Tank gun test, extreme ranges. (Warning: large pics inside)

[New Age Santa]

Well I decided to make a extreme long range gun test involved one Elite tiger tank and 5 regular vanilla Shermans.

The map size is 360 meters by 3,440 meters.

The targets engaged were as follows:

1'st Target-M4 Sherman, 3263 meters.

Shots fired-47 Kill-Yes

2'nd Target-M4 Sherman, 3252 meters

Shots fired-44 Kill-No

I will also be presenting pictures to show ranges being used, kills, and the spread of shells.

Here we have the Tiger tank engaging target number 1-

And the end result after 47 shells fired

Spread of shells directed at Tiger tank(FYI:I marked the spots where shells impacted with yellow dots, for ease of reference)

Spread of shells directed at Target 1

And finally, the spread of shells directed at target 2

Now some may be asking about the other 3 Shermans and why I did not fire at them as well. The answer is quite simple...I ran out of ammo (you will notice the Tiger still has one AP shell left, it refused to fire this shell. Probably saving it for self defense)

[ 09-28-2001: Message edited by: New Age Santa ]

[New Age Santa]

TTT

[-Havermeyer-]

I like your grass.

[Slapdragon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -Havermeyer-:

I like your grass.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And your field terrain mod is not bad either...

BTW -- your tests is very interesting, showing a very difficult to hit at very extreme range with the 88, but what are you comparing this with, or is this just illustrative of the limits of the 88?

[New Age Santa]

Just illustrating the limits of the 88 in the CM engine, and perhaps showing those who were wondering about the accuracy of the 88 in CM some clear cut stastistics.

Also, to show if what CM represents is really how accurate the 88 is. 40+ shells to kill one target from extreme range seems a bit much, especially with a elite crew.

[Hoopenfaust2]

I use ta have that Tiger mod. Where can I find that Tiger mod.

[Maastrictian]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by New Age Santa:

Just illustrating the limits of the 88 in the CM engine, and perhaps showing those who were wondering about the accuracy of the 88 in CM some clear cut stastistics.

Also, to show if what CM represents is really how accurate the 88 is. 40+ shells to kill one target from extreme range seems a bit much, especially with a elite crew.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Can you point us to some real life hit percentage figures at 3km range?

--Chris

[New Age Santa]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I use ta have that Tiger mod. Where can I find that Tiger mod.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right here-- http://www.afv-uk.net/cmoutpost/Terrain/Gunslinger/gunslinger.htm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Can you point us to some real life hit percentage figures at 3km range?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was sorta hoping for you guys to come up with that, although I will search for some.

Btw, I'm not criticising CM or BTS, I am just curious about the issue of accuracy at long range and extreme range in CM, so I used the 88 and 75(I think) as reference weapons to begin with, the tests are still far from over. I plan to test all armor and support weapons at long and extreme ranges and then compare them with real life statistics.

This will, of course, take quite a while.

[The_Capt]

Did you try an 88 AT gun, how does it compare?

Also the JagTiger would be interesting to see in the same test.

[New Age Santa]

I haven't tried the AT gun yet, however I have done a Jagdtiger test and found it to be slightly more successful than the 88 on the Tiger.

[Maastrictian]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by New Age Santa:

Btw, I'm not criticising CM or BTS, I am just curious about the issue of accuracy at long range and extreme range in CM, so I used the 88 and 75(I think) as reference weapons to begin with, the tests are still far from over. I plan to test all armor and support weapons at long and extreme ranges and then compare them with real life statistics.

This will, of course, take quite a while.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fair enough. It is known actaully that there is a minimum hit percentage that CM will not go below, no matter what the range. So I am willing to bet that, at 3km range, a 2.5% hit percentage is actually a bit high rather than low. But I don't have any real life figures infront of me. I will leave that to the real grogs and their uber-expensive books

--Chris

[rune]

Yep, a good point was brought up, what was the accuracy at 3 km? From what I have read, not too good.

Also, how many times did you run the test? Once? Twice? 100 times?

Rune

[New Age Santa]

The statistics you see are from the first test, I performed 5 tests after this with the nearly the same results so it's pretty consistent. One could say I am expecting a bit much from the 88 though. Although I have been reading threads which have people saying CM was modelled for "knife-fights"

Whether this is true remains to be seen, and hopefully these tests and other tests inspired by my tests will show either that CM cannot handle nor was made for long range fighting or that it is just as suitable as these close engagements.

