tiger

[BigPlay]

See Rule #4

[E25280]

See Rule #4

[dirt911]

oh for goodness sakes just add the m1 abrahms

[rabbidrabbit]

This thread is full of special.

[theNewB]

dirt911 - plz tipe proprly uterwize ppl dunt undarstands u. as to your post, firefly needs higher perk until then tiger has its uses but not many.

Bigplay ---

PzKpfw VI E Tiger

Hull Rear - 82@20°

Hull Bottom - 25@90°

Turret Rear - 80@90°

heres the penetration data for the m8s 37mm M6 gun (best HV 37mm of the war)

37mm M6 L / 53 (All data is displayed in milimeters vs. RHA / FHA plate @ 30°)

AP M74 Shot

Muzzle Velocity - 792 m/s

Penetration at 100m - 71mm / 52 mm
penetration at 500m - 54mm / 40 mm

APC M51B1 Shot

MV - 884 m/s

penetration at 100m - 63mm / 59 mm
and at 500m - 55mm / 52 mm

APC M51B2 Shot

MV - 884 m/s

penetration at 100m - 63mm / 59 mm

500m - 55mm / 52 mm

so on paper tiger can be killed by rear and that includes turret. sides well thats almost the same to penetrate since it was 60-80mm upper and lower hull was 25mm and turret sides 80mm all at 90°. so all in all at 48yrds i can see a tiger being killed for his futile attempt to traverse the turret 180° perhaps he should have slewd tank and turret. cant say dont know terrain or situation other then one dead tiger heh.

People need to read a few books rather then fictitious stories about M8's killing Tiger tanks.

ive read books and you take all of them with a grain of salt and compaire and really its up to you to read the evidence,documents,charts and make up your own mind with as much information as possible instead of saying "it was this way" when in reality history is never like that.

and moot i would LOVE historic optics and 100% agree it would be worth those high perks. Just might see IVHs and Tigers only if that happens

and heres 1 refrence site that got me started a long time ago about tanks and more importantly the data behind it not just eye witness reports or AARs or books that always seem to make something what it wasnt, or in most cases lack of detail, minus the few that are well researched and have added those extra details in. http://www.wwiivehicles.com/default.asp

and the people who were trying to prove him wrong..give actual facts and docs. it helps a lot more then the "your not educated enough so ill just flame you for it instead" attitude. BTW when i 1st read that AAR (quite some time ago) i WAS skeptical but with the data it is very plausable givin the ammo type and range and a dash of luck and guts...or insanity not sure which they go together well in some situations.

[E25280]

Bigplay, I wasn't going to say anything else because you are obviously confused.  But I have a few minutes, so let us review:

I had an M8 turret me while in a T-34/85. This M8 can up behind me and by the time I got the barrel swung around my turret was out. No way on God's green earth that should ever happen no matter how many shots he takes.

What makes you say that?

Why because driving a T-34/76 onto a enemy field or town with all the field ack shooting at you doesn't kill you or your turret as quickly as a lone M8 shooting 1 37mm round at a time at a T-34/85. No way 5 hits from a 37mm should be able to do that. That's why .

You do realize that enemy field and town ack is firing HE, not AP, right?

Also for the other comment about T-34's and ack compared to a M8 firing ap 37mm. I think 5 37mm acks hitting a tank at the same time would do more damage then 3 ap rounds from a M8.

So if I throw 5 spitballs at you and they all hit you, this is more devastating to your body than a single bullet from a .22?

spitballs, town / field ack will track a T-34 will spitballs?

Since you have difficulty keeping up, let me recap . . .

Your original complaint, as you can see, is that the M-8 got your turret.  Nice try to deflect attention from your error by changing the subject to tracking instead of turretting.  But fail.

Town and field ack fire high explosive rounds, not armor piercing rounds.  An M-8 shooting at your turret is in all likelihood firing AP rounds.  Therefore, the M-8 is going to have a better chance at penetrating your armor and disabling your turret, especially if hitting the sides or rear of your T-34/85's turret -- which we know he did, because you say "he can [sic] up behind me" and "by the time I got my barrel swung around."

But, you are right, I shouldn't be telling you to read a book -- "think logically" would be more appropriate.

[Ack-Ack]

Hmmm.....

This action was reported to Major Donald P Boyer Jr. S3, 38th Armored Infantry Battalion, by Captain W.H. Anstey (Commanding Company A, 38th Armored Infantry Battalion) who witnessed the engagement.

Yep, the unit was part of the 7th AD and it happened in Belgium in December of 1944.

Came across another story of a M5A1 light tank taking out a Tiger II with its 37mm main gun when two of them fired on a Tiger II tank from elevated positions (firing down onto the Tiger II turret and rear compartment) but nothing else other than "a M5A1 tank driver told me this story of..."


ack-ack

[humble]

but think about it tiger was built in a time where no other tank could kill it tiger was built too sweep all before it and keep on. eventually allied designers and tank crews became so desparete that, they were using ground troops too capture these things.

after capturing these tanks and many tests on 102mm armour only one allied gun could penetrare all the way through the armour,The QF 17 pounder a british gun but the british had no tanks at the time too mount it on.
So the american designers after studying the power too weight ratio of the sherman and weight of the gun mounted it on a sherman naming it the firefly this tank was excellent proving effective against tiger 1 although it still faced one problem sherman couldnt with stand an 88mm hit many crews of the day were not trained to deal with a tiger meaning still,even though the right gun was there the tank was there and all
it still could sweep all before it.





