John1966 Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 I posted an anecdote in CMFI last night about Catch a Tiger but I've been puzzling about it. It's not a spoiler to say your main objective in this one is to take out an immobilised Tiger with your infantry (that's basically the mission). I was pretty pleased with how it had gone. All the supporting infantry eliminated without the Tiger getting a shot off so time to close in with the bazooka teams (there are four available) to get it. One team was in front (wasn't expecting it to achieve much but I wanted all sides covered so the Tiger couldn't just rotate and blow everyone up). One to the side. Two to the rear. Ranges were about 20m. Front one a bit more. One of the rear ones quite a bit less. Now we all know Tigers are tough SOBs so I was a bit surprised when the first shot from the front got a penetration. Then the team at the side got three penetrations with their first three shots. But that was all the penetrations either team got. But the two teams at the rear (who I was banking on for the coup de grâce) unloaded most of the ammo, hit every time (10+ hits): not one single penetration. OK, could be flukey (but that's very flukey if I'm getting front/side penetrations) but am I missing something about a Tiger's armour? Were they tougher at the back than the side or something? I know the angle of the shot is important (I assume) and I think the side team were close to ninety degrees on, but so was one of the rear teams. Tiger inflicted 9 casualties while this was going on (so major rather than total victory). In the end the platoon HQ got it with a grenade. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltungswaffe Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 Armor Data for the Tiger I (slope in degrees from the vertical) Front Side Rear Gun Mantlet 120 mm @ 0° Turret 80 mm @ 0° Turret 80 mm @ 0° Turret 100 mm @ 10° Superstructur 80 mm @ 0° Hull 80 mm @ 0° Superstructure 100 mm @ 9° Hull 60 mm @ 0° Hull 100 mm @ 25° Source: JENTZ, Thomas L.; Germany's TIGER Tanks - Tiger I and II: Combat Tactics; ISBN 0-7643-0225-6 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 A visual aid: It disagrees with the Jentz numbers by a couple of mm here and there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John1966 Posted January 14, 2021 Author Share Posted January 14, 2021 Interesting. The side hull armour is a bit thinner than the rear but only behind the wheels (so not sure what difference that would make). But a 20 degree slope at the rear would actually suggest you're better off firing at the sides. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 6 minutes ago, John1966 said: The side hull armour is a bit thinner than the rear but only behind the wheels (so not sure what difference that would make). The wheels are tough and typically there are two or three of them covering any given section of hull. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artkin Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 Angle of the shot should be unimportant as bazooka rounds are high explosive anti tank (heat) rounds with a shaped charge inside that penetrates any angle. A bazooka surely has enough penetration power to dig through any part of a tiger. Not sure why the troops didnt bail if their engine was fried. Happens all the time to me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freyberg Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 6 minutes ago, Artkin said: Angle of the shot should be unimportant as bazooka rounds are high explosive anti tank (heat) rounds with a shaped charge inside that penetrates any angle. A bazooka surely has enough penetration power to dig through any part of a tiger. Not sure why the troops didnt bail if their engine was fried. Happens all the time to me. Certainly it is less likely to deflect than a high velocity projectile, but the jet still has to penetrate a certain width of steel, which can vary depending on the angle it strikes at. Plus, as a general observation, shaped charges are dependent on the energy and dimensions of the explosive - and I think the Tiger I was right at the upper limit against which the 60mm bazooka round could be expected to have any effect. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John1966 Posted January 15, 2021 Author Share Posted January 15, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Artkin said: Not sure why the troops didnt bail if their engine was fried. Happens all the time to me. That'll be something to do with the scenario design. It's immobilised right from the start (so it'd ruin the game if they bailed). Don't know how the designer arranged it though. Because it occurred to me they might just bail if I dropped some HE on them. (They didn't.) I guess they were crack. Actually, it might say in the designer's notes. I'll check. Edited January 15, 2021 by John1966 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artkin Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 Reading up yeah looks like the penetration kinda sucks for it. I guess I'm mixed up. I thought there was a 81mm version, but I am mistaken Idk if its modeled but I guess the engine could be resisting the rounds a little 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John1966 Posted January 15, 2021 Author Share Posted January 15, 2021 2 minutes ago, Artkin said: Idk if its modeled but I guess the engine could be resisting the rounds a little That's sort of what I was wondering. An engine hit is more likely to get an immobilisation but, of course, it was already immobilised. But like you say, I've no idea if it's modelled to the extent that the crew and other functionality of the tank are protected. 10+ rear hits at point blank range and apparently no effect (although I don't know what was going on inside and the AI can't tell me). So perhaps it is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danfrodo Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 All I know is when my enemy has tigers they are rolling pillboxes of endless death and mayhem. When I have tigers they are fragile little butterflies. Though once I blundered into one in a nice little Norman town w a terribly under-gunned churchill -- but first shot broke the tigers gun. I spent the next 10 minutes chasing the tiger around all of northern France and blasting it w that dreadful Churchill 75 until I finally got them to bail. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 23 minutes ago, danfrodo said: All I know is when my enemy has tigers they are rolling pillboxes of endless death and mayhem. When I have tigers they are fragile little butterflies. Though once I blundered into one in a nice little Norman town w a terribly under-gunned churchill -- but first shot broke the tigers gun. I spent the next 10 minutes chasing the tiger around all of northern France and blasting it w that dreadful Churchill 75 until I finally got them to bail. First Tiger which was captured in North Africa was probably disabled by a 6 pounder Churchill. The AI is better in direct fire than 99.999% of the players. I disabled a Tiger once with a .303 thanks to the AI. Forgot all about the sniper but the loss of its commander was a devastated loss of morale of the crew. It didn't participate for the remainder of the game. The AI was probably responsible for the Churchill's achievement, plotting direct fires too often result in disappointments, The British 75 mm gun in tanks is a modified 6 pounder they drilled out the bore. The HE was more useful against infantry and AT guns. What I found out, I replaced direct firing plotting with cover arcs, but be careful with them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artkin Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 Yeah tanks really aren't invincible. I would take a panther over a tiger any day. Better in every aspect. Good armor, less weight, probably less ground pressure, arguably the best tank gun of ww2 (high velocity low caliber), though 88mm kwk43 a close second! Apparently they made a variant with night vision? or was this just a SPWAW fantasy? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freyberg Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 46 minutes ago, chuckdyke said: First Tiger which was captured in North Africa was probably disabled by a 6 pounder Churchill. Yeah, those 57mm AP shells really fly - great penetration. They don't always do enough damage for a kill, but they're lethal often enough. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John1966 Posted January 15, 2021 Author Share Posted January 15, 2021 9 minutes ago, Artkin said: I would take a panther over a tiger any day. While I'm normally petrified of Panthers (they always seem to turn up in larger numbers than Tigers, for a start), this evening I fired a frontal shot at one with a PIAT and the damn thing blew up. I actually jumped. I was so surprised I swore out loud. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 18 minutes ago, Artkin said: Yeah tanks really aren't invincible. I would take a panther over a tiger any day. Better in every aspect. Good armor, less weight, probably less ground pressure, arguably the best tank gun of ww2 (high velocity low caliber), though 88mm kwk43 a close second! Apparently they made a variant with night vision? or was this just a SPWAW fantasy? Experiment with infrared. Best allround tank I would have a careful look at the 76 mm Easy Eight. With the HVAP ammo it would have rivalled the penetration of the 17 pounder and 75 mm/ L70 of the Panther. However, they supplied the HVAP round to the TD's like the Hellcat which had the same gun. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoMac Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 1 hour ago, John1966 said: That's sort of what I was wondering. An engine hit is more likely to get an immobilisation but, of course, it was already immobilised. But like you say, I've no idea if it's modelled to the extent that the crew and other functionality of the tank are protected. 10+ rear hits at point blank range and apparently no effect (although I don't know what was going on inside and the AI can't tell me). So perhaps it is. Nah ! don't use Zooks against Tiger at PB range...Just run up to it with the magical grenades to take it out. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John1966 Posted January 15, 2021 Author Share Posted January 15, 2021 4 minutes ago, JoMc67 said: Nah ! don't use Zooks against Tiger at PB range...Just run up to it with the magical grenades to take it out. They are magic aren't they? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 6 minutes ago, John1966 said: They are magic aren't they? The British Gammon Bomb was. They carried the ingredients and made their grenades on the fly. From AT grenades to Satchel charges. Having people from mining communities in your forces pays dividends. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freyberg Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 21 minutes ago, John1966 said: They are magic aren't they? In fairness, close assault on an unsupported tank shouldn't be hard. I don't believe it was in RL. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 1 hour ago, Freyberg said: In fairness, close assault on an unsupported tank shouldn't be hard. I don't believe it was in RL. Yes, the Hungarians didn't have many problems with a little innovation. Here a JS III Chassis with no turret. But they had years and years of experience on the Eastern Front. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John1966 Posted January 15, 2021 Author Share Posted January 15, 2021 16 hours ago, Artkin said: Not sure why the troops didnt bail if their engine was fried. Happens all the time to me. Checked the designer's notes but for some reason this one doesn't have any. So no idea how they made sure the crew didn't bail. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vacillator Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 7 minutes ago, John1966 said: Checked the designer's notes but for some reason this one doesn't have any. So no idea how they made sure the crew didn't bail. I wondered if it was the 'soft factors' of the crew, but having checked them out, I would say not. Don't wish to give away too much... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John1966 Posted January 15, 2021 Author Share Posted January 15, 2021 1 minute ago, Vacilllator said: Don't wish to give away too much... Actually I should load this up as the Germans just to see how crack that crew is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vacillator Posted January 15, 2021 Share Posted January 15, 2021 1 minute ago, John1966 said: Actually I should load this up as the Germans just to see how crack that crew is. I pressed Ceasefire on an old save. Not very. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.