plates above 150mm slowly go from ~240 BHN to around 190 BHN depening on the thickness.

So ~270mm, like in-game, is actually correct.

Yes explain, and why would it apply only to German steel plates ?

 

A thick plate of Metal will never have an homogenous hardness through all it's thickness. The outerpart of a metal plate will always be harder on the outer surface than within it's thickness. The thicker the plate is and the more tender the center of the plate will be in relation to it's outer surface.

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, VahooDJ said:

 

And so, the T29, T32 and so on and on has holes to, behind the tank, where the engine is, but still it gives armor of 25.4 mm of armor for T32 and 38.1 mm for T29 and you can actually see the engine through the ventilation holes.

A good point indeed ! 

Edited by Destroyer500000
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tantor57 said:

Yes explain, and why would it apply only to German steel plates ?

 

A thick plate of Metal will never have an homogenous hardness through all it's thickness. The outerpart of a metal plate will always be harder on the outer surface than within it's thickness. The thicker the plate is and the more tender the center of the plate will be in relation to it's outer surface.

The specification for any good quality homogenous armour calls for a uniform hardness throughout its thickness. If it isnt, its by definition a production flaw and we dont model those is the game. 

What he was referring to is the fact that thicker plates need to be heat treated to a lower hardness(throughout) compared to the thinner ones to obtain optimal resistance to penetration. It's actually a good thing (at least for full bore sized shells eg. not subcaliber) because a thick plate that is as hard as a thinner one would have lower resistance compared to somewhat softer one(well at least for matching and overmatching projectiles ex. 100mm vs 122mm cal shell). It's complicated and even I dont know the specific physics of it, but if you make a small scale model of the full size tank round and fire it at a relatively sized armour plate, it will perform differently because of the scaling effects, since the speed of sound and propagation of deformation in the plate doesnt change so more material is involved in resisting the round in a small scale model. Its one small part of this.

I'll leave it at this for now. I think this answers the question but ask anyway if you have more.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Peasant_wb said:

The specification for any good quality homogenous armour calls for a uniform hardness throughout its thickness. If it isnt, its by definition a production flaw and we dont model those is the game. 

What he was referring to is the fact that thicker plates need to be heat treated to a lower hardness(throughout) compared to the thinner ones to obtain optimal resistance to penetration. It's actually a good thing (at least for full bore sized shells eg. not subcaliber) because a thick plate that is as hard as a thinner one would have lower resistance compared to somewhat softer one(well at least for matching and overmatching projectiles ex. 100mm vs 122mm cal shell). It's complicated and even I dont know the specific physics of it, but if you make a small scale model of the full size tank round and fire it at a relatively sized armour plate, it will perform differently because of the scaling effects, since the speed of sound and propagation of deformation in the plate doesnt change so more material is involved in resisting the round in a small scale model. Its one small part of this.

I'll leave it at this for now. I think this answers the question but ask anyway if you have more.

In one word how does this affect our overweight friend ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

 

We have listened carefully to your suggestions and we are impressed.

 

The documents provided are unquestionable. Therefore, we will apply this revision for Maus in 1.89. Also, and for reasons of balance, Maus rises to 8.7 BR.

 

Thanks for helping improve Warthunder.

 

-Gaijin

  • Haha 12
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, DarkHearth said:

Hi.

 

We have listened carefully to your suggestions and we are impressed.

 

The documents provided are unquestionable. Therefore, we will apply this revision for Maus in 1.89. Also, and for reasons of balance, Maus rises to 8.7 BR.

 

Thanks for helping improve Warthunder.

 

-Gaijin

Is this true or is this a troll ?

  • Haha 4
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.