I don’t know about separating them out, they really are the same vehicle, one is more of a temporary version while the other is the finalised version. Other than the gun, nothing else really is different about them. I think it makes more sense to keep it the way it is.
1 Like
Wow, amazing find, well done!
However, that shell is the 80 mm 29/35M. It is a 1935 model, so I think this is the shell for the 80 mm AA gun rather than for the 29/44M tank gun of the 44M Tas (but idk why you’d need an APHECBC round for an AA gun). Considering the tank gun was developed from the AA gun, I would assume this should be compatible with the 29/44M tank gun, but I’m not exactly sure if this is the main round that it would have fired, surely a new more powerful round was made for the 29/44M tank gun? I read that the AP… round of the 80 mm tank gun could penetrate 171 mm of armour, but idk, maybe that’s wrong, maybe it fired this shell.
Edit: On the blueprint it says “lgv.páncélgránát” which probably stands for “légvédelmi páncélgránát” which means “anti-air armour piercing round”. This confirms what I was thinking, this isn’t specifically the round for the 80 mm gun of the 44M Tas but for the 80 mm AA gun instead. Whether the Tas would fire this or something better, I do not know, but it would likely fire something even better than this.
But either way, this gives us a vital starting point for the performance of the 80 mm gun. 872 m/s does seem to be the correct velocity, yes. 156 mm of pen should be enough for a BR of 5.0-5.3. And the 80 mm tank gun would either fire something this strong or even stronger. Btw, did you use this calculator? New formuls for calculating of the armour piercing — War Thunder Wiki
5 Likes
Yeah no. It literally has different armament, it does not matter if it was finalised configuration or not. We have several prototypes in-game, and their production version more or less same situation.
Which is the main factor here, that affects game play and rating.
We had this argument before, however you see it fit. I do not see how you can justify having two vehicles if they are the same.
Yes this is for the 80mm AA gun, the AA gun had HEAT too. The guns had them because of anti tank capabilities same as the 88mm flak (if I am right).
It should be compatible. We dont know if it would be the main round fired, this is the only AP round and there was no development of a new round for the 29/44.M, maybe if the project wasn’t stopped because of the bombing there would be a new shell, but sadly that did not happen.
Yes it says anti air, this is for the 80mm AA guns but could be used by the Tas’s gun, same as the 40mm bofors AP rounds could be used for the Turáns 40mm.
The only problem that I can think of is that maybe the 80mm shell could not handle the pressure, but I am not sure.
Sadly there was no new development for a better round.
Yes I used the calculator you linked.
Edit: The HEAT was not accepted into service for the AA guns but the person who I talked to said that it would have certainly be put into service by the Tas.
6 Likes
I get what you’re saying, and ofc in-game the Tas could certainly be two separate vehicles, but for the sake of having all of the information, history, poll, and discussion regarding the Tas in one place and not having to invent fake names for the tank like “44M Tas Prototype” and “44M Tas Production”, I think it’s simpler to just leave it as it is. I don’t see how separating them out is beneficial.
3 Likes
What do you know about this 80 mm HEAT round? Do you know its penetration or can we calculate it? Would it be more useful than the APHECBC, or would it be like the HEAT round for the 75 mm 43.M gun which is mostly useless against tanks and is used as a HE shell instead?
3 Likes
I would guess the HEAT is based on the German 75mm round, but modified to the 80mm gun, kind of like how Finland did with the BT-42’s gun.
Either way, it’s a WW2 heat round so it likely has only around 80-120mm of pen. A nice alternative to HE but not a primary round. Its APHE-CBC round is quite good, especially post-pen with 230g filler, so the HEAT round will not have a big impact on the vehicle I would wager. Still nice to have though.
5 Likes
I feel like this should not be 5.3 if it was added, the prototype should be 5.3 or 5.0, and the production version should be 6.0.
The shell had a length of 856mm, case length of 559 mm, shell weight of 5.8 kg and the gunpowder charge had a weigth of 515 g.
Also the shell had a velocity of 482 m/s and was effective at 1300m.
It penetrated 90mm of armor at 60 degrees.
The above mentioned infos are estimated.
It is said that this shell had a similar penetration to the AP shell (from the 29/38.M cannon - 750m/s).
Sources:
http://real-j.mtak.hu/11731/1/Haditechnika_2010.pdf at page 307
http://real-j.mtak.hu/11709/1/Haditechnika_1988.pdf at page 42
6 Likes
We dont have information if it was based on it or not.
But you are correct on the penetration part, it is estimated that it penetrated 90mm of armor at an angle of 60 degrees.
4 Likes
Very interesting, that information gives us quite a lot to work with.
I noticed that the charge weight was almost identical to the Italian “EPS M42” HEAT round we already have in the game. 515 vs 513 grams. The muzzle velocity is different but that is to be expected and doesn’t matter gameplay-wise.
When I said charge I meant the gunpowder charge not the TNT.
Sadly I dont have info on how much explosive it had.
4 Likes
Aah, I see. My bad.
3 Likes
Nice, thanks. Are we sure that the 80 mm gun of the Tas could fire this HEAT round? And if the penetration is 90 mm at 60 degrees, then surely it will have much more penetration at 0 degrees right? Maybe 180 mm? Or is this 60 degrees from the horizontal, which would be the 30 degrees column on a War Thunder statcard, in which case the penetration at 0 degrees should be around 120 mm.
4 Likes
It should be usable, same as the 29/35.M AP shell. The HEAT is named 29/42M PR
Its probably from horizontal, so it would be 30 degrees from vertical. Because it is said it has the same pen as the 29/35.M (from the 29/38.M cannon - 750 m/s). 180mm is too much.
4 Likes
I see, thanks. So would that mean around 120 mm of penetration in-game, or would it be more because of Gaijin’s system for calculating penetration? With the previously mentioned calculator, it only has options for AP rounds and APCR, so I guess we can’t use that.
4 Likes
I dont know, I guess it would be the same.
Paper tank,Gaijin won’t add…
you realize we have paper vehicles in warthunder right? japan has the F-16AJ, the Ho-ri and i think a few others
2 Likes
partially built prototype or not fully assembled prototype. not paper… at least get ur definitions right
5 Likes