Hortlund Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 I wanted to break this out from the original thread, beacuse it raises a very important question. Originally posted by KwazyDog: it would only take one hit from thats in the right (or wrong ) place to snap a track. Also note that they can be immobilised by a round through the tanks thin engine covers, too. Not something you see happen too often, but very possible. Dan No, Im sorry but you are misstaken here. .50 cals on aircraft in ww2 could not immobilize Tiger tanks by shooting off the tracks. Nor could the .50 cals penetrate the "thin engine covers" on the Tiger. If such effects are in the game, then that is something that needs to be looked at. [ November 29, 2003, 03:38 AM: Message edited by: Leutnant Hortlund ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwazydog Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 Err, you dont think that a lucky burst of .50cal rounds could break a track pin, find its way through a weak point in the engine grill or some other weak spot towards the read of the tank, especially considering an aircraft is firing with 6-8 guns? Ive *never* seen it happen in game myself, and Ive played a lot including that scenario some 30 times. As such it must be EXTREMELY rare and Im not suggesting it should be otherwise, but I seriously doubt it to be an impossibility. In fact I saw a doco a while back where a P-47 pilot was interviewed and said that they found if they aimed at a road in front or behind of a tank they could often bounce the .50cal rounds through the lower hull. That being said I was just taking a guess at what might have happened in the scenario described above. Its not impossible that the vehicle just happened to throw a track whilst being strafed. Dan [ November 29, 2003, 07:05 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hortlund Posted November 29, 2003 Author Share Posted November 29, 2003 Originally posted by KwazyDog: Err, you dont think that a lucky burst of .50cal rounds could break a track pin, find its way through a weak point in the engine grill or some other weak spot towards the read of the tank, especially considering an aircraft is firing with 6-8 guns? Actually no I dont. Or maybe that sounded too harsh. Let me put it this way, I have never seen any documented case of an aircraft shooting off the tracks of any German tank with its .50 cals, nor have I seen any documented case of any .50 cal having that effect on the tracks of any German tank, Tiger or not. I think that it also is physically impossible. Same goes for getting some shots into the engine for that matter. And that includes Pz IIIs and Pz IVs, not only Tigers. The closest I have seen was some theoretical argument that at 100 meters, and at 90 degrees angle, the .50 cal bullet could theoretically penetrate the rear top armor of a Pz IVH, but since the gun platform (the aircraft) would have to be at an altitude of 100 meters and in a vertical dive for it to happen, its not very likely to have ever happened in real life Ive *never* seen it happen in game myself, and Ive played a lot including that scenario some 30 times. As such it must be EXTREMELY rare and Im not suggesting it should be otherwise, but I seriously doubt it to be an impossibility. Luckily I've never seen that happen either (if I had, I would probably have written some "Fix or somefink"-post that very same second ) I think it should be an impossiblity, but before we start throwing penetration tables and armor thickness charts at eachother, is there any way to easily check if it is possible right now? In fact I saw a doco a while back where a P-47 pilot was interviewed and said that they found if they aimed at a road in front or behind of a tank they could often bounce the .50cal rounds through the lower hull. Yeah I saw that one too, and frankly I dont know what to make of that guy. We've had huge discussions on this topic (ac .50 cal vs German armor) in another forum, and the most plausible theory someone put forward was that the German tank he was firing at was leaking oil or something, and when he shot at it, that oil caught fire and made it look like a kill. Or something...I dunno, that guy could remember it all wrong too, maybe the dust from the 50 cals hitting the road made him think he got a kill, maybe the crew bailed for some reason and he thought he got a kill. But no matter what the true story was, there is one thing that is certain, there is no way you can bounce a .50 cal round off the ground and have it penetrate the bottom of any German ww2 tank. That being said I was just taking a guess at what might have happened in the scenario described above. Its not impossible that the vehicle just happened to throw a track whilst being strafed. Dan Yeah I hope that was the reason. Personally I would be very concerned if the game engine would allow .50 cals to immobilize German Tigers by shooting off their tracks. [ November 29, 2003, 07:35 AM: Message edited by: Leutnant Hortlund ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webs Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 The deflection of bullets off the road and into the bottom of a tank is a myth. The bullets strike the ground and the same angle they strike the bottom of the tank. In order for them to penetrate, they have to: 1) fail to penetrate concrete/asphalt; 2) retain sufficient kinetic energy; 3) penetrate the lower armor. So, you tell me how a bullet that won't penetrate concrete somehow gains the energy to pentrate steel.