New HE round

[Tank-Ace]

Chalenge is asking for a delayed fusing option for HE rounds, meaning after XX amount of time after the round impacts it will explode not after XX amount of time the round will explode after firing.  For example, having a HE round explode .0005 seconds after impact.

ack-ack

Thank you. Finally someone willing to clarify. Makes much more sense now, although still not a whole lot.

This thread is hilarious. Read the OP again and google the terms you don't understand.

Crap... missed the part about Precussion fuze + delay.


Challenge, I appologize for insulting you. I see now that it was uncalled for, and the miscomunication was on my end. However, I still feel your request is, to put it bluntly, a bit stupid.


If I understand you, you were origonally asking to have the ability to set a round's fuze to burst under a moving tank, and now seem to be asking to have the fuze delay detonation for a short period of time after a direct hit, under the impression that instead of having the rounds simply ricochet off and detonate away from the target, the round will mushroom out over a wider area, and increase the effect of spalling.

In the first case, you were citing difficulty in hitting a moving vehicle at extreme range. Your request makes less than no sense in that context, as it would require even more precise aiming, and precise timing. Where you only have to get the correct lead, and close to the exact range in order to disable or destroy a vehicle with a direct hit, in order to achieve a kill (or even have any effect beyond that of a normal HE round), you must have the PRECISE range, so that the shell lands directly in the path of the vehicle, as well as be very precise with a combination of lead and fuze delay.

For the second..... well, if you can score a direct hit with an HE round, why the hell can't you hit with an AP round? About the only times this would be usefull is if you're dinking around with the M8 or Panzer IV F1, and your target's side armor is too thick to penetrate at whatever range you're at, or if you're being profoundly stupid in your method of engaging a Panther, or a Tiger II.



If you're just wishing for this so you can kill Tiger II's without investing either the time and skill, or the perks to do so, I must say I most strongly disagree with this wish. The ability to do so would undermine the point of having perk prices.

[Chalenge]

Chalenge is asking for a delayed fusing option for HE rounds, meaning after XX amount of time after the round impacts it will explode not after XX amount of time the round will explode after firing.  For example, having a HE round explode .0005 seconds after impact.

ack-ack

What I am asking for is the round the various tank units used in actual combat and the way they were used. For instance the British tanks almost never had HE. The Firefly we have has HE. By the time the Firefly came out the British had stopped using HE with the 17pdr so I dont believe the Firefly should have HE. APCBC and APDS yes but not HE. Korea maybe. . .

The russians developed the HE round matched to a specific fuse for use against the Panzers. I have not found where those rounds were ever modified to deal with Tigers or Panthers (not sure they ever met Panthers actually and probably it wouldnt matter). And so on... and so on. . .

[tunnelrat]

 

[Tank-Ace]

What I am asking for is the round the various tank units used in actual combat and the way they were used. For instance the British tanks almost never had HE. The Firefly we have has HE. By the time the Firefly came out the British had stopped using HE with the 17pdr so I dont believe the Firefly should have HE. APCBC and APDS yes but not HE. Korea maybe. . .

Way I heard it was that they didn't have a very good HE shell to start with, and a good one only came out towards the end of the war. If they didn't carry very many HE shells, thats one thing, and I'm sure HTC would be willing to change it.

But I don't see the british just refusing to issue an HE round to the Firefly units.


The russians developed the HE round matched to a specific fuse for use against the Panzers. I have not found where those rounds were ever modified to deal with Tigers or Panthers (not sure they ever met Panthers actually and probably it wouldnt matter). And so on... and so on. . .[/quote]

[Chalenge]

Read some history sometime. The British did not carry HE because it had no effect. The Firefly HE had to increase the wall thickness of the casing which reduced the amount of charge to the point it could not get the job done. By the time they fixed it and got supplies to units there was no more war.

[Ack-Ack]

Around the end of 1944 a HE round was developed for the Firefly but it was still wasn't as potent as the standard Sherman 75mm HE round. 

ack-ack

[Chalenge]

And was not used. The newer explosie type was not loaded into combat area tanks until the Korean era.

