m4a3 sherman and some others

[GtoRA2]

See Rule #4

[Ack-Ack]

Oh, I seriously doubt the author of the book The Battle at St. Vith was "there". No actual report has been produced by the author or anyone here.

The book I linked to is a manual used by the US Army in teaching how to use armor in the defense, using the Battle of St. Vith as a text book example.  It is made up entirely of AAR reports from the units that took part in the battle from Dec 17 - 23.  So while the "author" of the text book might not have been there, the AAR reports that make up the book are written by people that were there and had taken part in not only the battle of December but also took part in the recapture of St. Vith a few weeks later in January.

ack-ack

[Die Hard]

The book does not simply recite the reports; the author of the book interprets the reports for us and gives us his conclusion. I read the first edition of that book, and while it is a good read as a tactical and historical analysis, the details like this "thin rear armor" Tiger is best overlooked and forgiven, but should under no circumstance be used as a "source".

[BigPlay]

See Rule #4

[GtoRA2]

See Rules #2, #5

[Skuzzy]

No, the next step is to place all parties involved in the personal attacks on a 1 week ban.

[Angus]

I hope it's not going kaboom, since then my looking-into on the Firefly and later-gunned Shermans fire power (penetration) will need another thread.
Anyway, need some help on this. Tony Williams had a site if I recall right, on ammo, ROF, penetration, kinetic energy, warheads and all. I cannot find it, and am also wondering if it included tank guns. Anyone?

[Skuzzy]

Everyone has been warned.  I see no reason for this to get closed.

[Lusche]

I hope it's not going kaboom, since then my looking-into on the Firefly and later-gunned Shermans fire power (penetration) will need another thread.
Anyway, need some help on this. Tony Williams had a site if I recall right, on ammo, ROF, penetration, kinetic energy, warheads and all. I cannot find it, and am also wondering if it included tank guns. Anyone?

This is Mr. Williams site: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/index.htm but you won't find that much about tank guns

A good tank gun comparison site is: Guns vs. Armor: http://gva.freeweb.hu/index.html

[Die Hard]

Front armor Panzer 4 80MM   Source (http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/tanks-medium/pzkpfw-iv-ausf-h.asp)

Armor Penetration 76MM M62 APC 500 Meter Penetration 116MM  1000 Meter Penetration 106MM

Source M4 (76mm) Sherman Medium Tank 1943-65 Steven Zaloga.

Yeah, those are pretty numbers, but those numbers alone does not reflect reality. The Panzer's 80 mm plate overmatch the 76 mm round. In 1944 this meant that the 76 mm APCBC rounds suffered from the "scatter gap" effect. When the armor equaled or overmatched the shell diameter the 76 mm round would shatter at velocities above about 2,000 fps. US Navy tests during WW II against 3 inch armor using 76mm APCBC, resulted in 50% penetration at about 2,069 fps impact, and then the hits failed from 2,073 fps through 2,376 fps. So the 76mm M1 gun firing an APCBC projectile the shatter gap occurs between about 200 yards and 1,200 yards, when the target plate is 80-100 mm thick and hard, such as typical German vehicle armor. That is why the 76mm M1 gun was a Tiger I killer on the charts, but not in real life. When it was fired in tests it tended not to shatter because American test plate was somewhat soft, so the shatter gap was not revealed by the testing and development program.

Against an 80 mm German plate 76 mm hits would be expected to fail from 200 yards up to 900 yards, and then penetrate from 900 to 1,200 yards. Closer than 200 yards the round would penetrate even when it shattered. From 1,200 yards to 1,500 yards the round would be defeated by the 80 mm plate at any side angle more than 12 degrees. Beyond 1,500 yards the 80 mm plate would defeat the 76 mm round at any angle. These numbers are of course only indicators and many more variables would change them for better or worse, so "lucky shots" could and did happen at any range.

The APCR/HVAP rounds did not suffer from this flaw and easily penetrated the Pz IV's front armor. Unfortunately, HVAP rounds were very scarce until very late-1944/early-1945 and even then they were far from common.