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 My personal opinion is that the banked shot to the bottom armor is nothing more than wishful thinking on the part of pilots who had spent too much time in high school playing pool when they should have been studying their physics. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwazydog Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 Heya Hortlund Firstly, lets remember we are talking about a very rare and lucky hit here, one which I have never seen in game but do not believe to have been an impossibility in reality. Lets remember that an immobilisation hit in CM is somewhat of an abstraction and could represent anything from a busted radiator or oil line to a broken link on a track. With that in mind, check out some of the photos below that Ive found whilst searching the net for further info... http://www.tiger-tank.com/secure/photos/6067-C-4_sm.jpg http://tiger1.info/vim/p7240018.jpg Here are a couple of photos of the vents allowed for engine cooling on the Tiger (the second seems to have had the rear cover replaced incorrectly? Odd). Note that size of the gaps in the cover! To be honest I was even surprised to see how wide they were. I see no reason a .50cal round or fragments there of couldnt find their way through those to something more vital below. http://www.tiger-tank.com/secure/photos/4194_f_6_sm.jpg This photo shows the rear of a Tiger, and the holes where the exhausts leave the engine and the starting crack passes inwards. I imagine the starting crack cover would be rather thick, but there is no getting around the need for exhaust to leave the vehicle. I think this would be a reasonable example of a weak point And to finish up, here is an interesting reference from the diary of Joachim Scholl, a Tiger commander, where its commented that he was captured after is track was 'blown off' by a Thunderbolt. Of course this could mean that they were blown off by a bomb dropped by the thunder bolt, but the worded to me sounded more like the aircraft itself may have done the damage. Interesting document either way I guess. Keep in mind that it would be very hard for a pilot to note an immobilisation hit against a tank from the air, so Im not particually suprised that accounts of it happening are hard to find. http://www.panzer-vi.fsnet.co.uk/tales_jscholl.html Thus, I think that saying it was an *impossiblity* that a Tiger or for that matter other WW2 tanks to be immobilised by a lucky burst from an aircrafts gun is still rather extreme. Should it be anything but extremely rare, defiantely not, but I dont think it should be impossible either. And no, I dont think its even worth asking Charles about at this point as its not something Ive never seen happen before and there are potentially other causes for it this situation Dan PS : And yeah guys, the bouncing thing sounded like a tall story to me too Still, it was metnioned by someone who was actually there so I figured it worth passing along. Id say its much more likely they were getting a lucky hit on the above and thought that is what was happening. [ November 29, 2003, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Tittles Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 The smallest fragment getting in those louvers would hole the radiator. Once the coolant system is 'popped', the engine would overheat. The V12 had cylinders that were extremely close by the way. Overheating would be a sure way to crack the block. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 Are you sure those vents in hte engine decks lead straight to anything vital? I'm pretty sure engine louvres were arranged to provide a complex airpath after the first year or 2 of the war, precisely to stop minor fragments hitting anything - and also to stop the contants of molotov coctailsfrom dripping onto the engine if they splshed onto the rear deck. I suspect that even if a radiator was breached it would take time for the engine to overheat - it's not an instant immobilisation, and the tank may well be able to continue to function statically (ie maintain enough power for the turret) even if not moving? Somewhere in a Journal of Strategic Studies prior to 1985 (when I read it!!) there's an article on what killed German tanks in Normandy as far as the allied inspectors could tell - 20mm's didn't feature much IIRC, and .50's were a long way underneath them!