M4A3(76)W - first impressions

[gyrene81]

gyrene.

Well, I am not a panzer ace like you.
But I have in fact been in many tanks.
M60, Leo 1, M1, Chieftain. But that wouldn't be necessary to see that you are an idiot.
More importantly to this debate.  I can reason.
The game presumes typical performance for many things that would be variable in actual use.
HP for every engine is just typical. For two engines that would expect to be identical they will be different to some extent for every single one. Due to maintenance, how hard they were run the previous day etc. Given the different drags on different airframes due to small things like damage and dirt and different markings.
One armourer does a different head space on his 50 cals that gets a little higher rate of fire. No two units in this game should be identical.
Why decide that is important for one little capability of one unit? The reload of Sherman.
No two Panzer IVHs would every actually reload in exaclty the same time in real life because time is a real number. So its just a matter of precision.
Yet that doesn't concern you.
All you care is that we not try to decide if the typical reload speed of a sherman 75 would probably be quicker then the typical reload speed of a sherman 76.
The "tricks" they used to speed up rate of fire in shermans contributed to them being called ronsons.
But you really haven't added a bit to this debate except blather and insults. But that is fine, I suspect that like as is the case with reasoning and explaining my position, I can insult a lot better then you as well.

I'd give your nickel back but as it stands you still owe me money...school tours to the museum don't count.

Unlike yourself I wanted to do some more research before saying anything further about the loading times since unlike yourself I am not a munitions expert that remembers off the top of my head how much weight difference there is between 75mm and 88mm AP. Perhaps you can enlighten us all with your wealth of information on optimal loading times for each tank...

[Karnak]

gyrene81,

Pongo is, as I recall, ex Canadian Special Forces.

[dirt911]

Well loading speed depends on the speed of the loader.In AH i hate all my loaders they load guns slower than a snail running a foot-race, .The average crew in WW2 most likeley could reload even the 88mm's on the Tiger 1/Tiger 2 around 3-4 seconds reloading (does not count oushing shell from the door on side of turret).

[gyrene81]

gyrene81,

Pongo is, as I recall, ex Canadian Special Forces.

And? That's like Air Force Special Forces...they don't know tanks. If the discussion on modern combat infantry weapons, no problem...but it's not.

Well loading speed depends on the speed of the loader.In AH i hate all my loaders they load guns slower than a snail running a foot-race, .The average crew in WW2 most likeley could reload even the 88mm's on the Tiger 1/Tiger 2 around 3-4 seconds reloading (does not count oushing shell from the door on side of turret).

I would tend to somewhat agree...the Firefly and T/34 76 seem too slow...Tiger is borderline, the AP round weighed 16 or 22 lbs depending on which type after seeing pictures of the gunners position...and assuming the ammo racks are in the same position as a Panzer IV...4 to 5 seconds theoretically should be possible. 8.2 seconds shown for the T/34 76mm, is more like the time it took to load a 105mm in an M60.

[Pongo]

Karnak, just an infantry guy. But thanks.

Gyrene,

Do you think the 75mm Sherman and the 76mm Sherman would have the same rate of fire with the same crew? Given that the 76mm is a much longer round. But that it is fielded in a different turret.
Everything else your saying is just slobber. Say something about the subject.
Your shaming your name sakes with this nonsense. If you know nothing about the question then just stay out of it.

[Lusche]

And? That's like Air Force Special Forces...they don't know tanks. If the discussion on modern combat infantry weapons, no problem...but it's not.

You have been pretty quick in making assumptions about a player supposed knowledge level in this threat as well..

I would tend to somewhat agree...the Firefly and T/34 76 seem too slow...Tiger is borderline, the AP round weighed 16 or 22 lbs depending on which type after seeing pictures of the gunners position...and assuming the ammo racks are in the same position as a Panzer IV...4 to 5 seconds theoretically should be possible. 8.2 seconds shown for the T/34 76mm, is more like the time it took to load a 105mm in an M60.

Pure shell weight is only part of the equation. Total ammo weight can be different for two shells of the same weight. Also length of the round (in combination with general ergonomics/working room), the round being one part or having two seperate ones, as well as what kind if breach action the gun has. And early T-34's didn't even had a dedicated gunner, the commander had to fill that role in addition to his commanding duties.

[Pongo]

gyrene,
If you doubt the reload speed of the T34 76, you should learn something of it.
First issue, 2 man turret.
Second issue, No turret floor, the crew had to shuffle around on the ammo crates to load. Including stepping over the open lids if they never got them closed.

Compressing those ergonomic problems into a slow rate of fire, even though, obviously if the loader has a round in his hand he can load that 76mm as fast as any other gun is a good idea.

I am surprised that an expert like you didn't know those commonly held facts on the T34 76mm turret design.
I guess you really are just an internet searching idiot. You really should bow out of this discussion if you not only do not know anything, but do not realize that you do not know anything.

[AWwrgwy]

gyrene,
If you doubt the reload speed of the T34 76, you should learn something of it.
First issue, 2 man turret.
Second issue, No turret floor, the crew had to shuffle around on the ammo crates to load. Including stepping over the open lids if they never got them closed.

