Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: GtoRA2 on August 01, 2008, 03:52:46 PM
-
We have:
the 88 L56 in the tiger.
The 17pounder in the firefly
the 75MM L48? in the panzer 4.
the T-34s 76
My impression was the 17 pounder would be the best, with the 88 a close second the 85 third and then 75 on the panzer and the last being the 76 on the 34.
Am I wrong here? Anyone know a good armor site that compares the balistics of all the guns?
-
A very good site is http://gva.freeweb.hu/index.html
Very detailed penetration data.
-
Very detailed penetration data.
hehe :)
-
hehe :)
:lol
-
hehe :)
:o :P
-
in my eyes i think the 85 is match for the tiger and vice-versa but the winner will be the person who sees the other one first
-
in my eyes i think the 85 is match for the tiger and vice-versa but the winner will be the person who sees the other one first
Not really. With basic AP ammo the T-34/85 cannot penetrate the Tiger's armor from anything other than short range. The Tiger's 88 will go through the T-34/85's armor like a hot knife through butter.
-
Whoooo just glad they finally are going to add the T-34/85~!! :)
A T-34/57 would be kinda fun too in a way :P
A T-34 with a high velocity 57mm gun.
-
The .88 rules of those guns while the 17 pounder penetrates as well AFAIK.
-
The fact that the Soviet 85mm is a mere 3 mm smaller than the German 88 is misleading. The 85 is like most Soviet calibres in that it uses weight of round for penetration rather than velocity and weight. The 85 does not have good range properties similar to the 76mm in the T34/76.
In Aces High, all things being equal, the 88 would be king with the 17 pounder a close second. The 85 is probably a relatively distant third.
Oddly enough the Soviet 85 is easily eclipsed by the 75L70mm used on the Panther tank, a gun that also was more effective than the German's own 88L56. The 88L56 was used in the Tiger one and was a shorter version with a smaller breach that would fit into the Tiger I's turret. The 88 in the flak version and later in the Tiger II, Nashorn, and Elefant was the 88L71 which was the best tank gun in the war.
-
The fact that the Soviet 85mm is a mere 3 mm smaller than the German 88 is misleading. The 85 is like most Soviet calibres in that it uses weight of round for penetration rather than velocity and weight. The 85 does not have good range properties similar to the 76mm in the T34/76.
In Aces High, all things being equal, the 88 would be king with the 17 pounder a close second. The 85 is probably a relatively distant third.
Oddly enough the Soviet 85 is easily eclipsed by the 75L70mm used on the Panther tank, a gun that also was more effective than the German's own 88L56. The 88L56 was used in the Tiger one and was a shorter version with a smaller breach that would fit into the Tiger I's turret. The 88 in the flak version and later in the Tiger II, Nashorn, and Elefant was the 88L71 which was the best tank gun in the war.
Hmm, looks like you mixed something up. The 88mm flaK used caliber length very similar to the 88 L/56 of the Tiger I. The 88 L/71 of the Tiger II was not related to 88mm FlaK (it was in competition to what later became the 88mm FLaK 41 but lost and was revived to become a tank gun).
The 88L/56 penetration power should be somewhat in the area of the 17 pounder but behind. The 88L/71 is clearly better. The soviet 85mm is in the area of the german 88L/56, maybe closely behind. All those values vary with ammo types used, the 17 pounder had some high penetration ammo with this was in short supply and not much seen in 1944.
-
I stand corrected. I was referring to the late war 88 used in flak guns rather than the 88 AA gun used say prior to the second battle of Tobruk.
I will stick to my guns (pun intended) on comparing the 88L56 and the Soviet 85. The 88L56 was superior in every way, especially at longer range. Soviet tank guns have always lagged behind German gun technology. They tried to use weight of shell to make up for the velocity and accuracy they were never able to acheive as successfuly as the Brits and especially the Germans. That is even true today with the lousy 125mm main gun of the most recent Russian tank guns compared to the 120mm Rheinmetal gun of several western tanks.
-
Add the Panther to the game and it will become kind of the GV's. It's 75mm round fires at such a fire velocity that it is said to have better penetration power than the 88mm on the Tiger! Atleast that's what I've heard.