                                                                  THE END

I'm afraid your a bit clueless about the realities of armored warfare. As a single example during the initial German advance on Bastogne many fractured allied units were thrown into the mix. US M-10's played a critical role and scored numerous kills on both panther and tiger tanks. Google 644 TD Bn and you'll find tremendous exploits in defense of the Elsenborn ridge....no tank ever "swept all before it". You simply want a "god mode" tank...go play quake

[stephen]

I put an 88mm into the side of an M4 at less than 500 yards, just above the tracks...... he turned his gun over and blasted me out of my Tiger, and back into the tower and continued merrily on his way.

Issues are one thing, but in real life 88m's dont give a hoot about lag, who's a better gunner, or armor thickness under 500yds....they smash through you and out the other side.
I dont want an uber tank, I want one who's merrits are reflective of thier actual performance.  The Tiger is obviously suffering in game, and somthing should be done to either it, or the game itself.

Personaly id like to see the 88mm instantly track a tank if it hits the side, or at-least have a good chance of doing so, mabey a little better terrain would help it as well, it seems to be a vehicle more suited to open country......

[BigPlay]

I put an 88mm into the side of an M4 at less than 500 yards, just above the tracks...... he turned his gun over and blasted me out of my Tiger, and back into the tower and continued merrily on his way.

Issues are one thing, but in real life 88m's dont give a hoot about lag, who's a better gunner, or armor thickness under 500yds....they smash through you and out the other side.
I dont want an uber tank, I want one who's merrits are reflective of thier actual performance.  The Tiger is obviously suffering in game, and somthing should be done to either it, or the game itself.

Personaly id like to see the 88mm instantly track a tank if it hits the side, or at-least have a good chance of doing so, mabey a little better terrain would help it as well, it seems to be a vehicle more suited to open country......

That is a very good point you just made however watch and see what kind of responce you get from the peanut gallery.

[stephen]

I sincerly hope HT doesnt put much stock into how many posts somone has made, even monkeys can babble...

[Die Hard]

Unlike smaller caliber tank AP rounds and APCR/HVAP rounds the standard KwK 36 Pzgr. 39 (APCBC) round had an explosive filler, so it wouldn't go through a tank; it would go into a tank and explode. The result should be obvious to everyone.

As a side note I'll add that the German 75 mm rounds also had explosive fillers, as did the American 75 mm, 76 mm and 90 mm APCBC rounds. However the British found that the explosive filler in the 76 mm was unreliable and removed it in their tanks.

[Die Hard]

Bigplay ---

PzKpfw VI E Tiger

Hull Rear - 82@20°

Hull Bottom - 25@90°

Turret Rear - 80@90°

heres the penetration data for the m8s 37mm M6 gun (best HV 37mm of the war)

37mm M6 L / 53 (All data is displayed in milimeters vs. RHA / FHA plate @ 30°)

AP M74 Shot

Muzzle Velocity - 792 m/s

Penetration at 100m - 71mm / 52 mm
penetration at 500m - 54mm / 40 mm

APC M51B1 Shot

MV - 884 m/s

penetration at 100m - 63mm / 59 mm
and at 500m - 55mm / 52 mm

APC M51B2 Shot

MV - 884 m/s

penetration at 100m - 63mm / 59 mm

500m - 55mm / 52 mm

so on paper tiger can be killed by rear and that includes turret. sides well thats almost the same to penetrate since it was 60-80mm upper and lower hull was 25mm and turret sides 80mm all at 90°. so all in all at 48yrds i can see a tiger being killed for his futile attempt to traverse the turret 180° perhaps he should have slewd tank and turret. cant say dont know terrain or situation other then one dead tiger heh.

You're confusing "lower hull" and "hull bottom". Hull bottom means the underside of the tank. The Tiger had a massive one-piece rear plate of 80 mm. I don't see how a 37 mm weapon could penetrate the Tiger's armor. In addition to the Tiger's armor being extremely thick it was also of very high quality, and it over match the 37 mm round by a ridiculous 2.16:1.






You can clearly see the massive plate and the armor shrouds protecting the exhaust ports.

[moot]

I sincerly hope HT doesnt put much stock into how many posts somone has made, even monkeys can babble...

Post the film.

[Jabberwock]

You're confusing "lower hull" and "hull bottom". Hull bottom means the underside of the tank. The Tiger had a massive one-piece rear plate of 80 mm. I don't see how a 37 mm weapon could penetrate the Tiger's armor. In addition to the Tiger's armor being extremely thick it was also of very high quality, and it over match the 37 mm round by a ridiculous 2.16:1.

Not universally of very high quality.

In a report on a Tiger I captured by the British in North Africa, they noted that the 80 mm of armour plate actually only gave the equivalent of 64 mm of RHA protection, due to flaws in the armour quality. 

Best penetration of US 37 mm (L57) I've found is 71 mm RHA/ 53 mm FHA at 100 m with M74 shot, or 63/59 mm with M51b1/B2 APCBC

With flawed armour, a 37 mm may indeed kill a Tiger from the sides or rear. Stranger things have happened in war...