Compressing those ergonomic problems into a slow rate of fire, even though, obviously if the loader has a round in his hand he can load that 76mm as fast as any other gun is a good idea.

I am surprised that an expert like you didn't know those commonly held facts on the T34 76mm turret design.
I guess you really are just an internet searching idiot. You really should bow out of this discussion if you not only do not know anything, but do not realize that you do not know anything.

Ammo crates?

Really?


wrongway

[gyrene81]

Karnak, just an infantry guy. But thanks.

Gyrene,

Do you think the 75mm Sherman and the 76mm Sherman would have the same rate of fire with the same crew? Given that the 76mm is a much longer round. But that it is fielded in a different turret.
Everything else your saying is just slobber. Say something about the subject.
Your shaming your name sakes with this nonsense. If you know nothing about the question then just stay out of it.

gyrene,
If you doubt the reload speed of the T34 76, you should learn something of it.
First issue, 2 man turret.
Second issue, No turret floor, the crew had to shuffle around on the ammo crates to load. Including stepping over the open lids if they never got them closed.

Compressing those ergonomic problems into a slow rate of fire, even though, obviously if the loader has a round in his hand he can load that 76mm as fast as any other gun is a good idea.

I am surprised that an expert like you didn't know those commonly held facts on the T34 76mm turret design.
I guess you really are just an internet searching idiot. You really should bow out of this discussion if you not only do not know anything, but do not realize that you do not know anything.

You fired the first round...and speaking off internet search idiots...ammo crates?  This really looks like ammo crates on the floor to me




All things being equal, same exact crew between the 75mm Sherman and the 76mm Sherman with the T23 turret firing Armor Piercing Capped ammunition...75mm with a 6.79Kg projectile and 76mm with a 7.0Kg projectile...the crew should be able to load the 75mm somewhere around .7 seconds faster than the 76mm. Neither would have been capable of under 4 seconds. It's not just due to the length of the round, shell weight and breech operation are also factors. Even though the larger T23 turret was used on the M4 chassis, it didn't significantly improve the loaders mobility. The VC Firefly 76mm should not be nearly 4 seconds slower than the 75/76mm Shermans and nearly 2 seconds slower than the Panzer IV...unless the crews were historically known to be inept...which I doubt. The T/34 76 reloads at 8.2 seconds when it should be closer to the Panzer IV and veteran T/34 crews said they could fire faster than the Panzers but that's not acceptable evidence. Whether or not they were talking about firing the 3.0Kg APCR round or the 6.3Kg HEAT round I don't know.

The Tiger had AP rounds that had projectiles weighing approximately 16lbs and 22.5lbs...the T/34 85mm fired an AP projectile that weight 9.2Kg...the only thing that would stop the crew from being able to reload as fast as the Tiger would be the location of the ammo racks...the turret had plenty of space for the gunner to operate.


You should stick with Canukian history...much less to know.

[Lusche]

Why do you keep giving projectile weight and do not use total round weights? After all, the loader doesn't not just load the projectile?
And where do you get the 0.7s difference in loading time from?

[gyrene81]

Why do you keep giving projectile weight and do not use total round weights? After all, the loader doesn't not just load the projectile?
And where do you get the 0.7s difference in loading time from?

Projectile weight is the only thing given in any tables...total weight with the shell isn't shown.

The .7 seconds is derived from taking into consideration the added weight, shell length and ammo rack configurations...I probably should have shown it as ~.7 since it could be higher or lower...1 to 2 lbs added weight would not significantly increase the time. Do you have a better idea or some documentation that would say differently?

[Lusche]

Projectile weight is the only thing given in any tables...total weight with the shell isn't shown.

In other words: Insufficient data

The .7 seconds is derived from taking into consideration the added weight, shell length and ammo rack configurations...I probably should have shown it as ~.7 since it could be higher or lower...1 to 2 lbs added weight would not significantly increase the time. Do you have a better idea or some documentation that would say differently?

"taking into consideration" = This very precisely looking number was just something you guessed?

It seems you make very strong claims with not really more background knowledge that I have. Seems you are guessing the same way as we do. You just present your conclusions in a ... "stronger" way.

[Pongo]

Sigh.
You could just admit your clueless now or do I have to make this really ugly.

[Pongo]

the M61 APC round for the 75mm weights 19.92 pounds and is 26.3 inches long.

For comparison the 76mm M62 weighed 24.8 pounds and the 17pdr APCBC weighed 35 lb.

While the two projectiles(m61 and M62) weigh similar amounts the 76.2mm goes 792 meters/second vs the 75mm at 588 m/s.
It is all that powder, leading to a longer case that makes them harder to handle in the tank, and slows down rate of fire.

Just from internet searches, wiki will tell you the round designation, then searching that will show this data pretty quick.

[Pongo]

I should have said about the picture, this is a T34 85 but the 76 is the same. Look at how long those boxes are, you have to open it, pull a round out that is full length of that box and then close the box? and load th round, if the turret traverses you have to shuffle around on those boxes and hope you closed them all.
Most experts like gyrene know all this, he is just being coy and doesn't want to explain things to us that we cannot understand.