[Slapdragon]

Here is one. There is actually one tank with a record of hits at the 3+ kilometer range. It is the M1 Abrams, and it has recorded single shot kills of T-72 at ranges of up to 3.6 kilometers while stopped (USNI database). Isreali M-60A1 firing against Egyptian tanks killed tanks at ranges over 2 kilometers with a 105mm gun, although single shot victories were rare at that range, and at ranges greater than 2.5 km it began to be hard to hit no matter how much ammunition was used (Inside the IAI, Tanks in the Sand).

These are not great comparisons, but I would put forward that the "amazing" (to quote a Janes refernce in the ANSI article) performance of the M1 w/ 120mm at even hitting an enemy tank 3.5 km away let alone using only one shot was special even in 1990. In CM, your 1/44 hit ratio could represent a "holy ****, we actually hit the mother" since it is hard to even line up sites on something that far away, even something as big as a tank, without something more than optics.

If any tank could do it in WW2 though, it would be the Tiger or its bigger siblings. I just do not have any references of Tiger accuracy past 1800 meters at my finger tips. May I suggest that you back it down to 2000 meters and try it again, which is outside the knife fight, but much closer for that weapon, then compare it with the performance of the 75, 76, and 90 Americans.

[ 09-28-2001: Message edited by: Slapdragon ]

[New Age Santa]

2000 meters, why I was thinking the same thing myself. Probably would be more reasonable too.

Will do, maybe in a couple minutes.

[New Age Santa]

Here are the results from the first run of tests at 2,000 meters, a Tiger vs. 5 M4 Shermans.

Target 1- M4 Sherman

Range- 1927 meters

Rounds fired- 1

Kill- Yes

Target 2- M4 Sherman

Range- 1925 meters

Rounds Fired- 6

Kill- Yes

Target 3- M4 Sherman

Range- 1923 meters

Rounds fired-15

Gun damaged on impact from round 9

Kill-Yes

Target 4- M4 Sherman

Range- 1923 meters

Rounds fired-2

Kill-Yes

Target 5- M4 Sherman

Range- 1936 meters

Rounds fired-7

Kill-Yes

Tiger hit once, shell ricochetted

[ 09-28-2001: Message edited by: New Age Santa ]

[MrSpkr]

Hey Santa, post pix of the last test -- it would be interesting to see the spread for that range and compare it to 3000m.

Also, it looks like you posted the same pick twice -- pix 4 and 5 are identical.

[ 09-28-2001: Message edited by: MrSpkr ]

[Vanir Ausf B]

A Challenger tank recorded a kill at over 5 km during the gulf war. That must be close to a record or something.

Long range gunnery in CM is currently not modeled real well. There are no optics and the hit % maxes out after about 5 shots. Defenders do not get any first shot bonus unless they are shooting at something next to a TRP. I think the accuracy of small lightweight shells may be a bit too high compared to larger shells (not sure on this). This rarely matters in actual gameplay because engagement ranges in CM are almost always in the short-medium range. At those ranges I think CM works quite well. We'll see how CM2 handles the long range stuff.

[ 09-28-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[Hanns]

I think one thing that would help this test, especially with the shot dispersion would be to use the grid overlay grass. That way it would be a lot easier to determine the amount of scatter with a reasonable approximation of distances. How the CM range tests compare to Rexford's data would be very interesting.

[Mace]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by New Age Santa:

Just illustrating the limits of the 88 in the CM engine, and perhaps showing those who were wondering about the accuracy of the 88 in CM some clear cut stastistics.

Also, to show if what CM represents is really how accurate the 88 is. 40+ shells to kill one target from extreme range seems a bit much, especially with a elite crew.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IMHO, it seems correct to me.

Gunnery optics during WW2 were relatively new and although their were some aids to assist the gunner, attempting to hit a medium sized tank at extreme range would be extremely difficult, even for an Elite crew.

Secondly, the optics were optimised for engagement at normal engagement ranges, not extreme.

Thirdly, there are other factors that affect the projectile path, eg wind bursts.

Modern technology accounts for these nuances (eg ballistic computers, laser designation, gun stabilisation), unfortunately the WW2 gunner had none of these.

