rune

As promised, the quote: " In the Panzer IIIG this involved a smallish shield of 40mm over the gun mounting and a long 40mm plate about 9 inches wide over the vertical front pf the superstructure. Nothing sdeems to have been done to the upper and lower nose plates or to the sides. In the Panzer IV the various expedients included the placing of extra plates of 20mm armour along the vertical sides, above and below the protection afforded by the tracks, and an extra 30mm over the vertical superstructure. The additional protection did not, however, defeat the 2 pdrs. Experiments made on German tanks captured in the Spring of 1941 showed that at 500 yards the British guns could penetrate the 40mm of double plates on the sides.... Head on all shots fired at 500 yards penetrated the double plates that protected the driver's and gunner's compartments. There was no reinforcement ont he nose. The conclusion of Middle East experts was, therefore, the Panzer IV "was completely vunerable" to the British 2 pdr..." Rune

As promised, the quote: " In the Panzer IIIG this involved a smallish shield of 40mm over the gun mounting and a long 40mm plate about 9 inches wide over the vertical front pf the superstructure. Nothing sdeems to have been done to the upper and lower nose plates or to the sides. In the Panzer IV the various expedients included the placing of extra plates of 20mm armour along the vertical sides, above and below the protection afforded by the tracks, and an extra 30mm over the vertical superstructure. The additional protection did not, however, defeat the 2 pdrs. Experiments made on German tanks captured in the Spring of 1941 showed that at 500 yards the British guns could penetrate the 40mm of double plates on the sides.... Head on all shots fired at 500 yards penetrated the double plates that protected the driver's and gunner's compartments. There was no reinforcement ont he nose. The conclusion of Middle East experts was, therefore, the Panzer IV "was completely vunerable" to the British 2 pdr..." Rune

Hmm...I should tell Charles about it, but then AI think, how much do we screw it up. Obviously they had fixed the error by adjusting fire, how many units did or didn't fix the problem. Not sure of dropping accuracy would not just bve worse in the long run, as the book only covers 1941, were the sights ever fixed? Just not information to do anything on... /tongue in cheek mode on You would think that they would have saved all this information for us, knowing that someday I would be doing research on the most obscure facts of WWII for a computer game. Very incosniderate of them not to save all this data, like HE for 6 pdr guns amd the small arms of the South African Army Squads. /tongue in cheek mode off Rune

Hmm...I should tell Charles about it, but then AI think, how much do we screw it up. Obviously they had fixed the error by adjusting fire, how many units did or didn't fix the problem. Not sure of dropping accuracy would not just bve worse in the long run, as the book only covers 1941, were the sights ever fixed? Just not information to do anything on... /tongue in cheek mode on You would think that they would have saved all this information for us, knowing that someday I would be doing research on the most obscure facts of WWII for a computer game. Very incosniderate of them not to save all this data, like HE for 6 pdr guns amd the small arms of the South African Army Squads. /tongue in cheek mode off Rune

Rexford, Going from memory here, as I am from work, will follow up later when home. It states the add on armour for the G wasn't very good and didn't help much, and the Germans even added tracks and sandbags to try to help against the 2 pdr. Could it be that some of the armour added to the G was NOT face hardened, which in the book anyway, is referred to flame hardened? Part of the problem is some of the Panzer IIIs and IVs were called "specials" without really defining what they were. Of note in the book was drawings of the tanks and the armour in mm. The reason I brought up the sights again, is a Brigadier of the Hussars himself said it was the reason for the myth of 600 yards. I also found it interesting that the Germans and Italians thought the British tanks were superior to the German Tanks. They say the 2 pdrs was better then the 50mm to about 1000 meters, where the 50mm finally surpassed the 2 pdr in penetration. That obviously changed once the longs came out. All in all a interesting discussion. However, with this further proof, I absolutely agree with you, it is modelled correctly. Rune

Rexford, Going from memory here, as I am from work, will follow up later when home. It states the add on armour for the G wasn't very good and didn't help much, and the Germans even added tracks and sandbags to try to help against the 2 pdr. Could it be that some of the armour added to the G was NOT face hardened, which in the book anyway, is referred to flame hardened? Part of the problem is some of the Panzer IIIs and IVs were called "specials" without really defining what they were. Of note in the book was drawings of the tanks and the armour in mm. The reason I brought up the sights again, is a Brigadier of the Hussars himself said it was the reason for the myth of 600 yards. I also found it interesting that the Germans and Italians thought the British tanks were superior to the German Tanks. They say the 2 pdrs was better then the 50mm to about 1000 meters, where the 50mm finally surpassed the 2 pdr in penetration. That obviously changed once the longs came out. All in all a interesting discussion. However, with this further proof, I absolutely agree with you, it is modelled correctly. Rune

Axe, To make you feel better, when I get home from work, I will send you a new CMAK scenario I just created. Enjoy.... Rune

Bastables is correct on the nose armour. It seems by Davy's comment it was a hitting the target issue, his unit figured it out due to the fact he was an ex-artillery officer and knew how to adjust....a 300 yard miss at 1000 yards, I'd say the sights were off a bit. It was late when I post that, but yes, it was the side armour of the Panzer IV Long "Special", the front was penetrated at 500 yards.n The later Panzer IVs with flame hardened armour even at 100 the rounds would bounce off. Also the book just covers the battle of Sidi Rezeg, and it does indeed have aars of panzers being destroyed at 1000 yards. I will try to scan the pages, but I won't risk the book to do so. I only got the book by ordering it from South Africa. Last time I checked, there were a few places on amazon that had it but wanted 100-150 dollars for it. However, I did post the pages and if someone has it, can read it. Will try to let all know later, but either way, a 1000 yard kill was possible if you hit. Rune

Bastables is correct on the nose armour. It seems by Davy's comment it was a hitting the target issue, his unit figured it out due to the fact he was an ex-artillery officer and knew how to adjust....a 300 yard miss at 1000 yards, I'd say the sights were off a bit. It was late when I post that, but yes, it was the side armour of the Panzer IV Long "Special", the front was penetrated at 500 yards.n The later Panzer IVs with flame hardened armour even at 100 the rounds would bounce off. Also the book just covers the battle of Sidi Rezeg, and it does indeed have aars of panzers being destroyed at 1000 yards. I will try to scan the pages, but I won't risk the book to do so. I only got the book by ordering it from South Africa. Last time I checked, there were a few places on amazon that had it but wanted 100-150 dollars for it. However, I did post the pages and if someone has it, can read it. Will try to let all know later, but either way, a 1000 yard kill was possible if you hit. Rune

Lorrin, Will dig that out later, however, found an excellent source that ends the debate: The Sidi Rezeg Battles 1941 by Agar-Hamilton and Turner Pgs 38-39, I quote: "Experiments made on German Tanks cvaptured int he Spring of 1941 showed that at 500 yards, the British guns [2 pdrs] could penetrate the 40mm of double plate on the Panzer IV and the 20mm on the other side of the tank. At 1000 yards it could pentrate it could still penetrate the double plate but not come out the other side" Quoted from teh Middle East Training Manual in the book was this gem: "the myth of german invincibility of material when submitted toi the cold light of engineering fact , makes a very sorry exhibition". On Pg 39, a lot more detail, but basically states the British tanks were actually better then the Panzer III with this quote: Brigadier Davy of the 7th Hussars, found that with the telescopic sights, firing the 2 pdrs before Crusader, that at 1000 yard, the round would land short 300 yards, or 11 feet vertically below the aim point...and he also states "it was no doubt responsible for the legend that the effective range of the 2 pdrs was no more then 600 yards." On pg 37 they talk about the 2 pdr penetrating the Panzer III easily at 1000 yards, and last, back on page 39, they tell on how when at longer ranges the shell would hit the Panzer III, the back tracer part would shatter and break off and shoot into another direction giving the impression that the round bounced off while it actuall penetrated. Lorrin, it is late tonight, I will try to scan the pages tomorrow, but as the book is exceedingly rare and old, not sure I want to chance cracking the spine of the book. Egads, went a little deeper, they talk about the base shop adding additional armoru to the Panzer IIIG, and the fact that once flame hardened armour was added on new tanks,t he 2 pdr could not penetrate, they specifically mention that this did NOT happen until the J model. Rune PS There are several AARs in the book where they mention Panzer III kills frontally and sides at 1000 yard or greater ranfe.

Lorrin, Will dig that out later, however, found an excellent source that ends the debate: The Sidi Rezeg Battles 1941 by Agar-Hamilton and Turner Pgs 38-39, I quote: "Experiments made on German Tanks cvaptured int he Spring of 1941 showed that at 500 yards, the British guns [2 pdrs] could penetrate the 40mm of double plate on the Panzer IV and the 20mm on the other side of the tank. At 1000 yards it could pentrate it could still penetrate the double plate but not come out the other side" Quoted from teh Middle East Training Manual in the book was this gem: "the myth of german invincibility of material when submitted toi the cold light of engineering fact , makes a very sorry exhibition". On Pg 39, a lot more detail, but basically states the British tanks were actually better then the Panzer III with this quote: Brigadier Davy of the 7th Hussars, found that with the telescopic sights, firing the 2 pdrs before Crusader, that at 1000 yard, the round would land short 300 yards, or 11 feet vertically below the aim point...and he also states "it was no doubt responsible for the legend that the effective range of the 2 pdrs was no more then 600 yards." On pg 37 they talk about the 2 pdr penetrating the Panzer III easily at 1000 yards, and last, back on page 39, they tell on how when at longer ranges the shell would hit the Panzer III, the back tracer part would shatter and break off and shoot into another direction giving the impression that the round bounced off while it actuall penetrated. Lorrin, it is late tonight, I will try to scan the pages tomorrow, but as the book is exceedingly rare and old, not sure I want to chance cracking the spine of the book. Egads, went a little deeper, they talk about the base shop adding additional armoru to the Panzer IIIG, and the fact that once flame hardened armour was added on new tanks,t he 2 pdr could not penetrate, they specifically mention that this did NOT happen until the J model. Rune PS There are several AARs in the book where they mention Panzer III kills frontally and sides at 1000 yard or greater ranfe.

Mister Wino, Evil wanted, evil created. It features April 1941, explody things, Seanachai, Explody things, Soddball, Explody things, Italians, Australians, and explody things. Pick a victim so I can email it to you, I will, however, expect feedback, unlike the rest of the slackers around here. Rune

I just did it and had all sorts of choices....what region? Rune

You know, mentioning it, I never got my SPWAW CD and I don't even know if my name was on it for the scenarios i did. Rune

Dear Mister Wino, Thank you, thank you. You may select a region and date and I will create a scenario for your use. As an extra bonus, you may select a name of your choosing to be placed within said scenario in a unit that you pick. Seanachai and Soddball, Did you both receive the scenario I sent for your Battle Royale? Tradition states that you actually acknowledge getting the work someone has done for you. I hope it causes you much gnashing of teeth. Rune

Guys, He is entitled to his opinion. Not all games are for everyone. There is enough doubt on the issue, part of the problem is you are dealing with events from 60 years ago. You would not believe what I had to go through to get the TO&E for South African units. We never trust just a single source, using multiples, and have always been open to suggestions or correcting errors if proof was found. There is no proof to over-turn all of the above. If that breaks the game for him, then that is his opinion. I thank him for trying the game. For everyone else, especially from results from testing shown above, 6-8 to 1 losses, there has not been complaints, including from people like Rexford [who IS a beta tester] who has written books on the subject. Are we perfect? far from it... but we need more to go on then a vague comment not mention models, target hit locations, and other misc. factors. Rune

Guys, He is entitled to his opinion. Not all games are for everyone. There is enough doubt on the issue, part of the problem is you are dealing with events from 60 years ago. You would not believe what I had to go through to get the TO&E for South African units. We never trust just a single source, using multiples, and have always been open to suggestions or correcting errors if proof was found. There is no proof to over-turn all of the above. If that breaks the game for him, then that is his opinion. I thank him for trying the game. For everyone else, especially from results from testing shown above, 6-8 to 1 losses, there has not been complaints, including from people like Rexford [who IS a beta tester] who has written books on the subject. Are we perfect? far from it... but we need more to go on then a vague comment not mention models, target hit locations, and other misc. factors. Rune

Pssssssssstttttttttttttttt Axe A French Beta Tester even got his before you got yours. Rune

EZ, You are correct...it is not modelled wrong. Here is a nice quote I found. Intelligence was slow in establishing “the extent to which the British weapons were inferior to the Germans as it was not until enemy weapons were captured and sent back to Britain for analysis that it became apparent that “extra armour plates were face hardened - to an extent which made the German tanks invulnerable to frontal penetration by the British two pounder7. The footnote mention it was the nose armour, and NOT the turret armour. Rune

EZ, You are correct...it is not modelled wrong. Here is a nice quote I found. Intelligence was slow in establishing “the extent to which the British weapons were inferior to the Germans as it was not until enemy weapons were captured and sent back to Britain for analysis that it became apparent that “extra armour plates were face hardened - to an extent which made the German tanks invulnerable to frontal penetration by the British two pounder7. The footnote mention it was the nose armour, and NOT the turret armour. Rune

Soddball, Why yes, yes I indeed have something ready to go. It features Italy, explody things, crunchies, Explody things, Germans, Explody things, and Pommies with their explody thingys. I believe it is around 1500 points, and is called Vines and Vineyards. It shall be sent your way when I get home. Yes, you may take evil lessons from it. Rune

It is all part of the Evil BFC plot to have Canadians beg to become Americans. With Customs stopping your copies, Boggs in Alberta and Harv in Sheepland, plus the fact their Army is going bankrupt due to politicians, it was decided to make Canada part of say...Maine. Rune

Boggs, See signature below. Axe , of course that is what I meant, we are shipping him to Alberta...it is the least we can do for you. Rune

Rune places a phone call to Canadian Customs Yes, yes, sure, no go ahead, if you are sure it is Axe's, of course you may keep it. Well, if you really want to get him, send his to Mr. Spkr in Texas.. yes, yes, we are sure we both the Soddball loses code in. What's that? Naaa...bet he hasn't even tried that scenario yet, it would have melted his processor. No...No... He can't even be considered a Jr. Evil. Well, OK, maybe a boil on Berli's .... OK, gotta run, Yes, Yes, we still plan on sending Boggs to Alberta...ok...yeah...bye Rune

Because the scenario file format changes. MikeyD is absolutely correct. Rune