Right now I'd say the 17pounder is the best with the 88mm of the Tiger second. Then the Panzer, T34/76, M8, and LVT4 follow up. The gun ofn the T34/85 would be up there with the Tiger and Firefly, but we'll never know until HT and Skuzzy and the rest of the crew program it in. As we all know, nothing was 100% correct the first time it was put into the game.
-
As we all know, nothing was 100% correct the first time it was put into the game.
I'd disagree with that statement actually.
And we can make fairly good guesses based on available penetration tables. Given those tables it is probable that the T-34/85's gun will be serviceable, but inferior to the 75mm/L42 on the Panzer IV H.
The Panther would per a perk tank, possibly with a higher price than the Tiger I.
-
Agreed. The Russian 85mm is third most powerful of the guns we have available now.
The Russians won't have anything approaching the power of the 17Lb gun until you get the Russian 100mm gun.
(http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/pol/pol-Su100pl2.jpg)
-
Agreed. The Russian 85mm is third most powerful of the guns we have available now.
The Russians won't have anything approaching the power of the 17Lb gun until you get the Russian 100mm gun.
(http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/pol/pol-Su100pl2.jpg)
According to the penetration data that is out there the T34/85's 85mm DT-5 or 85mm ZiS-S-53 will be the fourth best tank gun currently in AH, behind the 17lber of the Sherman Firefly VC, 88mm KwK 36 L56 of the Tiger I , and 75mm KwK 40 L48 of the Panzer IV H.
-
Not really. With basic AP ammo the T-34/85 cannot penetrate the Tiger's armor from anything other than short range. The Tiger's 88 will go through the T-34/85's armor like a hot knife through butter.
why is it so many of my tiger rounds keep being absorbed by the t34/76 before he finally dies
-
Ok, All the available data I have suggests the 85mm gun will be 4thin penetration beyond 1600m. Closer than that, the mass of the projectile will win through the 75mm gun on the Panzer, but just barely.
The Russian gun technology of the time lagged a bit behind. Most of the tank guns had lower velocities than their German counterparts, therefore had inferior penetration characteristics. To make up the difference they went with weight of shot to provide the force to penetrate the thick armor of the German tanks. Newton said it best ( F=ma ) Force = Mass times Acceleration. The Russians knew they didn't have the acceleration part down, so they upped the mass to apply the same force. How do you get more mass, you get a bigger caliber gun.
-
Yeah. There is no doubt that the T34/85 will be a far, far deadlier tank than the T34/76 we have now.
-
Yeah. There is no doubt that the T34/85 will be a far, far deadlier tank than the T34/76 we have now.
It should be equal to the Panzer IV(H) we have currently. Beyond 1600m tho, main gun effectiveness drops significantly. Speed is what this baby has. I foresee this as the LTAR's favorite base-taking machine. Survivable from medium-long range due to its sloped armor, and an effective gun from short-medium range, plus high speed, what is not to love?
EDIT: Their is still room for the Panzer IV. It's still effective beyond 1600m with its 75mm high velocity gun. The T-34/76, will still be useful, but we will see it IMHO more as a hoard tank. Only useful unless in great numbers overwhelming any defence. I.E. the LTARs ;)
-
How much speed will the T34/85 lose with what must be a heavier turret? Anyone have data on that?
-
All I wish for regarding this T34/85 is that the turret isnt made of cheese like the current AH2 T34. A drunk peasant with no arms can throw a rock and disable the turrent in the current T34. What a shame.
Anyone who has ever studied WWII armor understands that the Soviet 76mm on the T34 was "inferior" to the Pzr IV's 75mm (unless HVAP was used), but it was the armor toughness and design/slope and speed that propelled it ahead. I dont ever recall reading where T34 turrets got knocked out easily. Lets hope they fix that bug when they introduce the T34/85.
I cant understand why people aregue that the T34 was the "best" practical tank of WWII, its gun was barely more a penetrater than the US 57mm or UK 6lb'er AP (which were good in their own right), the gun was slower than a 7 year itch to relaod, and the gun optics were severly inferior to the Pzr V's as well. 1v1 it gets owned by the Pzr V. With that said, the T34 and the US/Sherman shared the "overwhelm" tactics book and fought the Pzr V in a 8 or 10 to 1 ratio. Guess who wins.
