Panzerschreck accuracy

[poesel]

What would the hit probability be of a Panzerschreck under firing range conditions at 200m vs a Priest? Regular troops, perfect weather etc..

I ran a short test and hit probability was 33%. That surprised me a bit since I didn't reckon that they were that accurate at maximum distance.

Results table (s=shot, h=hit):

3s0h

3s0h

2s2h (target destroyed after second hit)

1s1h (target destroyed on first hit)

3s1h (last shot hit)

3s1h (last shot hit)

Total: 15s5h

Three more teams weren't shooting because the target was just beyond the 200m max range. Of course there needs to be a cut off range but with those hit chances they should give it a shot.

Other interesting bit: none of the priests spotted a Schreck team, only one sound contact, even after firing. That I guess is due to the recent changes - good!

[phil stanbridge]

I lost a Sherman V to an unknown in last night's campaign fighting. When I finally accepted defeat I scouted around the map to see what hit my tank. Turns out it was a schreck at 200m! I was gutted.

[poesel]

For comparison I did the same test with Bazookas vs Tiger. I took the Tiger because it's roughly as big as a Priest.

Distance was 175m this time - the max range for the Zooks. I tested with both the M1A1 and the M9A1.

M1A1:

Strange thing was that they didn't fire. I had to give explicit target orders. Then I found out why they didn't: none of the shots could penetrate the Tiger front! Only slight damage to radio and optics.

Table:

4s1h (3rd)

5s1h (4th)

4s3h

4s3h

- (172m with target no shoot)

4s3h

4s2h

4s3h

4s2h

33s18h 54%

One of the teams refused to fire even on order.

M9A1:

They fired without order. They also got penetration but the result was not very encouraging.

4s2h (last 2, 1 pen)

2s1h (stops after 2nd, main gun destroyed)

4s3h (2 pen)

4s0h

4s2h (tank drove closer after 1st)

3s1h (1 pen, 1st shot)

3s1h (no pen, , main gun destroyed)

4s1h (1 pen, 3rd shot)

28s11h 39%

Except for the destroyed main gun the effects were the same as with the M1.

The hit percentage is similar to the Panzerschreck. The 54% results from the higher number of shots with the M1. The Schrecks needed only one hit to destroy a volatile target as a Priest and then stopped firing. The M1 had ranged in and continued to fire.

So accuracy seems to be ~ M1 > M9 > Schreck and you have roughly a 1:3 chance to hit the target at maximum range.

Is that was it was like? The number of tests is a bit small for an exact result but is the direction ok?

[sburke]

I once saw the AI launch a shreck at well over 250 m....and gasped as it arced very nicely right into my Sherman...then gasped again as the Sherman exploded taking out the halftrack next to it. Have never seen one hit from that far since, but the experience scarred me.

Typically I use them in the 70-150 meter range. Beyond that they become very unreliable.

Bazooka range is considerably less and there may be some input from BF that keeps them from launching too far past their range capability. That had been an issue previously with PIATs.

[Pak40]

I wonder how much percentage goes down when the target is moving. You could do another test with the Tiger moving in a circle pattern around the zooka.

[A Canadian Cat]

Running circles around the AT weapon - that would be interesting! Good idea.

BTW @poesel71 testing samples with around 30 shots might not be quite enough to decide which is more accurate.

[slysniper]

Agree, the test sample is too small to say for sure that your percentages are correct.

But As for knowing if you have a decent chance of a hit. Your 1 in 3 shots seem appropriate.

But the test would also be interesting to run with your troops in different statuses - I am sure if they are tired - you will see that the percentage number will go down. I don’t know how much, but it would be interesting to find out.

I have noticed in the game to pay attention to my troop status when planning an AT weapon attack. The worse shape they are in, the closer I make sure they are to the target to hopefully get a hit. Wounded, tired troops out of command will not be hitting 1 in 3

[poesel]

Maybe I need to phrase it better: I don't think anything is wrong with handheld AT weapons. Or better: I don't KNOW if something is wrong as I don't know how they did historically.

My gut feeling was that they should be worse than 1:3 at max range. Actually I wanted to ask here first for some numbers and then make the test versus the expected outcome. But then I thought I should put at least a little effort into it before I ask someone else for numbers.

Of course the number of shots are much too small to be statistically significant. And the intention was not to test the different weapons against each other. That was just to see if something was off with the Panzerschrecks I did first.

Now if someone could/would step forward and for example say: 'yeah they did that test in '46 on that army range and about one in three hit the target' then all is well and I go back to sleep. But some 'no way - you wouldn't hit the broadside of a barn at that range' and I'm off to more testing.

I hope I made myself clear

[YankeeDog]

Yes; it's very hard to say... 1/3 hits @ 200m seems high to me, but then again, your test is basically testing perfect "firing range" conditions, and actual combat usage is never going to match that.

It may well be that if we were able to go back in a time machine to 1944 and observe a trained PzShreck team at the training range at Grafenwoehr shooting at a target silhouette about the size of a Priest @200m on a perfectly clear day in good light with no wind, they would hit about 1 shot out of 3.