Mace

[ 09-28-2001: Message edited by: Mace ]

[Jeff Duquette]

New Age Santa:

Interesting test. Thanks for sharing it. Of interest is your plotting of the shot pattern with the yellow indicators. This is a very realistic looking shot pattern…i.e. relatively long and skinny. An elongated elliptical shape is pretty typical of both tank and artillery weapon dispersion patterns.

3000 plus meters is a fairly long shot not only from the perspective of typical LOS restricting terrain present in NW Europe, but also as a function of limitations on WWII optics and inherent weapon dispersion or probable error. Bare in mind that most gunners sights in WWII were less than 5X. That makes a target at 3000m look very small indeed through the gunners optics. In fact with a 3X (a very common gun sight magnification for WWII tanks) the size of the target in the gunners sight is not much thicker than the stadia lines in the sight at this range. That's pretty tiny.

There are various WWII tank with stronger magnification, most notably the JagdPanther with it 10X gunsight. In addition many gun sights were equiped duel magnification settings for ease in aquiring targets. Most modern armor GPS (gunner's primary sight) have duel settings…M1A1 and Leopard-2 are 6X and 12X (I think).

However there are numerous AAR's which I have collected over the last year or two detailing 3000m plus hits by Tiger I's, Tiger II's as well as US 3" and 90mm SP-TDs. These are also examples of long ranged engagements that don't seemingly involve an ungodly expenditure of ammunition. I have posted many of these AAR's here before. I can post some of them again if they are of interest to you. These "tales" typically bring the "oh that was only recorded because it was so unusual" sort of reaction from folks here.

Personally I think that answer is a little to simplistic, and really reflects a lack of understanding as to what may really be happening with long range tank fire. Anyone who has served in any sort of combat arm can tell you who the best shots are in their platoon\company. Davie Crockett, Jim Bowie, Sgt York., etc. Except the fellows I'm talking about are not dead eyes with a Kentucky Long Rifle or Springfield 03, but are their incarnations in tank gunnery. Marksmen. Sniper Gunners. Platoon and Company commanders know who these folks are and it is common that such extraordinary marksmen will be allowed a certain amount of latitude in engaging targets far in excess of ranges that are normally deemed practical for the average tank gunner.

In the case of the M1A1 a commonly thrown about effective range of engagement is 2000 to 2500 meters (what a coincidence that US ARMY tank gunnery training Table VIII is typically laid out to ranges of about 2000 to 2500 meters). However in looking through doctrine, "sniper gunners" might be engaging targets out to ranges of 3000m, or in the Desert Storm example described above it sounds like someone was given the go ahead to try at shot at some 3500m.

My two cents worth

[ 09-28-2001: Message edited by: Jeff Duquette ]

[Pzman]

Just as a side note I just ran my own test...only once so far. A KingTiger (Regular unit experance) destroyed a Sherman at 1697m first shot. Lucky or not?

Ran anther test at larger ranges... the KT took out the Sherman at 2674m with 6 shots, the first time and about the same distance (around 2670m) the second time, but it took 9 shots. I believe that CM models long range tank fighering, not as well as it could, but how often do we have tank/AT ect fights at this range?

[ 09-28-2001: Message edited by: Panzerman ]

[Priest]

Just for all the Mod Sluts

That is DD HiRes Grass

Tigers_Rough

and the tank is of course Gunslingers but the mod has been used as the basis for a mod at CMHQ but I forget the name or the author.

I use the same rough and grass although I am currently using the Sandy Tiger by Tiger I believe.

Anyways interesting test with a good illustration of testing with the pictures. If only most of the posts trying to prove this or that would be so concise. Good show.

[SGTHenry]

Great captures. Useful info. on tank stats. I hope to try some of these out this weekend myself.

[New Age Santa]

Thanks for the input for my test, much appreciated. Any stats,firing tables, etc etc you can hand to me or post on the board would also be greatly appreciated, seeing as I could compile it (hopefully and with enough time) into a list of effective ranges or if I am really lucky, maybe BTS will listen to me and improve long range firing capabilities.

Of note, however, is the fact that the allied tanks suffer greatly at long range fighting. With their shells either missing entirely or simply breaking apart against the superior German armor. This could very well be the answer to those who cry that German armor is not modelled correctly, when in fact it is. It is just that the German tanks excelled at long and medium range fighting whilst allied tanks usually did not fair so well.

Edit: I'll be posting the results for the KT and 2,000 meter Tiger tests soon.

[ 09-28-2001: Message edited by: New Age Santa ]