VK 36.01 (H) The Tiger I father

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
,
2

My reply about this tank from an other post:

"The VK 3601 with the Waffe 0725 gun would be an absolutely useless tank, due to the gun. Why?

Well, it is a squeeze bore gun, there is already one in the game on a german car. The problem is, that the shell is modelled as APCR.

Now since the last APDS nerf, even APCR started to shatter on everything, and deal absolutley no damage, even if it pens.

To top it all up, Gaijin would implement something like a 6 round ready rack for the tank, and with that 6 round, you might destroy a light tank, and after that, your rate of fire will be horrible, with absolutley no damage.

If gaijin models it as a solidshot, then that tank maybe could be good, since the penetration is close to the Panther’s penetration. But even as solidshot, the damage will be bad at best, so the tank should not have a ready rack (so the reload time does not change depending on the ammo rack location), and a faster reload time, maybe 5s aced, but 6s aced maximum.

The armor would be somewhat OK, but since the side armor is 60mm, you can’t really angle it.
The turret is a Panther-like one, so the mantlet in the middle is ~100mm or so, this means at close range potentially even the american 75mm will pen it, not even talking about the cupola.

So it is a Tiger with everything good taken away from it. Armor, that you can’t angle, no magical inpenetratable mantlet, bad damage.

I would say maybe 4.7. At 5.0, you have the Protopanther, and that is just a better at being a “heavy tank” than the VK 3601."

You have mentioned the 10.5cm and the regular 7.5cm guns.
I would say none of them would make this tank usable.
For my bet, i would say the best option for this is the Waffe gun, but the shell modelled as full calibre solidshot, and the tank could be at 4.7 max. The tank would be bad, but at least usable.

1 Like
3

It really needs to be reviewed.

image
Four types of ammunition were developed for the 7.5 cm Pak 41

  • Pzgr. 41 H.K.: armour piercing tracer ammunition with a tungsten carbide core. Mass 2.58 kg, muzzle velocity 1260 m/s.
  • Pzgr. 41 St.: armour piercing tracer ammunition with a steel core. Mass 3.00 kg, muzzle velocity 1170 m/s.
  • Pzgr. 41 W.: armour piercing tracer ammunition. Mass 2.48 kg, muzzle velocity 1230 m/s.
  • Spgr. 41: high explosive tracer grenade. Mass 2.61 kg, muzzle velocity 900 m/s.

The 7.5 cm Panzerjägerkanone (Pak) 41 was a unique weapon with excellent characteristics that was a threat to both contemporary tanks and post-war vehicles. Only a small number and a lack of tungsten prevented it from showing its full strength. Meanwhile, the appearance of this weapon prompted the USSR to begin working on its own analogues, especially since new types of German tanks were already known, and the performance of the Pak 41 was impressive.

Original article by Vadim Antonov.

But I don’t think the KwK 40 would be a bad option.
So much so that we already have a KV1 with this weapon in 5.0, and it goes well,

2 Likes
4

more squeeze bore guns are always good

3 Likes
5

It… kind of is APCR is it not?
I don’t quite see what’s wrong with that.

5 Likes
6

Because it is not quite APCR, and we all know that APCR sucks in this game.

2 Likes
7

You haven’t explained why it isn’t. In real life it’s called “APCNR” for “Non-Rigid”, but the functionality is the exact same.

It’s a tungsten carbide core enveloped by a jacket made of a lighter material so as to decrease the overall weight of the projectile, increasing its velocity, and delivering the high density, small caliber tungsten carbide core into the plate of armor at said increased velocity.

5 Likes
8

Yes, i know. But again, the issue is, that in game APCR is absolutely trash. It is also “not APCR”, because after the squeeze bore shell leaves the barrel, it looks like a solidshot, those “sticking out fins” are going to be pressed to the “core”. So it is more aerodynamic, than APCR. It is like APDS.

But if you want to play with ta tank, that is
a, has no armor
b, slow
c, can’t do anything, because it uses a uesless ammo

Then this tank is going to be your favourite.

The other reason is taht, knowing Gaijin, they will go for the APCR anyway.

2 Likes
9

I don’t see the problem? Armor seems to be good and this tank can be balanced with the right br. If the gun is that bad then put it at 4.3 where the armor is great

2 Likes
10

Still does not fixes the problem of the shell.

Also, even at 4.3 that armor is not going to be good

1 Like
11

Not all APCR is of arrowhead design. Just as an example, here’s the armor piercing ammunition for the 90 mm M3 cannon, M304 APCR, M82 APCBC and T33 APBC, not in that order.

Spoiler

90 mm M3 Ammunition

You can probably guess which is which, but the point is that the APCR here is not of arrowhead design.

Even some German APCR rounds, such as the ones on the Kwk42 and 43 (and even the Kwk40 from what I can tell), aren’t of arrowhead design and externally just look like normal AP rounds.

Spoiler

Pzgr4042

2 Likes
12

It still does not change the fact that it would be unplayable.

Good luck penetrating a T-34, or even a Sherman with APCR.
Even if it pens, the gamage is just awful.

At least advocate for APDS. That thing at least has less speed drop, and has better angle performance, so you will be able to pen angled armor…

1 Like
13

We don’t need to argue about APCR ammo, just request it to be launched with the good old KwK40

image
image1600×1066 260 KB

3 Likes
14

With that gun, it would be just a slower Panzer 4. It would be better that wth other gun, but again, just play a Panzer 4. it is faster, better armor, and the same gun.

15

Slower ? He is sure ?
It is faster and better armored than the PzIV.
image

And once again I will repeat!
We already have a 5.0 with 100mm of armor using this gun, and it performs well.
image

Imagine a Tiger I engine, carrying 10 tons less.
This is a VK3601

3 Likes
16

I am in a different discussion about the VK 3001, and i was mistaken, i though i was on that forum.

Yes, you are right.

However, i would like to oint out, that you are talking about a KV-1. That KV-1 is just better armored, than the Tiger 1.

Vith the VK’s armor, the problem is the very weak side, turret, and cupola armor. You can angle a Tiger, but you just can’t angle this VK in way to make the front effective, while the side being effective too.
80mm turret front, with a Panther style mantlet is just bad. It is flat, and the mantlet is effective 70-75mm, since it is probably cast armor, and not a black hole mess, like on the Tiger.
50mm cupola? Yes, soviet 45mm go brrrrrrrrrr.

1 Like
17

Maybe this works fine in 4.7 do you think?

18

i would say 4.3. It would be a good 4.3, and a usable 4.7

1 Like
19

+1 gib!!!

1 Like
20

I’m not holding my breath, but if the devs took the time to model APCNR correctly I’d be pleasantly surprised. It’d add some spice to the German tech tree instead of your typical ‘APCBC-HE go brrrr’

1 Like
21

Why dont you copy this over to the real suggestion part?

1 Like