[Ack-Ack]

I haven't found any records to indicate the Fireflies were never issued any HE rounds.  I've found numerous references to the Fireflies being issued 17 pdr Mk 1 HE rounds and later, the more effective Mk II HE rounds but that both rounds were weaker than the standard Sherman 75mm HE round.  These were the improvements made to the Mk II HE round according to Tony Williams.

One of the improvements made to the later 17 pdr HE was to drop the muzzle velocity well below that of the AP, enabling them to use thinner-walled shells. However, British HE shells generally had an inferior charge/weight ratio to US ones, because they used cheaper steel to make them from.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

A document entitled Middle East AFV Technical Liaison Letter 25, 16 December 1944 outlined the experience of the 2nd Canadian Armoured Regiment in Italy, this is an excerpt.  Bolded part is from me for emphasis.  It doesn't mention what type of HE round used but I'm guessing it was the Mk I HE round as I don't think the Mk II HE round started to make it to units until 1945.

1. This regiment received 4 Sherman Ic tanks, during a lull in battle, on 5 Oct 44.

 
2. After some discussion, it was decided to allot them all to one squadron, on the basis of one per troop. Since the troop leader normally leads his troop in the sort of close country in which we are now operating, it was decided that the 17 pdr Shermans would be given to the Troop Sergeants. (Squadron organization - 4 troops each 3 tanks).

 
3. Instruction was commenced as soon as the kit had been checked. One officer and one sergeant had just returned from a 17 pdr course at RACTD, having been flown both ways, and, in addition, a very competent sergeant-instructor from RACTD was attached to the Regiment. It was not possible to include firing in the brief training program.

 
4. On 14 Oct the 17 pdr tks saw their first action when this squadron provided close support for an infantry battalion (Hastings and Prince Edward Regiment) in an advance beyond SCOLO RIGOSSA. In the first afternoon this force gained approximately 1500 yds against stubborn resistance. Although the 17 pdr tanks were kept rearmost in their troops, they were called upon to shoot up many houses and dug-outs, and the HE shell was found to be about the same as the 75mm. In the opinion of one troop sergeant it "seems to knock out the back wall of the house"

 
5. An opportunity to observe its hole-punching capabilities came late in this first afternoon. One of the troop corporals spotted a Panther at about 300 yds range. He indicated it to his troop sergeant and meanwhile fired one round of 75 mm AP at it. The troop sergeant's gunner reports that as he laid the 17-pdr on the Panther, its turret was swinging slowly towards him and, as be fired, was still roughly 30 degrees off. Four rounds of 17-pdr AP were fired, all scoring direct hits. The Panther did not brew up, our own infantry patrols, fearing recovery by the enemy, set fire to it during the ensuing night.

 
6. The remains of this tank may be seen at BULGARIA (mr 656045). There are two clean holes in it and three "gouges". One hole is in the side of the gun barrel, approx 3 inches from the mantlet; since there is no hole out the other side of the barrel, and judging from the angle of penetration about 60 deg from normal) it seems probable that this AP round entered the turret via the breech of the gun. The other hole is in the side wall of the turret."

It appears that Firefly crews were issued HE rounds and so it's correct that the Firefly in game has them as well.  Though, I do wonder now which HE round the Firefly comes with in game, is it the Mk I or Mk II HE round?  I guess only HiTech can answer that one.

Do you have any official records that state the contrary?

ack-ack


 

[Chalenge]

Its neither. I believe the only difference in the HE rounds are the blast area. The M4A3-75 for instance should have the same trajectory and penetration as the AP round.

The account of the Firefly units I read indicated that tankers stopped carrying the rounds as they were useless in combat. But if combat is now shooting at buildings (thank you for posting that) then we can keep it. 

[Tank-Ace]

Its neither. I believe the only difference in the HE rounds are the blast area.

Thats just untrue. Either Lusche or SmokinLoon (forget which one, but I think it was Lusche) did some projectile analysis in-game. There are both differences in blast radius and damage done.

