M4 75mm gun

[Yarbles]

Basically the M475 isn't up to much against the other tanks either I summise. This why if we get another British tank we should have the 6lber version be it Cromwell or even Crusader. Churchill would be too slow it would be too much of  yawn.

[SmokinLoon]

Basically the M475 isn't up to much against the other tanks either I summise. This why if we get another British tank we should have the 6lber version be it Cromwell or even Crusader. Churchill would be too slow it would be too much of  yawn.

I think adding the Cromwell with a choice of turrets would be great.  Being able to grab the 6Pdr w/ some HVAP ammo for engaging tanks or the 75mm for hammering OBJ would kill 2 birds w one stone.  It was also allow for scenario accuracy, too.

[Tank-Ace]

you do realise that armour penetration figures are usually given for a % of hits (20/50/80% are common) not as an absolute number I assume?

yes. but while there is some variance in the peneration of large calibur guns, its not in the 15mm range. And who can say if HTC models that small variance? Untill Pyro comes out an says that they do model those variances upto 14mm of penetration, then I'll asume its a bug.

[Karnak]

Wait are we talking about you are sitting a tank 10 feet away or combat distance away?

I've done it from as far away as 200 yards, but no, it is not something that will be very useful in game.

[Yarbles]

I think adding the Cromwell with a choice of turrets would be great.  Being able to grab the 6Pdr w/ some HVAP ammo for engaging tanks or the 75mm for hammering OBJ would kill 2 birds w one stone.  It was also allow for scenario accuracy, too.

Yep that would be perfect expecially with a choice of Ammo. My limited research suggests that the 6lber gun continued in the British Army for asnother 20 years after the war and the ammo continued to be developed after the arrival of the 17lber. I also have read it could penetrate Tiger and Panther frontal armour at extreme short range with high velocity rounds. I believe there were a variety or ap rounds even during the war including higher velocity possibly even Sabbo and Dart type rounds. If we could also get a 95mm howitzer fitted Centaur it would give us more and better mobile artillery.

I am dreaming here.

[Yarbles]

Copied from Wikki but it would be interesting to find the test data this is based on.

"However, over the next year the Germans introduced much heavier designs into service, notably the Tiger I and Panther. The standard 6 pounder shot was effective frontally at short ranges as shown in the Armour plate experiment, but proved ineffective at extended ranges. It was the 6-pounder gun that accounted for the first Tiger destroyed in North Africa when mounted in the Churchill tank (which was the first western tank to knock out the Tiger I in tank vs tank combat). (This I realise was a fluke and have seen the tiger that was shipped back to the uk for evaluation)
The situation was somewhat improved by the development of more sophisticated ammunition, in form of the Armour-Piercing, Composite Rigid (APCR) shot, and the Armour-Piercing, Discarding Sabot (APDS) shot, which was available from 1944.(NOT SURE IF THIS ROUND FOUND ITS WAY INTO TANKS)

In the Royal Artillery regiments the 6-pounders were joined by the 17-pounders starting in 1943, but in infantry units the gun remained the sole AT gun in service until 1960, when it was finally declared obsolete".

[321BAR]

Ok which has more pentration? the T34/76 HVAP or the M4A3/75mm AP? because i've killed tigerIIs with the T34/76 from hitting it in the side of the turret. granted short range and i snuck up on him while he was busy shooting at a base... but it can be done from the side of the turret...

[Tank-Ace]

T-34/76 with HVAP. However, the standard 76.2mm AP round is noticably inferior to the US 75mm rounds, particularly at range.

T-34/76 with HVAP: 120mm at 0 yds
M4A3(75) AP: 91mm at 0 yds.



Yarbles, that tiger was "knocked out" IIRC, because the shell got wedged under the turret, and stoped it from traversing  .

APDS amunition wasn't developed till relativly late in the war, and (if I remember the tables I've seen correcly) it was about on par with the KwK 40 and M1 76mm.

[icepac]

I bounced about 19 hits of 17 pounder from about d3000 on a tank the other day and it did not die.

I'm pretty sure I was hitting probably the strongest part of the tank as the distance did not allow for much choice of where it hit.

I never did find out what kind of tank it was.

Does anybody know how effective the M4 rockets are against tanks?

You sure can shoot a lot of them in a short amount of time.

[SmokinLoon]

T-34/76 with HVAP. However, the standard 76.2mm AP round is noticably inferior to the US 75mm rounds, particularly at range.
T-34/76 with HVAP: 120mm at 0 yds
M4A3(75) AP: 91mm at 0 yds.

define "at range".   

The Soviet 76mm HVAP is an outstanding AP round out to 1000-1200 yards.  After that, it *quickly* falls in capability and then the standard 76mm AP round is the better choice.  When compared to the US 75mm AP, it is a no brainer that the Soviet 76mm HVAP is far superior at less than 1200 yards.  Dont even bother looking at the 0 yard range.  The 1k and 2k yard range is where the tale is told.       

I wish HTC would publish 400, 1200, and 2000 yards instead of 0, 1000, 2000 yards. 

[Tank-Ace]

Agreed, 400 yds is more of a realistic miniumum range. You have to be either good, fast, or lucky to close within 400yds of an enemy.

[Yarbles]

T-34/76 with HVAP. However, the standard 76.2mm AP round is noticably inferior to the US 75mm rounds, particularly at range.

T-34/76 with HVAP: 120mm at 0 yds
M4A3(75) AP: 91mm at 0 yds.
Yarbles, that tiger was "knocked out" IIRC, because the shell got wedged under the turret, and stoped it from traversing  .
APDS amunition wasn't developed till relativly late in the war, and (if I remember the tables I've seen correcly) it was about on par with the KwK 40 and M1 76mm.

I know I have seen the Tiger 1 with the damage inflicted by the Churchill. As to late war ammo well we have the Firefly and the Tiger 2 so makes sense to have comtmporary ammo and the Cromwell a top speed of 40mph though I am not sure how realistic this was in practice.

I read the 75mm AP gun in the Cromwell was better than in the Sherman for some reason but I still doubt it would be much use against any other tank in the game.

iN REALITY i PREDICT WE GET THE hELLCAT NEXT.

[Tank-Ace]

If they used the ROQF 75mm then it was just a bored out 6lber firing U.S. 75mm shells. It was identicle in preformance to the US M3 75mm, but (IIRC) it had a slightly lower rate of fire.

And the Churchill was perfectly capable of damaging and even killing a Tiger, I was just refering to that specific incident. It tickles my funny-bone that the tiger was reported destroyed, while they could still fire the cannon, the machine guns, and drive unhindered, all they would have had to do is just had to knock the shell out from under the turret, and they would have saved the Reich somewhere between 400,000 and 800,000 Marks (depending on sources).

As to the LW amunition, I think there has been an argument against HVAP/APCR rounds for US and German tanks on the grounds that the rounds issued to both nations' tank forces were relativly scarse, and developed, again, relativly, late in the war. If the 6lber gets APDS, then my panzer gets APCR.

[Karnak]

Giving the 6lber APDS would also significantly distort its capabilities in the early war settings.

[Butcher]

Agreed, 400 yds is more of a realistic miniumum range. You have to be either good, fast, or lucky to close within 400yds of an enemy.

Depending on the factors, its quite common to get 400yds from someone with the way the maps are built, especially the tropical maps we have,
mainly because it cancels out long range shooting due to the palm trees.

A decent tanker should have no problem closing the gap on someone, most of the time you won't need to get so close for a kill shot but I would say 100 of my kills have all been less then 600yds this tour alone.