-
Ok, All the available data I have suggests the 85mm gun will be 4thin penetration beyond 1600m. Closer than that, the mass of the projectile will win through the 75mm gun on the Panzer, but just barely.
The Russian gun technology of the time lagged a bit behind. Most of the tank guns had lower velocities than their German counterparts, therefore had inferior penetration characteristics. To make up the difference they went with weight of shot to provide the force to penetrate the thick armor of the German tanks. Newton said it best ( F=ma ) Force = Mass times Acceleration. The Russians knew they didn't have the acceleration part down, so they upped the mass to apply the same force. How do you get more mass, you get a bigger caliber gun.
This has nothing to so with acceleration. Penetration is a function of either energy, or momentum. What you're describing is momentum, which usually is a poor substitute for kinetic energy when it comes to penetration. Let me give you an example:
9mm (124 gr ball) vs .45 (230 gr ball) against oh, let's say, Level II body armor.
9mm has higher energy, .45 has much higher momentum. Which one gets thru the armor more easily?
9mm. It's all about the energy. :salute
And if you're thinking ,"Hey, but 9mm is smaller in diameter and pointier", you're right. But special light weight .45 rounds (and hence higher energy) can be made to penetrate just as easily as 9mm.
-
All I wish for regarding this T34/85 is that the turret isnt made of cheese like the current AH2 T34. A drunk peasant with no arms can throw a rock and disable the turrent in the current T34. What a shame.
Anyone who has ever studied WWII armor understands that the Soviet 76mm on the T34 was "inferior" to the Pzr IV's 75mm (unless HVAP was used), but it was the armor toughness and design/slope and speed that propelled it ahead. I dont ever recall reading where T34 turrets got knocked out easily. Lets hope they fix that bug when they introduce the T34/85.
I cant understand why people aregue that the T34 was the "best" practical tank of WWII, its gun was barely more a penetrater than the US 57mm or UK 6lb'er AP (which were good in their own right), the gun was slower than a 7 year itch to relaod, and the gun optics were severly inferior to the Pzr V's as well. 1v1 it gets owned by the Pzr V. With that said, the T34 and the US/Sherman shared the "overwhelm" tactics book and fought the Pzr V in a 8 or 10 to 1 ratio. Guess who wins.
The T-34 got its rep very early in the war, 1940, and 41, when most german armor had 50MM guns at best, or a short 75. Neither was all that good at hilling T-34s.
The Panzer 4 we have in the game was upgunned with a long 75 to deal with the T-34 and it does it well. They started doing this in early 42. After that the T-34 was still good, but nothing really special. Also an ergonomic nightmare for the crew.
-
The T-34 got its rep very early in the war, 1940, and 41, when most german armor had 50MM guns at best, or a short 75. Neither was all that good at hilling T-34s.
The Panzer 4 we have in the game was upgunned with a long 75 to deal with the T-34 and it does it well. They started doing this in early 42. After that the T-34 was still good, but nothing really special. Also an ergonomic nightmare for the crew.
The true quality of the T-34 wasn't it's lethality. It was it's mobility and reliability. Much like the Sherman, but with superior protection.
-
...and numbers
-
I wish more authentic gunsights. Same way like in red orchestra.
(http://pcmedia.gamespy.com/pc/image/article/701/701424/red-orchestra-ostfront-41-45-20060412012612128.jpg)
-
I wish more authentic gunsights. Same way like in red orchestra.
(http://pcmedia.gamespy.com/pc/image/article/701/701424/red-orchestra-ostfront-41-45-20060412012612128.jpg)
Ya mean that ... right now... we dont have an accurate gun sight??? ;) Sometimes I wish that HTC would accept help from volunteers to help devise and code some of the little things that could and would help the game along. I can only imagine there would be an army of coding volunteers if they openned up. Everything from fixing gun sights to improving graphics, to researching stats, facts, and testimony of the planes and vehicles in the AH2 game.
-
I wish more authentic gunsights. Same way like in red orchestra.
