M4A3(76)W - first impressions

[humble]

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

(Image removed from quote.)


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.

Actually the muzzle blast (generate dust cloud) created visibility issues for both the firefly and 76mm sherman that effected time between shots under most circumstances and is actually reflected in some of the numbers. It's not just the time to load the round but the time to reacquire the target...

[Karnak]

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.

I thought they'd fixed that in the /85 and that its turret had a floor that rotated with it.  Guess not, or not in all cases.

[Pongo]

Actually I did to, I thought the 85 had a turret basket, wiki says that was an 85 but I do have my doubts.

[Karnak]

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if that were actually a /76 or an incomplete /85 or a hybrid restoration.

[E25280]

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.

Read a book.  The listed ROF of the M3 was 20 rounds per minute.  The ROF for the 76mm M1 was 15-20 rounds per minute.

Or at least look at Wiki.  The page lists the various things they had to do to the Sherman just to get the 17lbr to fit, which means less space and degraded ergonomics.  And then there is this part:

The 17 pounder travelled 40 inches back as it absorbed the recoil of the blast.

Compare that to this statement in the book I linked.

Maximum recoil length on the 75mm main gun topped out at 14 inches, with the normal recoil length proving to be only 11 5/8 inches

And i've seen several unsourced statements in other forums that the typical rate of fire of the 17 lbr was half that of the US 76mm M1 for reasons of the poor positioning of the gun inside the tank combined with length of round, more cramped conditions and relatively long recoil time.

[gyrene81]

In other words: Insufficient data

"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.

Ok I'll play the game Lusche. Not insufficient data, just reflective of the data I have of which all I can do is repeat.  

Projectile weights for the U.S. 75mm and 76mm are cartridge weights...the rest I'm not positive of and full dimensions I'm still researching since all I have are copies of data tables without the full publication. Information I used several years back for another purpose.

Appears that Pongo stumbled across some data in wikipedia that I did not bother looking at since it is not usually considered a reliable source...but I'm guessing validity depends on who's doing the talking...and who's doing the intardnet searches around here.

I've actually stumbled across some footage that should somewhat support the fast reload times on the 75mm Sherman tank as reflected in AH (although 3.6 seconds is still extremely fast). Start at 4:04 on this clip and watch carefully.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXh1bnO9qDo&feature=related

Then watch episodes 3/5 and 4/5.

But it's from the history channel so take it for what it's worth.

Actually the muzzle blast (generate dust cloud) created visibility issues for both the firefly and 76mm sherman that effected time between shots under most circumstances and is actually reflected in some of the numbers. It's not just the time to load the round but the time to reacquire the target...

I thought the discussion was reload times, not the variables that are not or cannot be replicated in AH. If the muzzle blast is being reflected in the reload times of the tanks...the Tiger should be one of the top two slowest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBfv4uT5Mfg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59VPY3xiUNg&feature=related

Read a book.  The listed ROF of the M3 was 20 rounds per minute.  The ROF for the 76mm M1 was 15-20 rounds per minute.

Or at least look at Wiki.  The page lists the various things they had to do to the Sherman just to get the 17lbr to fit, which means less space and degraded ergonomics.  And then there is this part:

Compare that to this statement in the book I linked.

And i've seen several unsourced statements in other forums that the typical rate of fire of the 17 lbr was half that of the US 76mm M1 for reasons of the poor positioning of the gun inside the tank combined with length of round, more cramped conditions and relatively long recoil time.

Read more than that...and the 20 rounds per minute for the M3 was "optimal maxium"...which does not reflect the 3.6 seconds that occurs in AH. But then the video I posted for Lusche, shows the empty shell gets auto ejected...and 10 rounds standing upright inside the turret, known as "ready rounds"...so what do you want to believe?

[WWhiskey]

Holy cow!   are we really talking about 4/10nths of a second reload time?, the 76 should be slower than the 75,,, by maybe 2/10nths of a second! now insult my knowledge of the inside of a tank please!It is hard to believe this conversation is still ongoing!
This sounds more and more like my time, back in the day a bit I will admit, when we were standing outside a bar trying to figure out how many marines were going to fit in an army ambulance!
The answer is as it was,, still not as many as just got hurt!

[gyrene81]

Holy cow!   are we really talking about 4/10nths of a second reload time?, the 76 should be slower than the 75,,, by maybe 2/10nths of a second! now insult my knowledge of the inside of a tank please!It is hard to believe this conversation is still ongoing!
This sounds more and more like my time, back in the day a bit I will admit, when we were standing outside a bar trying to figure out how many marines were going to fit in an army ambulance!
The answer is as it was,, still not as many as just got hurt!

It's actually longer than that but, with that said, I'll leave you geniuses that have never manned a combat tank to enjoy the movie clips and when you're done you can gather back here and pat each other on the fanny to celebrate your infinite wisdom.


The reload times in AH are not fully reflective of real life but what is in the books is all HTC can work with.

[Karnak]

gyrene81,

What the hell is your problem?  You are being massively insulting and dismissive, making massive assumptions about people's knowledge, not posting any supporting evidence or experience of your own and twisting people's words into things they didn't even say.

Grow up, man.

[E25280]

Read more than that...and the 20 rounds per minute for the M3 was "optimal maxium"...which does not reflect the 3.6 seconds that occurs in AH. But then the video I posted for Lusche, shows the empty shell gets auto ejected...and 10 rounds standing upright inside the turret, known as "ready rounds"...so what do you want to believe?

I don't even know what you are trying to say anymore.  20 rounds per minute = 1 round every 3 seconds.  Based on that, one shot every 3.6 seconds seems reasonable, and I don't believe anyone has disputed that.  What was in question is whether the 76mm gun should have the same rate of fire or something slightly slower.  Reason dictates it should be somewhat slower, although how much is still open.

You are the one that made this erroneous statement:

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.

So having seen the film, are you now admitting you were dead wrong?

[WWhiskey]

It's actually longer than that but, with that said, I'll leave you geniuses that have never manned a combat tank to enjoy the movie clips and when you're done you can gather back here and pat each other on the fanny to celebrate your infinite wisdom.


The reload times in AH are not fully reflective of real life but what is in the books is all HTC can work with.

I am just wondering how you decided that nobody but you have ever been inside a tank?
 the difference between 15 and 20 rounds per minute is 1 second, 15 rounds = 1 round every 4 seconds 20 rounds =1 round every 3 seconds
20 rounds is faster than the

Read more than that...and the 20 rounds per minute for the M3 was "optimal maximum"...which does not reflect the 3.6 seconds that occurs in AH. But then the video I posted for Lusche, shows the empty shell gets auto ejected...and 10 rounds standing upright inside the turret, known as "ready rounds"...so what do you want to believe?

your words!
3.6 should lean more to the slow side of 15 to 20 rounds since 3.5 would be halfway! now for aces high if the 75 fired every 3 seconds and the 76 fired every 3,6 wouldn't that show a reduced rate of fire close to the stated amount posted in this very thread?

[Pongo]

Just so we have a full evidence trail.
"Quote from: Pongo on Yesterday at 04:28:34 PM
In real life everything varies, so?
A given tank is inherently able to maintain a quicker rate of fire. The game reflects that, the question is how accurately.
Gyrene.
Wish I had a nickel for everytime someone spouted without a clue. 
"
That his how your lesson in how stupid you are started gyrene.

Now you don't want to play anymore.

"Appears that Pongo stumbled across some data in wikipedia that I did not bother looking at since it is not usually considered a reliable source...but I'm guessing validity depends on who's doing the talking...and who's doing the intardnet searches around here.
"

I didn't get that data from Wikipedia, it was from an online posting of a US Army wartime test comparing the US 76mm and Brit 17 lbder ammo. Is that a reliable source? The phyical dimensions of such rounds are not hard to find. That was 2 minutes work.

I gather, by your attempt to discredit all information provided to you here that you will not man up and apologize to me for your ridiculous slight.
You truly are a disgrace to the name you carry here, but I gather you are used to that.

Pongo.

[Pongo]

back on topic.
E25280
"The listed ROF of the M3 was 20 rounds per minute.  The ROF for the 76mm M1 was 15-20 rounds per minute."
That sounds right, the 76 is not huge like an L70 round or a 17lb round, but its longer enough that it would have some impact.

Karnak, about the T34 85, I guess not, or not according to this kit and Steve Zaloga, who knows a bit about it.

[Karnak]

By that kit it looks like the main improvement from an ergonomics standpoint is a large increase in the number of ready rounds as compared to the T-34/76, delaying the need to open up the boxes that make up the floor.  Still leaves the commander, gunner and loader shuffling awkwardly around unless there are seats keeping their feet off the floor.

[Pongo]

I think there may be a seat for the commander missing due to the cut out, and one for the loader hidden behind the breach.
Just having a dedicated commander is a huge improvement.