47mm AT gun-pathetic after armour affects

[JonS]

... a Panther after being penetrated twice from the side by Sherman, usually just rotates it's turret and kills the Sherman.

Nonsense.

Does it happen: yes, of course.

Does it happen "usually": no.

[Amizaur]

You are saying "nonsense" to the result of one of my tests, JonS. I tested 3 immobilised buttoned Panthers showing their side, vs 4 or 6 Shermans, unbuttoned, facing the Panthers.

Shermans of course got first shot before the Panthers even noticed them (usually most shots were hits, penetrating sides of the Panthers).

The funny thing is, Panthers ALMOST ALWAYS won this uneven duel.

Sometimes one of the Panthers was killed, sometimes even two, but usually they were penetrated, but still - with or without casualties - just rotated their turrets and simply executed the Shermans in 2-3 salvos.

This result is ridiculous. There is no point in ambushing, getting advantageous position and first shot, if the attacked tank - even penetrated - immediately gets full situational awarness, notices the shootier and counterfires. Historically crews of tanks that were ambushed from the side or the rear, even didn't knew what hit them !!! They usually didn't even manage to locate the enemy, the position of where the fire is coming from, before all or most of the tanks in group were knocked out.

And if being suddenly penetrated from suprise, by unknown enemy, with casualties, they just retreated from their tanks. Even if they wanted to counterfire, they couldn't because they didn't know what hit them and from where !!

All they know was they were advancing and suddenly a bright flash and an explosion in the crew compartment happened, after which there were shocked, some wounded or even killed, there were lots of smoke, maybe fire, sometimes blood everywhere... They just opened their hatches and jumped/crawled out...

Now, compare this with my Panthers...

[womble]

I think "panic" means they are not obeying orders anymore, are only fighting for survival, and maybe not acting rationally, but they still have a self-preservation instinct so they will shot at nearby enemies. Only when they shot them, they continue to ignore your orders and instead of that, will try to retreat or hide. Panic may cause abandoning a vehicle, but also may cause the crew to retreat WITH their vehicle, if they feel it's a better idea .

I currently have a tank doing precisely that. It's been paniced for a while now, but wasn't retreating because it had nowhere to go that it liked. Now I've blown a hole in the bocage behind it, it's reversing out of danger, still in a Panic state.

[Andrew H.]

I currently have a tank doing precisely that. It's been paniced for a while now, but wasn't retreating because it had nowhere to go that it liked. Now I've blown a hole in the bocage behind it, it's reversing out of danger, still in a Panic state.

Surely a big explosion behind them won't make them less panicked...

[noob]

You are saying "nonsense" to the result of one of my tests, JonS. I tested 3 immobilised buttoned Panthers showing their side, vs 4 or 6 Shermans, unbuttoned, facing the Panthers.

How many time did you run the test ?

[womble]

Surely a big explosion behind them won't make them less panicked...

But the friendly-looking engineers waving and grinning probably soothe their worries. And frankly, with what's bearing down on them (and the crew know that), any way out looks like a good one.

[John Kettler]

It's been decades since I last read it, but Donald Featherstone, the noted wargame author,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Featherstone_(wargamer)

put out a valuable book called TANK BATTLES IN MINIATURE: A wargamers' guide to the Western Desert Campaign in 1940-1942 (1973)

It is valuable for our purposes because he did a marvelous job of finding and presenting excerpts from various individual accounts of tank warfare, a subject in which he had direct period knowledge from having served in the RAC. What I distinctly recall from that book was account after account from the British side of the engagement procedures for the 2-pdr amd 37mm armed tanks. It was simple, straightforward and was eminently logical: pick out an enemy tank and fire on it until it was either on fire or exploded, then move on. From these accounts, it's clear that the 2-pdr, firing shot only, generally required multiple penetrations to do the job. Elsewhere, I've presented examples in which a Mark IV/D took two such minor penetrations, practically in the driver's face, yet the driver wound up with only a minor head wound and was fully combat capable, as well as Wolf Heckmann's harrowing tale of a 2-pdr hit through the side of the turret of his Mark III, a shot which pierced the ammo locker, tore open some cartridge walls, but failed to ignite the exposed propellant. The tank sustained damage to its traversing mechanism, but the crew stayed with the tank, which subsequently went to the rear. He also describes a case in which the driver found himself suddenly encountering a partially penetrating 2-pdr hit directly before his face, freaked, left the tank, then returned.

The above is not to say the same holds true of a tank hit by, say, 7.5 cm PzGr 39. A quick trip to www.tankbooks.com and reading the interviews or the book TANKS FOR THE MEMORIES rapidly reveals hits of that size generally resulted in nasty wounds, dead crewmen and prompt departure from the tank. Those same, interviews, though, have the case of the Stuart whose turret was shot through and through by an 88 firing at point blank range, harming no one, leaving the tank well ventilated and fully functional. There, the crew stayed with the tank, which promptly reversed out of LOS to the 88. I think it's important to note here that no one got hurt and that nothing exploded inside the tank. The shell so overmatched the Stuart's armor that the shell was either in and out of the turret before it could fuze, OR the fuze failed to initiate.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Amizaur]

How many time did you run the test ?

Several. About six times. The Shermans won only 1 of 6 duels. This is not very statistically strength result, but enough for me to draw some private conclusions. I'm no betatester to spend more time checking and veryfing something absolutely sure. I'm curious about some game mechanics and sometimes I'm testing to check some things. When 6 Shermans are losing about 5 from 6 duels against 3 immobilised, buttoned Panthers that are showing their sides to Sherman gunners, then I draw a conclusion that something is not right. Yes, it COULD be a coincidence, but it's HIGHLY unlikely.