[Odin]

I played a recent PBEM and fired 5-6 zook shots before I finally hit my opponent's stug. The zooks were fired at ranges roughly between 85m-110m. Here's a video AAR, the zook action starts from about halfway in:

[John Kettler]

poesel71,

I believe this book, either in physical or digital form will help you:

Field Rocket Equipment of the German Army - 1939 1945, Terry Gander

The whole thing used to be available for free on Scribd. Sigh. Now, it's a bit more involved.

But if you're really serious about this (and can read German [unsure whether you're German or just happen to be there and making do with English] or have some way to get a translation done), a site called Bergflak's Lounge has eight (8) Panzerschreck manuals! The most critical of the Panzerschreck manuals is available translated into English as part of the long portion on the Panzerschreck. Would be very surprised if the info you seek wasn't in somewhere in those manuals.

Based on sight picture drawings for various Allied and Russian tanks, the crews trained to shoot as far as 150 meters (but targets at firing range were out to 200 meters). Oh, if the Panzerschreck happened to be fired at 45 degree elevation, it could reach as far as 1000 meters. A PIAT fired the same way would go 750. And now for a Panzerschreck anecdote.

Roughly three decades ago, I read an article by a military historian in AFV-G2 magazine about the painful Allied introduction to the Panzerschreck. It happened at Anzio with a Sherman Flail tank which trundled out to clear the mines so the breakout could begin. Whoosh! Flail tank explodes. Another one is sent forth. Whoosh! It too explodes. As I recall, the third Flail survived, doubtless because the Panzerschreck team either broke contact or was put out of action one way or another. Unfortunately, I don't recall there was a range listed for that engagement.

Hope the above is useful.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Vanir Ausf B]

The M1A1 bazooka uses the M6A1 rocket, which has a dispersion of 8.5 mils. The CMBN manual doesn't say what rocket the M9A1 is assumed to be using, but it is probably the M6A3 which has a dispersion of 6 mils.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/13810984/Standard-Ordnance-Items-Catalog-1944-Vol-3

Pages 148-150

I have read that the optical sight on the M9 bazooka had range gradations every 50 yards compared to every 100 yards on the M1A1.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Odd that the bazooka maximum range is only 175 meters in the game. FM 23-30, February 1944 (pgs 85-92) lists maximum range for the bazooka as 650 yards, with even moving targets considered hittable at up to 300 yards from a sitting position.

Page 85:

No sight picture can be obtained with launcher M1A1 beyond 300 yards. Elevation for ranges between 300 and 650 yards must be estimated.

Page 86:

At ranges up to 300 yards the primary use of the launcher is to fire at moving targets.

[poesel]

JK, yes I do indeed speak German

I skimmed through the manuals (again as my browser told me...). Thanks to Grandma I can read Fraktur

Not much in it except that maximum range is 200m (at least the visor goes that far). They mention that in a defensive setup the effective range is 150m. In another place there is 120m range for shooting at moving tanks. And then there is this:

It says that with ammunition type "Arkt 44/45" you have good chances to hit at -25°C to 100m, 0° to 150m and +25° to 200m. The types "Sommermunition 44" ('summer ammunition 44') and "Arkt" should only be used to 100m (from D1864/6 Panzerschreck manual http://www.bergflak.com/images/D1864_6.pdf page 17).

So as soon as we have a winter module with Schrecks we can test if BFC correctly models the winter ammunition accuracy.

If 150m-ish seems to be the somewhat recommended distance to engage then 1:3 for 200m seems no too far off. Good enough for me.

Btw.: there is also the very casual notion about shooting out of a window - which usually are in houses.

[akd]

Odd that the bazooka maximum range is only 175 meters in the game.

Not odd at all. If the TacAI wasted all its ammo on targets at 650 yards, players would be justifiably angry.

even moving targets considered hittable at up to 300 yards from a sitting position.

This has always struck me as wildly optimistic.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Not odd at all. If the TacAI wasted all its ammo on targets at 650 yards, players would be justifiably angry.

For the TacAI, yes. But I would think the human player would at least be able to order shots at longer ranges (assuming poesel's observation is correct about not being able to).

This has always struck me as wildly optimistic.

Probably. But 6 mils dispersion is only 5.4 feet or 1.6 meters at 300 yards (274 meters). If that is correct the weapon is plenty accurate enough to hit a tank-sized object at that range. I don't know what the first shot accuracy for a rested, unsuppressed shooter should be when firing at a motionless tank, but i see no reason to think it would be prohibitively low.

[JasonC]

Vanir - mils dispersion is an inherent accuracy of the weapon if benchrested dispersion, not the practical dispersion of the fall of shot when fired from the shoulder. Just as a K98 rifle has the inherent accuracy to hit and kill with every single trigger pull out to 200 yards or more, but would never achieve that in practice fired offhand, a bazooka is not going to keep all its rounds inside a 6 foot circle at 300 yards.

I would bet money that you could not keep *all* your shots (20 for 20 say) inside a 6 foot circle at 300 yards, firing offhand - with a K98.

