Anyone else done a gunnery range?

[Ari Maenpaa]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jshandorf:

Steve,

Once you have something hashed out and applied to CM2, and of coarse you feel it is as close as possible to reality, can you apply it to CM?

Thanks,

Jeff<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

An excellent suggestion.

I'll second that.

Ari

[aka_tom_w]

Just testing out the new sig file.

-tom w

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Following are opinions (very abridged because of the size of this post) of members of the 66th and 67th Armored Regiments and 2nd Armored Division:

The consensus of opinion of all personnel in the 66th Armored Regiment is that the German tank and anti-tank weapons are far superior to the American in the following categories.

Superior Flotation.

Greater mobility. This is directly contrary to the popular opinion that the heavy tank is slow and cumbersome.

The German guns have a much higher muzzle velocity and no telltale flash. The resulting flat trajectory gives great penetration and is very accurate.

The 90-mm, although an improvement, is not as good as either the 75 or 88. If HVAP ammunition becomes available, it will improve the performance of both the 76-mm and 90-mm guns.

German tank sights are definitely superior to American sights. These, combined with the flat trajectory of the guns, give great accuracy.

German tanks have better sloped armor and a better silhouette than the American tanks.

The M24 tank has not been available long, but has created a very favorable impression.

The M4 has been proven inferior to the German Mark VI in Africa before the invasion of Sicily, 10 July 1943. "

-Brigadier General J. H. Collier, Commanding Combat Command "A"

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 09-03-2000).]

[Simon Fox]

Just testing MY new sig

------------------

"In October I tried once more to win Hitler over to the idea of light tanks: on the southwestern front (Italy) reports on the cross-country mobility of the Sherman have been very favorable. The Sherman climbs mountains which our tank experts consider inaccessible to tanks. One great advantage is that the Sherman has a very powerful motor in proportion to its weight. Its cross country mobility on level ground (in the Po Valley) is, as the Twenty-sixth Armored Division reports, definitely superior to that of our tanks. Everyone involved in tank warfare is impatiently waiting for lighter and therefore more maneuverable tanks which, simply by having superior guns, will assure the necessary fighting power."-Albert Speer

[Ari Maenpaa]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1:

Ask Helge sometime about his recent 1.05 Tiger II gunnery tests @ 2500ms. Anyway theirs more then enough evidence in the magnification levels alone to suppport an deeper look into the optics issues 2.5x, 3x & 6x vs Allied 3x maginification levels. The Pershing's M15 sight was the 1st step at rectifying the gap as it had a dual magnification level similar to German tank optics of 1x & 7x magnifications, so a Pershing should have an better % TH at long ranges then an Sherman with its 3x magnification.

Regards, John Waters

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just a little addition:

In his book "Jagdtiger: Technical History" Andrew Devey states that Jagdtiger's gunsight offered 10x magnification.

Also the battle account in Janusz Ledwoch's "Jagdtiger" reports JTs destroying several Shermans at 4000m range. At least some of those Shermans were part of a convoy so they were MOVING targets. Scary huh?

Ari

[Dittohead]

BTT

[Simon Fox]

Well the British did have a x6 sight for their 17pdr equipped tanks at least.