Where is this German test you are referring to?
Idk. I will try to find it later. It was a field manual like thing. Bsically a chart that showed there can the tiger be peentrated by certain guns.
The appearence of tiger in 42 was what started the development of 85mm anti-tank gun.
6pndr could only pen tiger at extremely close ranges.
Thats why they went for 17pndr.
1 Like
Well till you show it, it’s all anecdotal.
It could pen it from ~600m. I would not call it extremely close range.
I know, i will try to find it when i will have a bit more time.
Ah yes, so all those reports about how 6pndrs stopped being effective around 1943 against tigers and panther and thats what led to addoption of 17pndr?
Pay those pieces of information no mind, some rando on the internet knows better than verifiable historical facts!
This is not the one i said, but currently this is the only i could find. This depicts the Sherman. It shows, that the front can be penetrated up to 250m. In game, you will not pen it at that angle. At very close range, the M61 can pen it, but there is another issue.
I still remember, before switching to formula, M72 solidshot used to have more pen, than M61 APHE. Their pen values vere basically swapped.
You can see it here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190311035418/https://wiki.warthunder.com/M4
Can pen it != it is effective.
Sorry, but if you are unable to spot the difference between them, then maybe visit a doctor.
It isn’t a standardization thing, though. If it was, Gaijin wouldn’t have implemented Bang-Bang fin control to the Igla. The reason Gaijin uses formulas for tank shell performance is to emulate how rounds work in real life while also making that decision as efficient as possible (for the average player’s hardware). Any difference from the performance from real life is either a consequence of limited hardware or lack of detail included into the physics model. The problem is we’re not talking about limitations within the physics model, Gaijin has already implemented PID into the game, it’s literally a simple change in value of one parameter.
TEC isn’t a great source to mention when talking about Russian Bias, he largely parrots anything Gaijin says.
2 Likes
As a russian I closely remember hearing that T-34-76 couldnt scratch a Tiger 1 from front.
That was on firing tests as soon as they got their hands on one, they didnt have APCR back then.
The onle soviet 76,2 that can go through Tiger 1 frontally is the lomger 76,2 seen on that one soviet milk truck for example.
The Russian 76 is nothing like the US 76. They used different ammunition and had different velocities. I believe the US m1 76mm soothing
m62 has 3 times the velocity of the Russian L11 76 shooting it’s APBC.
It talks about the US 75mm not the 76.
Thta is just plain wrong.
I smell the distinct whiff of Gajin-Logik in some posts from the usual suspects.
‘Ahah! Russian gun 76mm - US Gun 76mm - same number! They MUST therefore be identical!’
Alas no. Physics doesn’t work like that.
For the benefit of @O_HOgameplay here’s some assistance. Both of these are 76mm guns. They are not the same.
ONE of them fires a heavier shell a significantly further distance than the other. I’ll leave him to have a good long think about which one it is. Don’t think too long or hard.
Gun ballistic performance relies on a whole score of factors - of which gun calibre is but one.
4 Likes
There is no bias in this game:
lol the cracked window after an APFSDS hitting the frame.
It’s honestly comical at this point how bad the physics engine is.
i think i have similar experience with hesh, but it type 16.
i managed to RICOCHET a hesh to a helicopter. kinda scuffed.
and the fact that hesh did not overpressure that pantsir is a crime on itself
Correct, there is no bias.
In that video there’s bad shot placement.