[Vanir Ausf B]

What part of my post suggests any of that is news to me?

[poesel]

For the TacAI, yes. But I would think the human player would at least be able to order shots at longer ranges (assuming poesel's observation is correct about not being able to).

Sorry, you got that wrong: I had one Bazooka team that wouldn't shoot at a distance of 172m for one minute. The Panzerschrecks that didn't shoot had a distance of >200m (my fault in the setup) but also were not ordered to shoot.

So what you assume here was not tested. But since I'm sick at home anyway I'll do it for you.

[Sgt Joch]

Btw.: there is also the very casual notion about shooting out of a window - which usually are in houses.

Did you retest that with 2.12?

[poesel]

But I would think the human player would at least be able to order shots at longer ranges

Nope - you can target but they don't shoot. It's good that you are able to target them. May be useful when the target is moving. Would of course be nice if the player got some kind of feedback that they won't fire until in range.

Did you retest that with 2.12?

I'm well aware of the discussion and the new development in 2.12. But part of the problem was that there was no historic notion for or against being able to shoot out of houses. So now after BFC changed it there is finally a glimpse that at least the Heereswaffenamt thought it would be possible, too.

Btw for those interested: the reference is in:

http://www.bergflak.com/images/D1864_6.pdf

Page 18 last paragraph - shooting down from windows (presumably urban fighting)

[slysniper]

Maybe I need to phrase it better: I don't think anything is wrong with handheld AT weapons. Or better: I don't KNOW if something is wrong as I don't know how they did historically.

My gut feeling was that they should be worse than 1:3 at max range. Actually I wanted to ask here first for some numbers and then make the test versus the expected outcome. But then I thought I should put at least a little effort into it before I ask someone else for numbers.

Of course the number of shots are much too small to be statistically significant. And the intention was not to test the different weapons against each other. That was just to see if something was off with the Panzerschrecks I did first.

Now if someone could/would step forward and for example say: 'yeah they did that test in '46 on that army range and about one in three hit the target' then all is well and I go back to sleep. But some 'no way - you wouldn't hit the broadside of a barn at that range' and I'm off to more testing.

I hope I made myself clear

Even if you find this info, it still is questionable as to what the real event should reflect.

Having fired a few of these weapons or similar weapons that we have today I will put it this way.

If you are a novice and do not have someone teaching you all the tricks. You will likely miss whatever you are aiming at, even if it seems like a easy hit.

Seen it plenty. But once you understand the weapon and get a few things consistant, like your eye location to the sight on the old stuff and understand what to expect. It is actually pretty easy to hit a non moving target at any range the weapon is built for.

So it goes back to there is no way to prove 1-3 is correct.

Novice team would likely not get it even in perfect conditions

Skilled team, could likely do better than that.

That is from what I have seen.

As for the game, if you think 1-3 is too high, then before taking that as wrong. do as i said before test the same thing with a tired unit, with terrain challenges (wind or such and see what the numbers reflect. Then maybe you will feel better about how the game is approaching it.

For myself, the game seems fine as to hit chances to me (which does not mean much)

[Vanir Ausf B]

Hard data is difficult to come by. But the gist of what I am reading around the internet is that the Bazooka was more accurate and had a longer effective range than the Schreck, which is the opposite of how it is in the game.

I can't vouch for the sources, but for what it's worth:

Realistically, about 200 yards, 400 for a stationary target. For the panzerschrek the practical range is about 75 yards, 100 or so for a stationary target. But, both are far more dependent on the operator than the weapon. I have read numerous accounts of how much this effects accuracy with these weapons. In one case with the bazooka US troops were practice firing at about 300 yards at a boxcar the first gunner fired 6 rounds in succession missing every time. Another soldier then tried, hitting on his first and each successive shot thereafter.

http://www.ww2f.com/topic/3176-bazooka-v-panzerschreck/

Overall, the German design almost doubled the weight of the US M9A1. While increasing the penetration performance by about 50%, effective range was reduced by about one third, to 150 meters.

http://www.inert-ord.net/atrkts/pschrek/

[poesel]

As for the game, if you think 1-3 is too high, then before taking that as wrong. do as i said before test the same thing with a tired unit, with terrain challenges (wind or such and see what the numbers reflect. Then maybe you will feel better about how the game is approaching it.

First: as I already wrote I'm fine with hit percentages

Second: if I would run tests as you said I wouldn't test accuracy. I would test the influence of unit and weather conditions on the accuracy. But without a baseline this wouldn't help much.

I started this testing because usually I would set covered arcs of 100m around the Schrecks. Now I was a bit desperate in a battle and removed the CAs. I hit a driving Bren carrier at ~120m and stationary priests at 160m and 190m - all with first shots. Rested regulars in rain.

I don't complain but it made me a bit suspicious. Thus the test. Seems I got lucky in my game but not too much out of the ordinary.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Try testing the M9A1 bazooka at max range (175m) again, but this time with elite AT teams. At that range the dispersion is only about 1 meter so a well-trained soldier should be able to hit a tank-sized target at least most of the time.