Panther gun damage

[bangers]

I have been noticing a high frequency of gun damage through mantlet penetration with Panthers, has anyone else noticed this ?

Edited March 20, 2018 by bangers

[Vanir Ausf B]

I have noticed it for tanks in general, not just the Panther. I don't feel it is particularly unrealistic. Any penetration of the gun mantlet is likely to damage something important.

 

[bangers]

1 hour ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

Any penetration of the gun mantlet is likely to damage something important.

I understand that, I'm just wondering if the mantlet is penetrated too easily, as I don't see it happening as frequently to other vehicles.

 

 

Edited March 21, 2018 by bangers

[Vanir Ausf B]

3 hours ago, bangers said:

I'm just wondering if the mantlet is penetrated too easily.
 

I haven't seen anything suggesting it is but if you  have specific examples I will look at them. The Panther gun mantlet is unusually large compared to most other tanks so it gets hit rather frequently.

[IanL]

The other thing I have noticed is that Panther's survive more frequently than say, for example, Sherman tanks. So while a Sherman might suffer gun damage it is also very frequently destroyed too so there are not a lot of Sherman tanks running around with a non functioning gun. Meanwhile Panther's survive better and so there are a noticeable number of Panthers driving around with non functioning guns. Just a pattern I believe has lead to several "is there something wrong with the Panther" threads in the past.

This is quite separate from any possible armour bug that @bangers might give to @Vanir Ausf B to investigate. The presence or absence of any issue with armour protection does not change that in a head to head fight between Sherman and Panther tanks more Panther tanks are going to survive hits than Sherman tanks. That is all I am pointing out.

Edit: Oops just realized this is on the CMRT forum - go ahead and substitute T34 for Sherman in the above - it sill applies (of course some models of T34 are more capable of taking out a Panther but Panther's still survive hits better than T34s do).

Edited March 21, 2018 by IanL
Fix wrong tank in my examples.

[John Kettler]

IanL,

Look on the bright side. When the LL goodies get into the game, then your statement can be true as written!

Regards,

John Kettler

[DerKommissar]

Could this be happening?

[MikeyD]

Gun barrels are not made of armor steel so taking a hit can definitely hurt them. And if something happens to the recoil cylinders the gun is as good as dead. I'm working off vague memory, but I recall someone here once posted a real world AAR vehicle damage list and knocked out guns seemed to be surprisingly frequent.

[John Kettler]

There's a pic in Zaloga's Armored Thunderbolt of a Panther whose barrel was apparently shot away leaving around two feet sticking out past the mantlet. I know of a case where a T-34/76 took a muzzle hit, so the crew spent the night using a hacksaw to cut off the splayed part,  tested the gun with a string from a distance, and when the gun fired properly instead of blowing up, off they went the next morning to resume the fight, albeit with an L/whatever minus gun barrel! That story was on IRemember.ru back when we Anglophones could use it effectively.

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited April 3, 2018 by John Kettler

[JoMac]

Speaking of Hits to Vehicles in CMx2...It seems that a Panther (for example) doesn't need a lot of hits from a 75mm Sherman before the Optics got shot-up (It Doesn't matter if hits are to the Turret or Hull)...I remember playing 'Barkmann's Corner' (for one example), and his Panther took about 6x 75mm Sherman hits (at 500-600 yards), and the Optics where already shot-up.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Is that a problem? Optics are made of glass. Also, it's not actually possible to completely destroy the optics of a tank in Combat Mission. The gunner never loses his ability to spot and target.

[Erwin]

5 hours ago, John Kettler said:

tested the gun with a string from a distance,

  Ya gotta love the Russkies...

Edited April 3, 2018 by Erwin

[John Kettler]

Well after my post, I had recollections of a cold chisel and file being involved in the gun barrel, er, cutdown. Believe at least some of the work was done with a cold chisel and a hammer. A file was definitely used to true up the barrel after the cutting was all done and, I'm sure to deal with any burrs and such inside the barrel. An impressive feat, but I wonder what adjustments the gunner had to make with the somewhat reduced power cannon and its loopier projectile trajectories not accounted for in the sights.

Regards,

John Kettler

[StieliAlpha]

On 3.4.2018 at 10:02 PM, Vanir Ausf B said:

Is that a problem? Optics are made of glass. Also, it's not actually possible to completely destroy the optics of a tank in Combat Mission. The gunner never loses his ability to spot and target.

I have the impression, optics hits don‘t matter much at all.

I remember a pretty desperate CMBN fight,  where one of my two Panthers caught an optics hit. I pulled it back, hoping to use it as MG platform later. Fortunately something moved into it‘s sights and the Panther started firing merrily (and quite effective) away with the main gun nevertheless. Perhaps a little slower than usual.

