Jump to content

That proves it then... 88 only has  84mm of penetration at 100m on the is4's armor, considering that the is4 has near 60 degree slope. Not even close to penning,


I bellieve that German would probsbly use APCR which has better penetration (274/237 mm 0°/30° at 100m). Perhaps not to penetrate front hull but maybe have chance to damage the front turret (250mm but not shure about the slope).

Note, that Tiger 2 front armor was 150mm at 50° (100mm at 50° for the lower part) and turret armor 180mm at 10°.

Considering that IS tanks penetration was 162mm 30° at 100m with best ammunition, they maybe could penetrate the lover part.

Anyway, I think this combat would be about flanking/immobilizing enemy rather then head to head.
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with APCR (although I believe the Germans referred to theirs as HVAP,) wwas that they had poor accuracy at great distances, and tended to lose velocity quickly due to their lower mass.  When your advantage is great accuracy and penetration at long range, using a shell which is less effective at long range seems like a bad idea.

 

As to the Russian's ability to kill German tanks, they did not, strictly speaking, need to penetrate the armor to kill them:

http://tankarchives.blogspot.com/2013/03/is-2-vs-german-big-cats.html

 

A 122mm HE shell was capable of sending a foot-wide chunk of metal spinning around the interior of the tank, breaking half of its welding seams and setting it on fire.

 

Generally speaking, I think that high tier battles will be more of a matter of who shoots first.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that higher doesnt mean better, BUT the 88 was only good for shermans which very LITTLE armor. Yeah they could pen them at range, but thats like shooting a shotgun at a waterbottle... I just feel it seems kind of odd.

wow...you really don't know your history....an 88 could pen a helluva lot of things with effect, kv-1'skv-2's,T-34's,t-70's,M3's,churchills,coventors,matildas,and more........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys do know that the IS-3 and IS-4 are postwar tanks, right? That the IS-3 participated in the Victory parade in Berlin on the 7th September 1945 does not make it a wartime tank.


developed in 1944, prototypes ready during 1944, build during may 1945 (350 before VE day), first issued to tank regiments at the time of the battle of berlin [with little to no combat at berlin, according to Zaloga], was deployed in manchuria against the japanese. Sounds like a wartime tank to me.
 

The problem with APCR (although I believe the Germans referred to theirs as HVAP,)

I don't think the germans used an american term :Ps

it was called "Panzergranate 40" and the term ("APCR") was "Hartkerngeschoss" afaik.

Edited by Wenin
  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

developed in 1944, build during may 1945, was deployed in manchuria against the japanese. Sounds like a wartime tank to me.

 

I heard the deployment in Manchuria is doubtful.

Edited by Blackart
  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard the deployment in Manchuria is doubtful.

 

not that they needed it.

 

However as far as i know. Russian tanks basically suffered from the same problem late war german tanks did that the steel was hard and therefore spalling would be just as big of a problem to them as it would for the Germans.

So wouldn't the most convenient solution be something like this:

 

Stuh42e.jpg

 

so just start lobbing Howitzer HE shells at it should do the trick right?

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard the deployment in Manchuria is doubtful.

Have you a source?

Zaloga only says "Other sources indicate that IS-3 heavy tanks were used in the August 1945 assault on the japanese in Manchuria" and I don't have any other books about the IS-3

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with APCR (although I believe the Germans referred to theirs as HVAP,) wwas that they had poor accuracy at great distances, and tended to lose velocity quickly due to their lower mass.  When your advantage is great accuracy and penetration at long range, using a shell which is less effective at long range seems like a bad idea.
 
As to the Russian's ability to kill German tanks, they did not, strictly speaking, need to penetrate the armor to kill them:
http://tankarchives.blogspot.com/2013/03/is-2-vs-german-big-cats.html
 
A 122mm HE shell was capable of sending a foot-wide chunk of metal spinning around the interior of the tank, breaking half of its welding seams and setting it on fire.
 
Generally speaking, I think that high tier battles will be more of a matter of who shoots first.


Thanks for that link! Though I'm not fan of these tests. It wad one tank and you can't be sure about condition and it's quality as German had some problems with making the arnor and wields properly at the last months of the war.

  

the 122mm would ideally use the HE rounds to kill the crew and create spalling, rather than use the ineffective AP rounds


I heard about it few times but not sure if it's not only problem of late Germans armor or it works on early Tigers as well.
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, even Jumbo would have problem versus 88mm.