The M4A3-75 for instance should have the same trajectory and penetration as the AP round.

This part was a bit unclear. Are you saying the M3 75mm's HE shell should have the same trajectory and penetration (in a discussion of HE shells?  ) as the M3 75mm's AP round? Because depending on the rounds used in game, there should be up to a 170m/s, and as little as a 45m/s difference in muzzle velocities. And given the different shell weight, the trajectory would be difference simply due to the difference in ballistic coefficients.

Or are you saying the M3 75mm gun should have the same trajectory and penetration as the 17lber? Because the only thing shared between the 17lber and the M3 75mm was the caliber group. Projectile dimentions and weight, cartridge length, weight, and propellant load, and barrel length were all different.

The account of the Firefly units I read indicated that tankers stopped carrying the rounds as they were useless in combat. But if combat is now shooting at buildings (thank you for posting that) then we can keep it.

If theres infantry in the buildings, why wouldn't it count as combat? I mean thats really one of the primary purposes of HE shells; to dislodge enemy infantry from cover and buildings, and to smash up fortifications.

[Chalenge]

Kid your teachers have failed you miserably. This topic has ended.

[Tank-Ace]

The M4A3-75 for instance should have the same trajectory and penetration as the AP round.

OK, so what part of this sentence is logical in the context of HE rounds?

M4A3-75 (firing what shell for gods sake!!?!?) should have the same trajectory and penetration as the AP round (Of the M3 75mm? Of the 17lber?!? WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?).


OK, so you just quit? Don't be a dick and rage quit because everyones not just agreeing with you; you threw something out that was fairly out of left field, be prepared to explain it.

[Chalenge]

Look kid. An M4A3-75 is not an M3. I said exactly what I meant. The AP and HE rounds are the exact same shell except in the case of the HE shell there is explosive compound present and a fuse.

I know you are confused but the idea of this post is not to educate you on ammunition but to request a change to HTC.

I was not trying to be funny I think it is a tragedy and any further discussion in that direction is only going to get me in trouble.

Have a nice day.

[Ack-Ack]

Just to clarify for me, the HE round used by the standard 75mm Sherman has the same explosive properties as the 17 pounder HE round used in-game?  If the explosive properties are the same in- game than a request should be made to lessen the explosive properties of the Firefly's HE round to cause less explosive damage than the standard 75mm HE round.

ack-ack

[Tank-Ace]

Look kid. An M4A3-75 is not an M3. I said exactly what I meant. The AP and HE rounds are the exact same shell except in the case of the HE shell there is explosive compound present and a fuse.

M3 is the designation of the gun, you idiot. The M3 is the "75mm Gun Motor Carriage M3" when mounted with the 75mm Gun M1897A4.
Unlike you apparently, I have the capacity to remember those designations, and don't have to refer to the gun by the vehicle that uses it.

And is the shell the same? Source would be appreciated. From everything I've read, the M61 AP round just had a small HE charge at the base of the shell, so it would detonate on impact, while the HE round was an actual 75mm howitzer round, and so had a fairly large explosive charge.

But even if the HE round WAS just a standard AP round stuffed with explosives, it still wouldn't follow the same trajectory, or penetrate the same ammount of armor, BECAUSE IT WAS SLOWER. If you try to argue against basic physics with your stupid "its the same shell  " argument, not only will you lose, but you will deserve to lose.

Would it be similar? Maybe, really depends what they're using for the propellant load on the HE round. After looking at the in-game charts, I see we have the M61 AP round modeled for the M4, instead of the older M72. There will be at LEAST a 45m/s difference in muzzle velocity, but it could also be up to 170m/s, which isn't tiny.

I know you are confused but the idea of this post is not to educate you on ammunition but to request a change to HTC.

So we're just supposed to know what you're thinking? Contrary to your opinion, just randomly throwing out "they sould be the same as the AP round" isn't very clear, when you throw it out in the middle of talking about the Firefly's HE round.

I was not trying to be funny I think it is a tragedy and any further discussion in that direction is only going to get me in trouble.

Have a nice day.

Up yours, too buddy.