[Amizaur]

On 3.04.2018 at 8:11 PM, JoMc67 said:

Speaking of Hits to Vehicles in CMx2...It seems that a Panther (for example) doesn't need a lot of hits from a 75mm Sherman before the Optics got shot-up (It Doesn't matter if hits are to the Turret or Hull)...I remember playing 'Barkmann's Corner' (for one example), and his Panther took about 6x 75mm Sherman hits (at 500-600 yards), and the Optics where already shot-up.

IIRC one of the complains about the Panther D performance during first days of Kursk battle was that unusually high number of gunsights were damaged and workshops were quickly out of spare gunsight parts. This could be because of two factors: 1). Panther mantlet was unusually big in comparison to whole front turret profile, 2). it COULD take a 76mm blow on mantlet and keep going, only with optics damaged - instead of whole tank being destroyed like would be in case of PzIII or PzIV catching same 76mm hit:).

Edited April 8, 2018 by Amizaur

[jtsjc1]

On ‎4‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 6:30 AM, Amizaur said:

IIRC one of the complains about the Panther D performance during first days of Kursk battle was that unusually high number of gunsights were damaged and workshops were quickly out of spare gunsight parts. This could be because of two factors: 1). Panther mantlet was unusually big in comparison to whole front turret profile, 2). it COULD take a 76mm blow on mantlet and keep going, only with optics damaged - instead of whole tank being destroyed like would be in case of PzIII or PzIV catching same 76mm hit:).

This is probably why the Panther Ausf "F" had the "pig's head" mantlet like the King Tiger and a smaller front turret facing. The Germans called it Schmalturm.

[MikeyD]

I think with regard to Panther there's a psychological factor involved. I know whenever I play with an ubertank I'm more likely to take ill-advised risks, believing the armor will save me. If I were piloting a Marder III my game-play is super-careful and stealthy. A Panther or Tiger I'm practically inviting the enemy to shoot me. So my optics get wrecked, my gun gets damaged, and I fall victim to a 'lucky' lower hull penetration.

[John Kettler]

MIkeyD,

My experience, when it comes to those lovely cats, is that NO amount of careful anything can save these critters from disaster. Would agree, though, that charging in only shortens the time until things fall apart. Back during ROW, I had a Jagdpanther first bog, then immobilize, on dry ground. That's but one example. In CMBN, playing Barkmanns Corner, first Barkmann bought it while head out, followed by the gunner while head in! Have repeatedly found this sort of thing happens with any expensive CM toy, including an Abrams. Okay, more like two, if you count the one so dinged up as to be largely unfightable because its optics were cut to pieces by 30 mm fire.

Regards,

John Kettler

 

[StieliAlpha]

14 hours ago, MikeyD said:

I think with regard to Panther there's a psychological factor involved. I know whenever I play with an ubertank I'm more likely to take ill-advised risks, believing the armor will save me. If I were piloting a Marder III my game-play is super-careful and stealthy. A Panther or Tiger I'm practically inviting the enemy to shoot me. So my optics get wrecked, my gun gets damaged, and I fall victim to a 'lucky' lower hull penetration.

I agree. Though, that happens to me mostly with Tigers. Always disappointing to find out once again, that they are as invincible as I would like to have them. Perhaps, I should change expectations after all these games. 😎

Edited May 12, 2018 by StieliAlpha

[Bulletpoint]

On 2/4/2018 at 11:38 PM, MikeyD said:

Gun barrels are not made of armor steel so taking a hit can definitely hurt them.

Agreed, but in my experience the game seems a bit too happy to let shots kill the gun by coming in alongside the barrel...

Obviously a shot that hits the barrel from the side at a 90 degree angle would likely break it, but shots that come in from the front at close to 0 degrees would glance off, slide along the barrel and end hitting the mantlet instead - unless I'm fundamentally mistaken about physics.

 

[Anson Pelmet]

On 5/12/2018 at 6:23 AM, MikeyD said:

I think with regard to Panther there's a psychological factor involved. I know whenever I play with an ubertank I'm more likely to take ill-advised risks, believing the armor will save me. If I were piloting a Marder III my game-play is super-careful and stealthy. A Panther or Tiger I'm practically inviting the enemy to shoot me. So my optics get wrecked, my gun gets damaged, and I fall victim to a 'lucky' lower hull penetration.

I agree! That's probably why my Marder IIIs - hidden in trees at the far end of the map, with a limited keyhole of sight - regularly end up with higher kill counts than my expensive big cats!