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwazydog Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 Looking as the Bovington tank yeah, they do seem to go straight through and I think further investigation would confirm this. To be honest though it wouldnt surpised me at all if it was designed this way as the odds of something getting in there is very small, particually considering the time frame when the Tiger was developed. As for tanks not breaking down stright away I agree, it probably shouldnt depending on the type of damage cause, but remember immobilisations are currently somewhat of an abstraction in CM and can represent numerous faults. Guys, this is something that has never been seen before, or at least I have never seen it and cant recall it seeing mentioned on the forum. Thus it is obvoiusly a very rare event, as it should be. Its really not something worth a hell of a lot of detailed investigation though as aircraft are rare to start with on the CM battlefield Dan 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 Oh, Dan, you must know there's no nit too small to pick when grogs are in the room! Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Tittles Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 If the radiator got holed, those vents would be pouring steam out. Giving away the tanks position. It would not take vey long to overheat. Depending on ambient and engine temp, it could be a few minutes. Air has to come in as well as out. So those vents were the output of the fans, where did the air come in? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Determinant Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 Originally posted by KwazyDog: PS : And yeah guys, the bouncing thing sounded like a tall story to me too Still, it was metnioned by someone who was actually there so I figured it worth passing along. Id say its much more likely they were getting a lucky hit on the above and thought that is what was happening. I think that a good default setting is to never believe any unsubstantiated aircrew claims. There must be a good reason why they are the only folks who are forced to carry and use gun cameras in action. The debriefs must run like this: 'So, you claim to have shot down a squadron of FW190s and diabled a Pz Div through clever deflection shooting? Sounds splendid. Shall we just look at the film before we post that up officially?' And if the old flyboy was brazen enough to make a claim like that years afterward can you imagine the stuff he would have come out with at the time when trying to get into a girl's knickers? The sound you can hear is my flesh creeping... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wings7 Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 quote from Leutnant Hortlund "Let me put it this way, I have never seen any documented case of an aircraft shooting off the tracks of any German tank with its .50 cals, nor have I seen any documented case of any .50 cal having that effect on the tracks of any German tank, Tiger or not. I think that it also is physically impossible." What is your source for the documented cases you mention? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wings7 Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 quote from Leutnant Hortlund "Let me put it this way, I have never seen any documented case of an aircraft shooting off the tracks of any German tank with its .50 cals, nor have I seen any documented case of any .50 cal having that effect on the tracks of any German tank, Tiger or not. I think that it also is physically impossible." What is your source for the documented cases you mention? [ November 30, 2003, 10:05 AM: Message edited by: wings7 ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hortlund Posted November 30, 2003 Author Share Posted November 30, 2003 Originally posted by wings7: What is your source for the documented cases you mention? Uh...what I said was that I have not seen any documented cases of .50 cal doing damage to German panzer tracks. If you are looking for some info on the effect of airpower on tanks in general, look for: I. Gooderson, Allied Fighter-Bombers Versus German Armour in North-West Europe 1944-1945: Myths and Realities (Journal of Strategic Studies, vol 14, No 2 June 1991) Basically, the Brits had a team "the operation research team", that went over the battlefields after the battle to examine German wrecks to determine what had killed those wrecks. Gooderson has gone through these reports and published his findings. Probably the most reliable sources for such information around today. Example: Often the German attack at Mortain is used as an example to show the effectiveness of the fighter-bombers as tank killers. But in fact this engagement is rather an example of vastly exaggerated claims. The British 2nd TAF claimed to have destroyed or damaged 140 German tanks in the Mortain area 7 - 10 August, while 9th US Air Force claimed 112. This actually exceeded the number of German tanks employed in the operation. In fact no more than 46 tanks were lost in the operation and of these only nine had been hit by air weapons.Quote by Zetterling 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Tittles Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 This pic shows that the tiger fuel cell was behind the radiator. The air would be drawn in above the fuel cells and through the radiator and out the back vented plate. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Tittles Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 This pic shows that the rear vents had a slant to them. Its entirely possible that a Tiger being attacked from the air from behind could catch a MG bullet that would not only hole the radiator but also hit the fuel cell! In reality, even an aircraft with 8 MGs can not get the bullet strikes on the tank for more than a brief instance. Most tank tracks are actually under the armored envelope when attacked from the air. It would be just as likely for a ground mounted HMG than a plane mounted HMG to knock a track off. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hortlund Posted November 30, 2003 Author Share Posted November 30, 2003 Hey Dan If you look at the first two pictures you linked, you will not exactly how thick that engine air-intake cover (someone with a grog-level greater than mine will undoubtedly tell me what the proper word for it is ) really is. Again, you could probably shoot a .50 cal into one of those holes, but again, you would have to be in a vertical dive to do it. And if you try it at a 45 degree angle or smaller (which is probably the most likely attack angle) it should be pretty clear that the .50 cals would not penetrate the engine covers, but pieces of .50 cal bullets might fall down there yes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwazydog Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 Heya Hortlund Yup, they are extremely thick, as least the 25mm that is the general upper armour level I would guess actually! Something to consider though...you wouldnt necessaryly have to be in a verticle dive, but instead you could be attacking from the side of the Tiger. If you look at the front air cover in the last shot above you should be able to see what I mean. Again, youd have to be lucky but considering the amount of lead a plane can throw at a tank there is some suprisingly big hole for them to enter through there It makes me wonder why they didnt design it like the rear one as it seems to offer better protection. Maybe they needed more air flow... Dan 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Tittles Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 The right part of that picture is the back of the tank.. http://onwar.com/tanks/germany/plans/tiger1.gif [ November 30, 2003, 06:00 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trommelfeuer Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 Ladies (?) and gentlemen! What we really need here is the mother of all threads about this question, and here it is: P-47 guns vs the Tiger Tank etc... Just sit back, (try to) relax and read through all this ... err ... excellent discussion. "The only thing I fear while in my Tiger is.........the .50 caliber." - Michael WittmanAnd please don't miss RedSpar's "video proof" post on page 13, it's a MUST SEE! Greetings, Sven 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 Well in WWIIOL, Me109E's are killing tanks all the time. And it is standard practice for them to aim at the tracks and disable a tank. So, it must be realistic, right? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Tiger Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 Originally posted by Zulu: Well in WWIIOL, Me109E's are killing tanks all the time. And it is standard practice for them to aim at the tracks and disable a tank. So, it must be realistic, right? Hmmm... maybe the 20mm Guns make the difference!? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexford Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 The holes in the Tiger tank rear hull armor must be how that Stuart managed to knock out a Tiger from the rear. There are several references to how tanks should aim at the thinner armor on the Tiger rear hull, and the guidance may have been lead to assume an incorrect fact (rear armor thickness actually equals the side armor thickness) because of some lucky penetrations through the hole areas. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 Well, just as Allied air superiority became apparent didn't the Tiger I start showing up with thicker turret roof armor? That would imply that they considered their thinner roof armor inadequate for the task, wouldn't it? Remember, the Russian anti-tank rifle round could just pierce the lower hull side of a Panther without skirts. A hail of close-range .50 rounds onto a tank's thin roof would at least be cause for concern. If the CM penetration engine says the .50 cal can pierce X armor at Y range at Z angle, and a tanks turret roof falls inside those parameters, then bye bye tank! As to breaking track links, some track types had a better reputation than others. German track links like the Tiger's had a reputation for taking abuse. Churchill track links, on the other hand, were notorious for breaking from smaller caliber hits. That's why those heavy front fenders were mounted, to act as a protective shroud for the breakable track links. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.