The British 75 mm problem

TLDR; no APHE for Sherman II, give APHE to the Cromwell Vs, Valentine XI, Churchill VIIs & Excelsior. Or just don’t depict faulty fuzes at all, like the way T-34 transmissions don’t eat their own gears.

Bug report; British 75 mm APHE missing

Would you like to see late-war (1944-1945) British tanks gain M61 APHE?

  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

image
Shot, APC M61 both with and without explosive filler, from the Churchill VII Armaments Pamphlet (Provisional), July 1945

Those of us who play Britain in the low BRs know the pain;

“YES, A HIT!”

The translation is; “You are about to be one-shot by APHE”.

Almost all British equipment from Low BRs up to 4.7 relies upon high velocity, high penetration solid shot and the internal shrapnel it produces to destroy components and kill knock out enemy crews. High-performance British guns such as the 2-pdr, 6-pdr, and the legendary Ordnance QF 17-pdr successfully employ this philosophy to destroy enemy armour at their respective BR ranges.

Here enters the ugly duckling - the Ordnance QF 75 mm gun.

image

Firstly, in real life the QF 75 was a decent general-purpose gun, it had the most effective high explosive round of all British armour, and maintained the ability to defeat light and medium enemy armour. Likewise the ammunition commonality with the Americans was essential, ensuring that British tanks would be able to access US ammo supply in theatre.

This doesn’t mean a whole lot in War Thunder. For one thing there are no static targets or infantry, and vehicles equipped with the QF 75 are required to engage constantly in tank-on-tank combat (which is fine, that’s why we’re all here).

image

So what’s the issue?

The issue is an artificial restriction on the QF 75, which disregards primary sources and bug reports in favour of a decision to add “flavour” to the game. Following the failure of the APHE rework, this ammunition continues to perform in a highly effective manner that defies the laws of physics which War Thunder does try very hard to simulate. Instead of a fragmentation cone, APHE will detonate spherically and massively increase the chance of a one-hit kill.

And while Britain has five vehicles equipped with the QF 75, the M61 with APHE filler is available only to one; the Sherman II. The historical ammunition commonality on which the QF 75 relied is thrown out the window, as if British Shermans somehow had access to a different logistics train to the rest of the Royal Armoured Corps.

The Sherman II that we have is recogniseable as a very early model by its narrow mantlet, the missing loader’s hatch and 2in bomb thrower, and small-hatch cast hull. This tank would have entered British service in 1942, precisely when the fuze of the M61 APHE round was still unreliable, and the British requirement for high explosive material reputedly led them to removing the filler from the incoming American ammunition. Even in the US, the fuzing issue led to batches of M61 being produced without HE filler until the problem could be resolved. Of all the British 75 mm tanks, this tank should not have APHE!

Fast forward to 1944, the fuzing issues are a fading memory and Allied forces are engaging in the largest amphibious invasion in history. The British Army returns to France equipped with mature and modified US vehicles as well as a variety of domestic designs, the logistics train behind Operation Overlord is phenomenal and fuels the push into France, the Low Countries, and finally Germany.


image

Low-tier US, Russian, and German vehicles all benefit from the APHE game mechanic, and it isn’t fair play to artificially nerf British equipment in this way.

My suggestion is to flip the 75 mm problem on its head;

  1. Remove APHE (and T45) from the 1942 Sherman II as befits its depiction of a tank at Alamein.
  2. Add the M61 APHE to the 1944-1945 Cromwell V, Valentine XI, and Churchill VIIs! These are the late-war tanks that would have received M61 with functional fuzes.

Reports;
Sherman II ammunition incorrect
Churchill VII incorrect ammunition

22 Likes

Make Britain Empire great again !

Grenadier march intensifies

5 Likes

Consider removing the Fuzed APHE from the other M4A1 75 variants? (except M4A1 (75) W (china))

  1. to keep the M4A1s together in capability,

  2. They all are lacking a Loader’s hatch, are small-hatch and lacking the Smoke mortar, and have the small Rotor shield , identically to the Sherman II

  3. To Model the service history of M61 throughout its life, within the game, not just within Great Britain

But yes, the QF 75 would really want its APHE, the Churchill VII/Croc especially, would also compliment the playstyle of the Cromwell V greatly

13 Likes

Having the historical APHE would be nice, and would be great for future OQF 75 tanks, added to War Thunder.

Yes, I wouldn’t like to see Canadian 75 mm gun tanks added with the same handicap.

+1

+1!!!

The moment gaijin gives Britain M61 APHE they will also implement the APHE rework.

6 Likes

Worthy tradeoff

7 Likes

Worth it

7 Likes
2 Likes

Explosive filler for Britain? Thoust speaks of heresy

1 Like

From the Sherman 75 Armament Training Pamphlet, January 1945. Due to the normal delay between production of equipment, and the evaluation and production of manuals, this late-war document would also apply to British tanks that fought in 1944.

The two types (filled and unfilled) of M61 APC are described on page 134.

Cover

image

image
image

1 Like

New report, in an attempt to claim the M61 APHE that is rightfully ours;

British 75 mm APHE missing

7 Likes

Sometime, some heresy is the beginning of the Truth

Only issue i see with this, is that it would mean buffing british tanks. And it is well known gaijin do not like doing that at all

I dont think having ap is a problem. Aim better or accept tradeoffs.

1 Like

There are no tradeoffs with 75mm AP vs APHE. The velocity is the same, the reload is the same, the pen is actually marginally worse on the AP compared to the APHE. There is not one single benefit or tradeoff to using the AP.

I love having to mantlet T-34s one crewman at a time, thank you for your exceedingly valuable comment.

3 Likes

Nah. Sometimes you get two at a time. Clearly it’s just a skill issue.