What most, if not all SPAAs? Praga is 1,where is the rest you’re talking about
Ostwind has 49mm pen, as it does not get any of its better AP shells.
All Dusters and other AAs using the same gun get 72mm pen AP-T; ZSU-37 and Phong khong T-34 gets 70mm AP-T and 87mm HVAP; 25mm 72-K on the milk trucks has 57mm AP-T; Leopard 40/70, AMX13 DCA 40, and Lvkv 42 get 93mm pen AP; L-62 ANTI and Lvtdgb m/40 both get a choice of either 79mm AP-T or 68mm SAP - Lvkv 42 also has it but that one will probably see far more use out of the higher pen AP.
WIth this, the Ostwinds are the clear exceptions with the worst AP pen of any SPAA in the 37-40mm class, and it’s not due to a better shell simply not existing. 67mm pen solid shot wouldn’t break the game by any stretch, and the Ostwind complainers would be overjoyed by it probably moving up from 3.3 then.
1 Like
Are there any diagrams of this 37 mm round?
Unfortunately GhostMaxi has not added it to his thread yet, so no. But you can find it on some german vessels with the 37mm FlaK 43:
There is a diagram on his thread for the 110mm pen HVAP shell for the same cannon, but I’m not asking for that unless it came on another vehicle entirely, like the Flakpanzer III. It would be way too strong.
1 Like
I had a nuke in ground battles, flying the B29. A single shot of the 45mm APHE fragged the entire plane. Very cool and fair, anti everything cannon.
3 Likes
Don’t forget the Yak-9UT . I have used it and had it used against me many times. The amount of firepower it has against ANY target is insane. You basically dictate the flow of the game.
1 Like
Me in my flackpanzer 341 sat back and hoping it comes to my favorite ifv.
1 Like
They should give it the 110mm pen HVAP just because it’ll be funny
Its historically accurate though.
With time 45mm at guns became obsolete as at weapons but they kept geing used as infantry guns.
Light to move and very accurate. At 2 km hit pillbox window no problem.
The weapon is accurate, we’re talking about the accuracy when mounted on plane firing in full auto.
The recoil has practically no affect on the plane and you can easily have 3-5 shots hit the same target.
It’s the same deal with the Yak-9T, except that the NS-45 should have even more recoil, making it impractical.
Otherwise the NS-45 would be a straight upgrade over the the NS-37, except the excessive recoil made it unuitable as fighter armament.
2 Likes
apart from the calibre there is no commonality between the aircraft cannon and the ground-mount guns…
Different cartridge, different barrel, different sights, different feed mechanism and of course a very different mount. It’s like comparing RARDEN to GAU-8.
Meanwhile Il-2 with NS-37 was considered a failure because it only achieved hits on a target tank in 43% of trial sorties. And as per ammo spent the accuracy was 2,98%.
That is in perfect weather, on a static target with no aspects like AA or enemy aircraft, and on a slower and more stable aircraft.
2 Likes
WT is a game - not reality.
A long time ago I had a document where the USAF tested M8 rockets vs T34/85 targets in Korea - they got about 6% within a couple of meters/direct hits - and that was in trials as the Il-2 was - with hte target highlighted
1 Like
The only effective at weapon in ww2 were ptab bombs. But even they only had advantage over bombs and rocjets by a couple times. Not even tenfold.
You might want to share a source backing up your claim? Wikipedia is not a reliable source.
Iirc the PTAB 1.5-2.5 were dropped in very large quantities but they were not even mentioned by the Germans as threat to heavy armor in their battle reports…
The IL-2 has wooden wings. The recoil was stretching the structural limit, making it impossible to safely mount NS-45. Recoil would snap the plane off target, so unless you had the plane perfectly aimed, there was no way to hit the target.
Probably fine to attack trains and locomotives but against moving tanks it simply didn’t have the volume of fire needed to be able to score hits reliable.
Maybe that’s actually the reason for NS-45 APCR. A lighter shell would significantly reduce the recoil.
So maybe it was possible for the IL-2 to use the NS-45, when using ammunition that produced less recoil. But it was only mounted on a couple of IL-2s before they abandoned the idea.
This is due to the unfortunate placement of the guns. Low accuracy is due to the asynchronous firing of the wing guns and the large distance of the guns from the longitudinal axis of the aircraft and, as a result, the rocking of the aircraft during firing.
1 Like
Sorry @KillaKiwi, but I mentioned the Il-2-37 trials in the context of accuracy of aircraft-mounted high-caliber guns, since these were some of the few that got properly counted.
Can’t disagree with anything mentioned here, but I honestly don’t believe the accuracy would’ve skyrocketed in the Yak’s context. A significant increase would occur, but we’re talking about multiplying 3% of hits per shot.
I won’t say the number is absolute since I have no way of knowing it at the moment, but I’d guesstimate around 15±5%.
I was just angry about the dude talking of hitting a pillbox’s window from 2km away with an infantry cannon. Like, bruh, I could then say that Merlin III could produce 1,3k horsepower at +12lbs, so a Cromwell could also see similar numbers.
I know. I’m just saying that NS-45 wouldn’t have made it any better.