turn you blasted tank!

[Chad Harrison]

recently i was forced to use a priest as a last ditch AT platform. so i hid him in a corner of 2 building. a panther sped by and stopped just to the left of my priests firing arc. he targets the panther, and begins to rotate. let me say this much, it took FOREVER!!! the panther spotted him, rotates his turret and KO my priest before i ever shot! :mad:

so heres my question: what determins how fast a tank rotates (hull, not turret, we already went over the later ? do non-turret/SP guns rotate slower? does weight play a factor? nationality? ground conditions?

[Slapdragon]

Turret and tank rotation is based on historical data, not a math model like shooting. Experience counts here, your tank and his matched experience, speed, and the SP losty like it often does at close quarters.

[Chad Harrison]

so each vehicle has a historical "hull rotation speed" right? are there numbers representing that anywhere? im not accusing you, but do you say that through experience or is that what you have hear/read? any other opinions?

[lcm1947]

I don't know if anybody will be able to answer that question. I personally would think it would depend entirely on the vehicle. Like would a Sherman turn faster then a Panther or Chaffee or whatever. I'm sure you could find out but unless there's a book on " How fast do tanks and Self Propelled guns turn " you would be hard pressed to get an answer. I would however assume ( you know what assume means ) but anyway I would assume the vehicle that ran the fastest would be able to turn the fastest but that's certainly only a guess.

[Slapdragon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

so each vehicle has a historical "hull rotation speed" right? are there numbers representing that anywhere? im not accusing you, but do you say that through experience or is that what you have hear/read? any other opinions?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mo, the turret speed question has come up beforem, and turret speeds in th egame are modelled after a wide variety of sources on turret speed, sometimes 2 or 3 sources per tank.

Tanks also had a speed they could turn in place at. This is also modelled.

I am not sure how gun laying information was acquired, as I have never heard it mentioned. Here I am assuming that Charles and Steve have a source.

[Chad Harrison]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Here I am assuming that Charles and Steve have a source.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

my assumption was always that the faster a vehicle could drive, the faster it could rotate. so the hellcat/sherman can rotate its hull fairly quickly, which it does. i dont think there is a reference for that kind of stuff. they proboably just guestimated until it "felt" right. more wisdom from anyone?

[Shandorf]

The problem is that Shermans and earlier model Amis tanks did not have an independent drive system for each track. Thus a Sherman could not turn in place. The Panther and Tiger and tanks could. The Shermans and other Allies tanks could only lock one track and spin the tank in a wide circle.

So historically you are getting a leg up as far as the Shermans go because of the game’s engine. I suspect in the engine rewrite they will change this.

Jeff

[Vanir Ausf B]

Shandorf is correct. You shouldn't be complaining that your Priest rotates too slow, because in real life they couldn't rotate at all. It would've had to back up and pull forward to change facing.

[edgars]

I think the problem Chad is describing is that when you park AFVs to close (i mean very close) to the bulding and then rotate them it'll take much longer time to do it than in open ground.

Some kind of abstraction modeled in, i guess...

[Vanir Ausf B]

Oh, yeah. Same thing happens in scattered trees. It represents the gun getting caught on stuff. Of course, that wouldn't be a problem with the Priest, but they probably couldn't code in exceptions for individual vehicles.

Still, the Panther would have one that one in real life anyway.

[Freak]

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

Tanks also had a speed they could turn in place at. This is also modelled.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not sure if the allied sherman tanks were modeled correctly in regards to "turning in place".

[Thomm]

Guess the required turn rate could easily be derived from data on the transmission and the gear box and the associated engine RPM. Choose the lowest gear and see how a high engine RPM translates to chain movement. Divide by lateral chain distance to obtain angular velocity for the tanks that have to lock one thread. Double the value for tanks that can turn in place.

Do not know if this specific data is available, though.

Regards, Thomm

[David Aitken]

Vehicle rotation speed was reduced in an update to CM, because tanks were programmed to rotate both their hull and turret to an AT threat, thus bringing the gun to bear as fast. This is a problem with unturreted vehicles, because they take forever and a day to bring the gun round, especially if they are ambushed from the rear.

There is a slight bug, in that a tank which spots an enemy AT asset at the end of a turn, will not continue rotating its hull in the next turn unless ordered. Also, one must keep in mind that giving a tank a target order will only rotate its turret. Giving a separate rotate order is necessary to bring the gun to bear ASAP.

Indeed it is difficult to turn in place, but is a Jagdpanzer IV or the like going to just sit there and try desperately to swivel round, taking a minute or more to do so in certain terrain, whilst an enemy tank takes leisurely pot shots from behind? No, they're going to move in a small arc and do it much more quickly. Unforunately vehicles will not do this of their own volition in CM.

I might add that giving a movement order causes the vehicle to rotate 'in place' (excusable as an abstraction) a good bit faster than a rotate order, although if rotating ASAP is your goal, obviously a movement order suffers from the command delay.

This has doubtlessly been discussed before – I may do a search at some point.

[Freak]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken:

Vehicle rotation speed was reduced in an update to CM, because tanks were programmed to rotate both their hull and turret to an AT threat, thus bringing the gun to bear as fast. This is a problem with unturreted vehicles, because they take forever and a day to bring the gun round, especially if they are ambushed from the rear.

There is a slight bug, in that a tank which spots an enemy AT asset at the end of a turn, will not continue rotating its hull in the next turn unless ordered. Also, one must keep in mind that giving a tank a target order will only rotate its turret. Giving a separate rotate order is necessary to bring the gun to bear ASAP.