(http://pcmedia.gamespy.com/pc/image/article/701/701424/red-orchestra-ostfront-41-45-20060412012612128.jpg)
I like this....might put some spark back into the game for me!!!
-
^ word.
They'd need to have some means to use it though - gameplay/strat has been static for how long now?
Not meant to be a swipe, just my own sad experience / perception.
I guess we're all still "Waiting for CT."
-
Ya mean that ... right now... we dont have an accurate gun sight??? ;) Sometimes I wish that HTC would accept help from volunteers to help devise and code some of the little things that could and would help the game along. I can only imagine there would be an army of coding volunteers if they openned up. Everything from fixing gun sights to improving graphics, to researching stats, facts, and testimony of the planes and vehicles in the AH2 game.
We already see that with maps and skin, which are all player created (including most of the default textures).
However, I, and apparently HTC as well, think letting players get into the coding may be going a bit too far.
-
All,
I have created a Wish List thread for adding an Assault Gun to the game, along with an outline as to why this might lead to interesting gameplay options. Serious and thoughtful comments are solicited.
Go here: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,243156.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,243156.0.html)
-
This has nothing to so with acceleration. Penetration is a function of either energy, or momentum. What you're describing is momentum, which usually is a poor substitute for kinetic energy when it comes to penetration.
SNIP
You are right this has nothing to do with acceleration. As soon as the projectile leaves the barrel it ceases to accelerate. The powder can no longer impart kinetic energy and momentum to the projectile. The Russians could not get the energy, so they compensated by upping momentum. I was trying to get that through to the people who think just because it is similar in caliber to the German Flak 36 L/56, and British 17lb, that it will perform as uber as they are.
As far as your little example. Try sending both projectiles through 3" barrels. The 9mm will bounce off too, but the .45 will still put the perp on his butt.
-
You are right this has nothing to do with acceleration. As soon as the projectile leaves the barrel it ceases to accelerate. The powder can no longer impart kinetic energy and momentum to the projectile. The Russians could not get the energy, so they compensated by upping momentum. I was trying to get that through to the people who think just because it is similar in caliber to the German Flak 36 L/56, and British 17lb, that it will perform as uber as they are.
As far as your little example. Try sending both projectiles through 3" barrels. The 9mm will bounce off too, but the .45 will still put the perp on his butt.
True, .45 definitely has more knock down power (courtesy of that momentum), but I was talking about penetration of armor. Totally different animal. I could get into strain rate and speed of plastic deformation of the armor, but that would probably bore this crowd.
Wait.. I think it already did. :D
-
Penetration of a tank round is dependant on ballistic coefficient (mass, surface area, and drag) and velocity. I don't even know why "momentum" is even being discussed here as it's not in the equation.
-
Momentum (p)=mass(m) * velocity(v)
-
The Russian 85mm shell was a 21.5 lb shot with a muzzle velocity of 899 m/s. The energy of the round leaving the barrell was on par with both the 17 Pounder, and the 88 L/56.
Armor Peircing Capped Ballistic Cap (APCBC) shell for all three guns in meters per second:
85mm: 21.5 lb at 899 m/s
17 Pounder: 17.0 lb at 884 m/s
88 L/56 (Tiger I): 22.25 lb at 811 m/s
It was the quality of the shell that decreased its performance. A problem that persisted through the war for the Russians, although the shells were certainly "good enough" in most cases to get the job done, and the Russians did develop APCR (tungsten) rounds for their T-34/76 and T-34/85 to help with penetration.
-
Penetration of a tank round is dependant on ballistic coefficient (mass, surface area, and drag) and velocity. I don't even know why "momentum" is even being discussed here as it's not in the equation.
It has nothing to do with surface area or drag. Has everything to do with mass, sectional density, modulus and strength of the penetrator material and the target material, and impact velocity. Both energy and momentum are dictated by the mass and impact velocity. (Thanks 633DH98 :aok) This is generally referred to as "terminal ballistics".
What you're talking about is "flight ballistics", which will allow you to calculate the appropriate elevation to hit the target at a given range, but it won't tell you if you're going to kill the target.
