Shadow 1st Hussars Posted January 5, 2001 Share Posted January 5, 2001 I've made a map with two Fireflies and a Panther A, King Tiger, and Jagdpanzer. One Firefly is armed with 50ap rounds, the other with 50tung rounds. In the ap armed test, the shell broke up at 2213m against the KT (no suprise there ) i moved the KT to 2000m away from the Firefly, where the FF struck a gun hit. From then on it missed every shot. 2/30 rounds hit it KT. Then I reversed the FF into one of the pits I have at each end to keep the tanks I'm not testing in, and brought out the second FF armed with tungsten. I had to move the KT from side to side at 2000m, and by the end of the turn the second FF had spotted it and was aiming. I then halted the KT. The next turn the FF opened up. Halfway into the next turn the FF nailed the KT with a front turret penitration, and the crew abandoned it. Could it be that Tungston rounds are more accurate than Armour pearcing? btw: the KT never spotted the FF ------------------ No bastard has ever won a war by dying for his country. They won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Duquette Posted January 5, 2001 Share Posted January 5, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>btw: the KT never spotted the FF<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Its those inferior German Optics at work again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted January 5, 2001 Share Posted January 5, 2001 I would think that BTS would agree that HEAT, HVAP and APDS (from a rifled 1940's gun) would be less accurate than a solid steel shot. Then again you never know what revisionist thinking will get you. I wrote up this big long post to stick on the end of the 88L56 optics thread but stopped and asked myself "what the f**K for?" Is it worth it (I actually agreed with Steve on some points by the way) when you are dealing with people that get the final word and can decide when an abstraction is needed and when an anal retentive stance is the only option and will argue down to the millimeter about AP rounds but futz up something like spotting (that throws off everything) and wont listen to any game changes like counter abstractions because they didnt think of them and act like you are showing them some big hunk of wiped-bad doody paper? It aint worth it. I get better things to do. I work with a-holes and dont need to come home to a hobby thats annoying. I get this crap at work, thanks, and this heres miller time boys. Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexford Posted January 5, 2001 Share Posted January 5, 2001 17 pounder APDS fired at 4000 fps, which yields flat trajectory and good accuracy even given velocity loss with range. The problem is that field tests showed that about 50% of APDS was wild and lost penetration due to unbalance round. IN thoery, the sabot falls off as the round leaves the barrel, in actual practice pieces of the sabot would stick to the round jerking it to one side and decreasing penetration due to funny hit angle. During American tests during 8/44 at Isigny France, APDS missed Panthers in open at several hundred yards and didn't pierce glacis, while previous British tests showed ammo to be accurate and it penetrated Panther glacis at 700 yards. APDS was new during 1944 and inconsistent. Russians T62 was supposed to be greatest tank in world during 1973 war, smooth barrel gun with muzzle velocity over 5000 fps and APFSDS round. Round had discarding sabot like 17 pounder but used smooth bore gun for added velocity. Instead of gaining accuracy through spinning round (rifling does this), Soviet 115mm APFSDS released fins as it left barrel which were supposed to obtain true and straight flight that rifling normally buys. Problem was that fins often came at different times which unbalanced ammo. Israeli's reported that T62 rounds would strike the ground at odd angles or sideways. New APDS is an adventure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Duquette Posted January 5, 2001 Share Posted January 5, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>this heres miller time boys<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Miller? Jeeze. Coors Light brings you the refreshing taste of the Rockies! Brewski and Pizza please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 No one in the Rockies has any taste, believe me. And that ugly Coors plant in Golden is just butt ugly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by rexford: During American tests during 8/44 at Isigny France, APDS missed Panthers in open at several hundred yards and didn't pierce glacis, while previous British tests showed ammo to be accurate and it penetrated Panther glacis at 700 yards. APDS was new during 1944 and inconsistent. B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Americans fired APDS? I know that some US units procured APDS for the 57mm ATG (from brits 6lbr, a bottle of whiskey per) but no US unit would fire APDS otherwise. The US guns fired HVAP which is very similar to german AP40. It takes the light weight collar down range for a ride. US 76mm weapons used this as well as late 90mm weapons. It would scrub its velocity quickly due to the large diameter to weight. APDS on the other hand SHOULD retain its velocity (IF it doesnt get "stupid" after leaving the barrel) BUT it was afflicted with QC problems because the tungsten needed to be a balanced dart and the discarding sabots needed to.. discard correctly. Not easy it seems from a spinning 1940's projectile. As for missing panthers AND also not piercing hulls; whadya expect? Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael emrys Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by rexford: The problem is that field tests showed that about 50% of APDS was wild and lost penetration due to unbalance round. IN thoery, the sabot falls off as the round leaves the barrel, in actual practice pieces of the sabot would stick to the round jerking it to one side and decreasing penetration due to funny hit angle.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Some years ago I watched a high speed film of a 17 lbr. round in flight and was struck by how much it wobbled. Since I haven't seen films of other rounds, I don't know what a comparison would prove. But it was rather disconcerting to watch that wobble and think of what it might spell for accuracy, range, and penetration. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts