Dittohead

From http://www.britwar.co.uk/salts/salt5.htm WO 291/308 Effect of flamethrowers on military personnel. Users believe from experience in action that flamethrowers have a strong morale effect. It is estimated that a gallon of burning fuel in contact with the victim will kill. Information from flame actions showed an average of 270 gallons per death, 9 gallons per prisoner. Discharge rates are 4.7 gallons/sec for the Crocodile, 1 gallon/sec for the manpack. Thickened fuel gives a clean flame rod, with little or no obscuration, and the fuel continues to burn on the ground. Unthickened fuel produces a sheet of billowing flame, much obscuration, and little burning on the ground. This obscuration effect could be used to blind pillbox slits at 20 yards or over with a manpack flamethrower, then approach to 10 yards, close enough to shoot through the aperture. WO 291/986 The operational effectiveness of the flamethrower tank (Crocodile). This report uses war diaries and other sources covering 175 Crocodile and infantry actions in NW Europe. The actions listed show from 2 to 15 Crocodiles supporting typically 1 or 2 infantry companies, but sometime nil, one platoon, 4 companies, or an unknown number. The report concludes that, as indicated by casualties sustained by the attacking infantry, the Crocodile was better than a standard tank in the support role by a factor of about 2 in day actions and about 2.5 in night actions. Of the 175 actions, in only 11 cases did the infantry fail to reach their objective. In about 50% of actions little or no opposition was encountered after flame was used. "This indicates the great morale effect of flame". In one instance, a German NCO ordered his men to surrender if they were attacked by flamethrowers. For each trailer of fuel expended, about 6 enemy were killed and about 28 captured. In about 50% of actions, 50 to 100% of the fuel was expended, with an overall average of about 70%. Over the period Jan 1944 to Apr 1945 fuel expenditure increased from about 30% on average to about 90% in the last few months. The capacity of the trailer was considered adequate: A crocodile trailer holds 400 gallons, about enough for 100 shots.

I recently acquired Squadron/Signal publications "US TankDestroyersin Action" Armor Number 36. I noticed that on all M-10 and M-36 TD's the .50 cals were mounted on a fixed pintle on the back of the turret in such a way, that the only place that they can fire effectively is in about a 120 degree arc to the rear of the turret. The TC would have to hang out onto the rear sponson or deck in order to fire forward. Some M-18's had the .50 cal mounted on a fixed pintle while others had the circular mount on the TC station. Just wondering if the effectiveness of the .50 cal on these TD's should is drastically reduced when firing forward or should they be restricted to the 120 deg rear arc of the turret. Or if the .50 cal fires forward it makes the TC real easy to hit with small arms fire. Some TD's were modified by moving the pintle forward, while others mounted a .30 cal forward. But in most pictures the .50 cal is pointed limply to the rear and not being used. Its interesting to note that the UN captured a Serbian M-18 following the Dayton Peace accords. Now thats a classic. Tony

Yes, anything is posssible with the editor. Why you little.........

Note the impotance of firing first. WO 291/975 Tank battle analysis. This report presents the results of an analysis of 83 tank vs. tank actions in NW Europe taken from unit war diaries. The data means that it is not possible to separate results out by individual tank or gun types. It is assumed that Allied (British) tanks have 25% 17-pr tanks, and that 25% of towed ATk guns are 6-pr, the rest 17-pr. German ATk guns are assumed to be 50% 75mm and 50% 88mm. The report's conclusions are: 1.SP guns are more effective that towed ATk guns by a factor of about 3 for the Allies, and about 2 for the Germans. 1.The Panther and Tiger are more effective than Mk III and IV against Allied SP guns by a factor of about 4. 1."In tank versus tank engagements, for the chance of success to be equal for either side, Allied tanks would have to outnumber the German tanks by some 30%". 1.For an equal chance of success against German anti-tank guns, Allied tanks need to outnumber them by about 2 to 1. 1.The mean "success range" for the 17-pr was 2100 yards, as against 580 yards for the 75mm. 1.The average "success ranges" for tanks were 750 yards for the Allies, 1290 yards for the Germans. 1.Allied ATk guns were successful at 1090 yards (SP) and 870 yards (towed), whereas German figures were 330 yards (SP) and 300 yards (towed). 1.Of 83 actions, 58 were won by the side that fired first. Where a side was both Numerically superior and fired first, it was invariably successful. 1.A successful tank attack typically resulted in about 15% losses; a failure, about 65%. 1.A successful ATk gun defence resulted in about 12.5% (SP) or 15% (towed) losses; a failure, over 50% (SP) or 80% (towed). From http://www.britwar.co.uk/salts/salt5.htm

Hunnicutt says "a few" 17 pdr APDS became available in Aug 44, but that the early rounds were "somewhat erratic", and less accurate than APCBC. I think they need to model the erratic behavior of APDS rounds to even things up a bit.

Seems like the 7.92mm can penetrate the M-8 side and rear armor found this(not sure of the bullet type) WO 190/706, German Army infantry weapons. This document is dated 1938. Range in units stated, penetration in mm. Weapon Angle Range Penetration 7.92mm s.m.k bullet 90º 400m 8.5 90º 100m 10 Chamberlain, Doyle & Jentz, 1978 Appendix I, "German Tank Armament ", in: "Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two", first edition, Peter Chamberlain, Hilary L. Doyle & Thomas L. Jentz, A&AP 1978, page 245. "Penetration of Homogenous Armour Plate at 30º from Vertical", ranges in metres. Weapon Ammunition 100m 500m 7.92mm MGs Patr SmK 8mm 3mm From http://www.britwar.co.uk/salts/salt5.htm Web site has an excellent summary of penetration data from all sources. Penetration data is downloaded as a rtf document. [This message has been edited by Dittohead (edited 01-16-2001).]

British Report on Gyro's - Lots and lots of good info on this site. Wow http://www.britwar.co.uk/salts/salt5.htm WO 291/1202 Tank armament stabilisation: User experience and the present situation. Westinghouse hydro-electric stabilisation on the Stuart, Lee and Sherman stabilised the main turret armament and co-ax in elevation only. "Owing to the limitations inherent in the system, it was used very little operationally. It gave slightly better results when shooting on the move than could be obtained with a shoulder-controlled gun; but the chances of hitting when using it on the move were so small, compared with firing from the halt, that users preferred to engage their targets from the halt rather than on the move with the stabiliser working." In Italy, the stabiliser was used as a shock-absorber on 76mm Shermans, as the big gun subjected the elevating mechanism to large shock loadings when moving cross-country. "The Westinghouse stabiliser was so little used during the campaign in NW Europe, that servicing and repair of the equipment ceased after the liberation of Belgium. Replacement vehicles were sent forward classified as "fit",regardless of whether the stabiliser was in working order or not." Trials with the Metrovick electrical two-axis stabiliser on 20-pr Centurions at Lulworth showed accuracy with AP 70–75% as good as at the halt, and with HE very nearly as good as at the halt. A second trial produced results slightly less favourable.

Well with the M-8 there a couple issues that need to be resolved. Have been looking but no additional info so far. 1. Is the armor 9mm or 10mm. If the armor is 9mm can the 7.92mm penetrate at under 100m. 2. The Puma and /3 have 8mm @30 deg = 9.2mm and was penetrated by the .30 cal at around 80m. The 234/1 was not, has 8mm @35 deg = 9.7mm. So MG-42 should go through 9mm. As I brought up in another thread it would be nice for Tanks or AT guns to fire HE at AC instead of AP. This way even on near misses the HE round has a good chance to disable the AC, esp the fast moving ones.

I was just re-reading the battle for the Remagen bridge portions of "First across the Rhine, the story of the 291st Eng Combat Battalion" by COl David E. Pergrin. The germans thru everything at them including the 540mm guns and V-2's in attempts to destroy the bridge.

Then again it would be nice to be able to select HE to fire against thinly armored cars and halftracks. Even a near miss will have a good chance to knock them out.

So how does a 37mm crew adjust fire at 1000m moving at 10-15 mph. In large caliper guns it is easy to see the stike of the round to adjust fire. But with the 37mm you just don't have the magnification on sight or do you? Only if the German optics were this good. Who loads the 37mm while the cmdr is shooting the .50 cal? Does it have an autoloader? ROF does not equal accuracy [This message has been edited by Dittohead (edited 01-16-2001).]

This points out that the M-8 and other wheeled AC should be vulnerable to immobilization and critical hits from machinegun fire. As it is now mg's do not shoot at the M-8's. All it would take would be a chunk of rubber on the front tire being shot off and then when the M-8 tries to turn. The tire gets torn from the rim. Bingo immobilized.

Hmmm I wonder of Tamiya accounts for the superior german optics.

Gimmie 20, And whats for supper?

Remember he is a trained professional, so kids please do not try this at home. Looks like a case of shatter gap to me.

Anybody else notice the board acting up?

The Ju 87G-1/2 used Wolfram core shells for their 37mmAP rounds as well. Hopefully we will be able to buy Hans Rudel for Air support in CM-2.

Are you playing with full Fog of War? If not you should.

Keep up the good work Rexford. Now if we just had a complete summary of all the info you've provided.

Oops forgot about the British. I need to locate other sources to verify the thickness of the side and rear armour on the M-8. 3/8" = 9mm So the 10mm armor may be incorrect. Also need to lookup the penetration of the various MG's.

Partial Info PZSK - rounds - 7.27 lbs tube - 65" long 24.2 lbs Bazooka - Rds - 3.4 lbs Plus after so many years of war the British and German troops were tired and out of shape.

what, no back bacon?

i [This message has been edited by Dittohead (edited 01-10-2001).]

I would much rather see picts of T-34, Pz-III KV's, Etc.

I believe it is only available in June and July of 44.