Cuteling ran the calculations using methods listed in WW2 Ballistics and Gunnery, basically the Jumbo's frontal armor is immune to the short 88 at all ranges

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cuteling ran the calculations using methods listed in WW2 Ballistics and Gunnery, basically the Jumbo's frontal armor is immune to the short 88 at all ranges

Yeah, not so much better with APCR

50.jpg?180220551.jpg?64022

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,ok! I'm bit tired of being wrong... :-(
Back to library them..

 

 

 

*Oh, I saw what happened there. I ment Tiger II 88 L/71 ! Since we were comparing Tiger 2 with IS 4 right before so thats it.  Anyway, dint know  that Tiger 1 cant penetrate Jumbos front armour... though never wouldnt argue about it.

Edited by Wenceslas
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I figure it, the "fantasy" Tiger II with 105mm versus IS-4 and whatever T-54 model they've put in is a reasonable "tier 5" matchup.

 

I'm more interested in 1942-1944 tanks. I hope the "normal" KT will be there at tier 4 (in the new 1-5 tiering).

Edited by Cpt_Branko
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

To make it short: For tank combat the 88mm is clearly superior to the russian 122mm

For Aerial combat, a MG151/20 with mineshells is clearly superior to soviet ShVak... in WT, it isn't.

 

Do you really think Gaijin would model and match stuff correctly when it comes to tanks while avoiding it at all costs on Planes?

 

Have you a source?

Zaloga only says "Other sources indicate that IS-3 heavy tanks were used in the August 1945 assault on the japanese in Manchuria" and I don't have any other books about the IS-3

And now tell me, how they did get the IS-4 in WW2... not even bothering with the fact that there's a file named IS-4M.

 

The way I figure it, the "fantasy" Tiger II with 105mm versus IS-4 and whatever T-54 model they've put in is a reasonable "tier 5" matchup.

 

I'm more interested in 1942-1944 tanks. I hope the "normal" KT will be there at tier 4 (in the new 1-5 tiering).

Might be T4... but IS-4 will be there as well. Oh... and Tiger I? Don't expect it to be usable.

  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiger will be useful, I wouldn't worry about that.  And besides, just because you can't pen a tank's front, doesn't mean you cant kill it.  Well aimed shot and blast off a drive wheel, or bust up some road wheels and return rollers, and that tank is immobilized for good.  Gaijin said tracks would likely fix over time, but there's more then one way to immobilize a tank then just shooting track links.  If they do go full realism on the damage models, I have a feeling there's going to be lots of people crying about light tanks doing drive-bys on heavies wheels :)  

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do you really think Gaijin would model and match stuff correctly when it comes to tanks while avoiding it at all costs on Planes?

 

That is a completly different matter.
 

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading all of this , ( soviets and germans had one of the best guns ) what will allies have to counter this ? Seeing as how the tiger can knock almost any tank it faces from a kilometer away , id like to know what gun that allies had could do the same or at least comparable perfomance .

 

Maybe the L/53 90mm on the Pershing ?

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for double post my modem is trololing me

Edited by SteelWings55
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading all of this , ( soviets and germans had one of the best guns ) what will allies have to counter this ? Seeing as how the tiger can knock almost any tank it faces from a kilometer away , id like to know what gun that allies had could do the same or at least comparable perfomance .

 

Maybe the L/53 90mm on the Pershing ?

The Pershing's and Patton's should do the trick. I hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading all of this , ( soviets and germans had one of the best guns ) what will allies have to counter this ? Seeing as how the tiger can knock almost any tank it faces from a kilometer away , id like to know what gun that allies had could do the same or at least comparable perfomance .

 

Maybe the L/53 90mm on the Pershing ?

The 90mm M3 was superior to the L/56 if that's what you're asking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading all of this , ( soviets and germans had one of the best guns ) what will allies have to counter this ? Seeing as how the tiger can knock almost any tank it faces from a kilometer away , id like to know what gun that allies had could do the same or at least comparable perfomance .

 

Maybe the L/53 90mm on the Pershing ?

 

well the Brits will be set really.

A10, Comet, Achilles and firefly all pack the mighty 17 pounder, which is very good against the bigger Kittens and Stalins little tanks.

 

IRL the US had some troubles in the Normandy campaign due to their assumption the Panther was a heavy tank that would be seen in little numbers.

but there are some sherman variants that will do the trick. and the Pershing most likely.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...