Considering the typical engagement range in 1944 France was 400-600 yards... Yeah, the 76 mm gunned Shermans did have considerable trouble with the Pz IV. Conversely the Pz IV had no problem killing Shermans up to about 2,000 yards and did not suffer from ammunition deficiencies at typical combat ranges.

[BigPlay]

I hope it's not going kaboom, since then my looking-into on the Firefly and later-gunned Shermans fire power (penetration) will need another thread.
Anyway, need some help on this. Tony Williams had a site if I recall right, on ammo, ROF, penetration, kinetic energy, warheads and all. I cannot find it, and am also wondering if it included tank guns. Anyone?

Pentration charts sometimes are not always applicable to battlefield situations. Many units were not provided with the most effective ap rounds or at best were deployed in small increments to tank crews. Take the American 76mm gun. It was really only a deadly gun with the type of AP  ammo that was always in very short supply, so it's effectiveness was many times not all it should have been.

[Die Hard]

I hope it's not going kaboom, since then my looking-into on the Firefly and later-gunned Shermans fire power (penetration) will need another thread.
Anyway, need some help on this. Tony Williams had a site if I recall right, on ammo, ROF, penetration, kinetic energy, warheads and all. I cannot find it, and am also wondering if it included tank guns. Anyone?

The British 17 pounder was a truly excellent weapon. Even better in my opinion than the Panther's KwK 42 which is often laureled as the best tank gun of the war.

[GtoRA2]

Yeah, those are pretty numbers, but those numbers alone does not reflect reality. The Panzer's 80 mm plate overmatch the 76 mm round. In 1944 this meant that the 76 mm APCBC rounds suffered from the "scatter gap" effect. When the armor equaled or overmatched the shell diameter the 76 mm round would shatter at velocities above about 2,000 fps. US Navy tests during WW II against 3 inch armor using 76mm APCBC, resulted in 50% penetration at about 2,069 fps impact, and then the hits failed from 2,073 fps through 2,376 fps. So the 76mm M1 gun firing an APCBC projectile the shatter gap occurs between about 200m and 1200m, when the target plate is 80-100 mm thick and hard, such as typical German vehicle armor. That is why the 76mm M1 gun was a Tiger I killer on the charts, but not in real life. When it was fired in tests it tended not to shatter because American test plate was somewhat soft, so the shatter gap was not revealed by the testing and development program.

Against an 80 mm German plate 76 mm hits would be expected to fail from 200 yards up to 900 yards, and then penetrate from 900 to 1,200 yards. Closer than 200 yards the round would penetrate even when it shattered. From 1,200 yards to 1,500 yards the round would be defeated by the 80 mm plate at any side angle more than 12 degrees. Beyond 1,500 yards the 80 mm plate would defeat the 76 mm round at any angle. These numbers are of course only indicators and many more variables would change them for better or worse, so "lucky shots" could and did happen at any range.

The APCR/HVAP rounds did not suffer from this flaw and easily penetrated the Pz IV's front armor. Unfortunately, HVAP rounds were very scarce until very late-1944/early-1945 and even then they were far from common.

Considering the typical engagement range in 1944 France was 400-600 yards... Yeah, the 76 mm gunned Shermans did have considerable trouble with the Pz IV. Conversely the Pz IV had no problem killing Shermans up to about 2,000 yards and did not suffer from ammunition deficiencies at typical combat ranges.

Maybe you should post some sources like I did so we can see how much of this is your opinion and whats based on sources.


The Panzer 4 H was the only one with 80MM of frontal armor. The rest of the models had 50MM front plates.

The turret armor was also easy to penetrate at only 50MM for the front and none of it has much slope to it.

Hell that site Lusche posted has all the numbers for everyone to check and see. Even the Sherman 75mm gun could handle the Panzer 4 from under 1000 yards.

[ur] http://www.freeweb.hu/gva/weapons/usa_guns5.html[/url]

[GtoRA2]

I am reading a Report I found online called Tankers In Tunisia, it is interesting none the tankers interviewed mention thinking the Panzer III and IV were a match for the Sherman but they all feared the Tiger.

You can find the report at :

Www.lonesentry.com

[GtoRA2]

Direct link to Tankers In Tunisia
http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/tankers/index.html

Interesting read.