Just for grins, I went out and found a link to one of our older programs here at Lockheed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM-166_LOSAT
Scroll down close to the bottom where it says:
"Video of LOSAT in action" (5000 fps Baby! :O)
The missile was later downsized because it was too lethal. :D
-
I actually spent a lot of time on subjects like this long ago, in a a different life. This including talking to Veterans (German, Russian, American, British) that actually crewed these vehicles in combat.
For armor penetration:
1. 17 pdr. This gun has armor penetration roughly equal to the 75L70 of the Pz V. This is with APCBC. The 17 pdr. also used discarding sabot rounds in combat, which were not overly common but they were available (a few rounds of the total loadout) and this increased the penetration by about 50% overall.
2. 88L56 (The Pz VIE/Tiger I MA). APCR was available for this gun, but was fairly rare. It was also very nasty. 88L56 APCR hit as hard as 88L71 (that's the gun the Pz VIB and JPz V carried) APCBC. By 'rare', we're talking 1 or 2 rounds per vehicle, to be used only in the event that something really dangerous came along that 88L56 APCBC could not handle (there weren't a lot of Allied MBTs in this category, ever).
3. 88L53 (T-34/85), 75L48 (Pz IVH), 76L55 (M4). With 'standard' APCBC, these guns all have almost equal penetration (read below).
4. 76L41 (T-34).
There are a few things to remember.
Solid AP has an increased chance of 'shot shatter' if the round is impacting armor plate that is thicker (this includes 'effective thickness' due to sloping) than the diameter of the shot. This explains why there are situations where the 88L53 could be more lethal against certain types/thickness of armor plate than the 76L55 even if the 'base penetration data' is very similar. It is also partly why tungsten core rounds came into being, and why depleted uranium rounds exist today - high to ultra-high velocity rounds penetrate better and are less likely to shatter against hardened plate when they are made of dense material.
http://www.freeweb.hu/gva/index.html - I cannot stress how excellent this site/info is regarding the topic at hand. Go and read every page of this site if you are interested in gun and armor data from WW2. It explains in detail the various factors - round type, armor type, thickness, etc. For a very solid basic understanding of the topic, read this site several times. It is an excellent resource. Probably the best collection of data and explanations to be found in 1 place in any book and on the internet.
Mike/Wulfie
edit: added the '0' that I forgot. :D
-
"and this increased the penetration by about 5% overall"
Umm, I think you forgot a 0 on the end.
17 Pounder stats:
500 meters (APCBC): 180mm at 0 degrees.
500 meters (APDS): 259mm at 0 degrees.
The 17 Pounder APDS round was an extrordinarily powerfull shot, the forerunner of modern APDS tank rounds. It was the most lethal 76mm round used in WW2. The Fireflys only carried a few rounds per tank however.
-
in my eyes i think the 85 is match for the tiger and vice-versa but the winner will be the person who sees the other one first
The Tiger can almost always survive a frontal turret hit from the T-34/85. A frontal hull hit and the chance of a penetration at 500m is close to 50%.
Going the other way, the Tiger will almost always kill the T-34/85 with a frontal hit (turret or hull) at 1000m.
Then there is the optics issues - German gunsights were of superior make and superior design (in terms of ease of use and first shot hit probability) when compared to Russian ones. There have been some sims that accurately modeled the different sights, including sight controls, etc. and in those situations the importance of the differences becomes very evident.
http://www.freeweb.hu/gva/index.html - go there and look at the armor and gun of both vehicles.
I talked to one T-34/85 Crewman a long time ago and he commented that most Russian MBT crews liked the T-34/85 the best of all the Russian MBTs (including the Is-2). Good turret rotation rate (they fought their Is-2s like assault guns because the rotation rate was so poor), great mobility, a good gun (they could trade shots with StuG IIIGs and Pz IVHs as rough equals) and most important of all - the T-34/85 had the ability to 'pop smoke'. According to the Russian crewmen I interviewed, this was very important..."Because if the Germans missed on the first shot they never missed on the second". Smoke gave them a chance in open terrain at range.
Mike/Wulfie
-
Umm, I think you forgot a 0 on the end.
Yeah I did. LOL. Thanks for catching that, thanks for the heads up, etc. :aok
Mike/wulfie