Indeed it is difficult to turn in place, but is a Jagdpanzer IV or the like going to just sit there and try desperately to swivel round, taking a minute or more to do so in certain terrain, whilst an enemy tank takes leisurely pot shots from behind? No, they're going to move in a small arc and do it much more quickly. Unforunately vehicles will not do this of their own volition in CM.

I might add that giving a movement order causes the vehicle to rotate 'in place' (excusable as an abstraction) a good bit faster than a rotate order, although if rotating ASAP is your goal, obviously a movement order suffers from the command delay.

This has doubtlessly been discussed before – I may do a search at some point.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think, and I may be very wrong, but IIRC, the allied sherman tank does not have the ability to "turn in place" in reality. I think this discussion was brought up some time ago and (obviously discussed to death).

[jshandorf]

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

I think, and I may be very wrong, but IIRC, the allied sherman tank does not have the ability to "turn in place" in reality. I think this discussion was brought up some time ago and (obviously discussed to death).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Depends on what you mean by "turn in place". It can lock one track and spin the other, so in essence it would be almost in one place turning.

The panther, Tiger, and later models could put one track in reverse and one in forward. So in effect they could spin in place. It wasn't until the Pershing, I think, that an allied tank could do this.

jeff

[ 07-31-2001: Message edited by: jshandorf ]

[Freak]

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

Depends on what you mean by "turn in place". It can lock one track and spin the other, so in essence it would be almost in one place turning.

The panther, Tiger, and later models could put one track in reverse and one in forward. So in effect they could spin in place. It wasn't until the Pershing, I think, that an allied tank could do this.

jeff

[ 07-31-2001: Message edited by: jshandorf ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats it, thanks for the the correction. I knew it had something to do with the turning ability of the sherman which is not modeled correctly AFAIK. Thanks again!

[Snake Eyes]

One of the things Allied tankers admired about the Tiger I was its ability to pivot in place. It could pivot faster than its turret could spin.

[Freak]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snake Eyes:

One of the things Allied tankers admired about the Tiger I was its ability to pivot in place. It could pivot faster than its turret could spin.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmm that would make quite a differnce in a tight spot...

[Gpig]

Yup. I've seen the same thing happen with my assault guns.

Once, I spent 5 painstaking minutes maneuvering my StuH42 into position to pummel some engineers in Vossnak. I carefully avoided enemy tanks and bazooka teams and found an ideal spot with great LOS to an american held heavy building. But I plotted my StuH's final movement points a tad too close to a building and it took two whole turns to rotate and finally fire ONE shot. Then the game ended. I guess the assault gun got stuck in a shop front window or somthing.

Frustrating, but it felt "realistic."

Now I'm just careful where I plot.

Gpig

[Chad Harrison]

thank you for all the information! those who spoke about the allies inability to turn both tracts explains the slowness. i was further curious as to what the difference in rotating speed between tanks. so i ran a quick test this morning with regular crews in a sherman and priest. i placed one of each in open ground, scattered trees, RIGHT next to a building, and RIGHT next to woods. heres the time results to rotate 180 degrees:

--------------------sherman----priest

open ground-----------35---------24

next to building------64---------54

next to woods---------70---------70

in scattered trees----81---------60

i did not have enough time to run it for other vehicles, but i thought the sherman would rotate faster than the priest. is that correct? neither could really "rotate" in place right? and why did they both take the same amount of time to rotate next to the woods? i use a lot of SP guns in my games, and i just want to know more about how hull rotation is represented in the game. :confused:

[ 07-31-2001: Message edited by: Chad Harrison ]

[Hanns]

Actually the German tanks performed an operation called pivot steering. Most modern tracked vehicles can do this (at least US ones can, that's where my direct experience is). On hard ground or roads it's a very quick way to pivot the vehicle inside it's own length. The problem is when on soft dirt, mud or sand the material will pack up under the road wheels and cause the vehicle to throw track. I'm sure those bogey wheels on early American tanks were really susceptible to this. I've broken down and replaced tracks on M2A2s and M113s more often than I wanted to count. On some of our older M113A2 APCs the pivot steer mechanism was disconnected due to this problem. If you were in a combat situation you'd have that nice "Vehicle Immobilized" sign hovering over you Does anyone know if the game increases the chances for bogging in soft or wet ground when the vehicle is pivoting?

[aka_tom_w]

this "turn in place" feature has been refered to also in the forum here as "neutral steer"

if you are patient and you care to wait for the search engine, look up neutral steer, there have been ALOT of posts about Allied and Axis vehicles with neutral steer capability.

good luck

-tom w

[Hilltopper]

My father was in armor in the Korean War and told me that Sherman's rotated very easily. He was on an M4A3E8. He said they called them "easy 8's" since you could easily run a fiqure 8 pattern.

However, not sure that this model served in the second world war. I am sure someone knows for sure.

[Slapdragon]

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

My father was in armor in the Korean War and told me that Sherman's rotated very easily. He was on an M4A3E8. He said they called them "easy 8's" since you could easily run a fiqure 8 pattern.

However, not sure that this model served in the second world war. I am sure someone knows for sure.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The E8 was the last in the line of Shermans (well, except for the M50) and was by the end of the war getting to be the most common. After the end of the war it was the tank which was chosen as the standard medium model for retention.

In many ways, an E8 (actually M4A3(76) W+ HVSS) is a fair match for a Panther. Different strengths and weaknesses, but a good tank overall.

[Hilltopper]

Ahhh...thanks, SlapDragon. I fiqured someone would know the answer. BTW, the term "easy 8" was also a reference to the E8 designation. Probably not telling you anything new.