Russian 37mm anti-tank gun stats wrong?

[flamingknives]

Posted by: OZ77

The Soviet early war ammunition was notoriously bad - prone to shatter on impact, thus robbing the gun of it's full potential. Perhaps this is what we're seeing in the game data. [/QB]I am ready to argue about this.

That's nice. How do you plan on doing that?

I freely admit I have not personally done any serious research on this subject, but it is the general consensus of this board and BFC other calibre ammunition was poorly manufactured (45 and 76.2mm). As they have done extensive research on the subject, I am more inclined to believe them than someone who has read some document which doesn't even specifically refer to the phenomenon.

Starting from the point where most ammunition for the more common guns was faulty, it seems reasonable to assume that the ammunition for a less capable, less common gun might be as well.

Posted by: Fishu

I found the weights as well..

Soviet 37mm is 0.665kg and german 37mm Pak is 0.680kg

This according to a single source.

Fishu, I take it that those are shell weights that you have quoted.

If they are, then we have a lighter Sov shell that is more prone to shatter, travelling at a similar speed to the German shell.

oh, and if it is the same gun, the case length would have to be identical, although you would still be able to have a varience in projectile length.

[Edit: FlamingUBBCode]

[ April 29, 2003, 03:11 PM: Message edited by: flamingknives ]

[MikeyD]

I believe (I may be wrong) BFC tweaked the German 37mm round in the 1.02 Beta to make it slightly more prone to shatter against T-34 high hardness armor, to address the perceived ahistorical 'T-34 overkill' problem in the game.

It wouldn't be out of line for them to revisit the Russian 37mm gun as well, see how the stats can be massaged to give it less of a 'generic' gun feel.

[Fishu]

Flamingknives,

If guns are produced under license, to my knowledge the case lenght doesnt need to be of same lenght.

For smallarms I can name a few:

Zb26 -> Bren & german version

7.62mm PPSh 41 rechambered for german stantard 9mm SMG caliber(!).

Finns also rechambered lots of captured guns to their stantard rifle calibers.

License built cannons from what I know are in quite many cases different caliber in a way or another.

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by Fishu:

Flamingknives,

If guns are produced under license, to my knowledge the case lenght doesnt need to be of same lenght.

For smallarms I can name a few:

Zb26 -> Bren & german version

The ZB26 and Bren are, of course, not the same gun. One is the ZB26; the other is the Bren, known to the Czechs as the ZGB.

Originally posted by Fishu:

7.62mm PPSh 41 rechambered for german stantard 9mm SMG caliber(!).

Finns also rechambered lots of captured guns to their stantard rifle calibers.

These, of course, were not built under licence.

Originally posted by Fishu:

License built cannons from what I know are in quite many cases different caliber in a way or another.

You will kindly oblige by citing one such case, specifically for the case of licensed production, in calibres larger than 20mm. I can't think of any.

Let's be clear about what you are suggesting. It seems to me that you are claiming that the Russians may, having procured the licence to manufacture the PaK 36 in their own country, modified the chamber and projectile dimensions, for the specific purpose of producing a lower-performance weapon.

If this is indeed your claim, then I suppose it might be true, but it seems to be an entirely lunatic thing to do, and I can think of no occasion where a similar thing was attempted with an ATk gun. I am therefore not disposed to believe that such a thing happened unless you can produce evidence of some kind that it did.

All the best,

John.

[MikeyD]

My own sparse reference stated the Russians also bought the Rheinmetall gun directly from the company in addition to license manufacture, and the German collected and reused large numbers of the Russian gun against their former owners in 41, which would imply the same chamber length.

Remember the Rheinmetall 37mm gun was the 'gold standard' before the war. Both the U.S. and Japan built their own versions, and apparently so did the Russians.

[ April 29, 2003, 05:08 PM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

[OZ77]

Originally posted by rune:

Potential Paratroop? What does that mean?

Any soldier could be a potential paratroop. Let's look at reality.

1. They did not have the air transports available to move 50,000 men, much less 500,000 men.

2. They did not have the parachutes themselves in enough numbers.

3. Of the 50,000 officially deemed a paratroops, 10,000 were sent to fill out infantry units.

Look at the amount of aircraft/sorties it took at Arnhem. The Russians were not even close to that. Potential means nothing.

Rune

Try to find and read Suvorov's books. You will find the answers on all your questions. I am not going to recopy 9 books.

I think you will be knocked out by Suvorov's facts

[OZ77]

Originally posted by rune:

Hey look, revisionist claptrap.

500,000 paratroops? From russia themselves, they say:

Russia's airborne troops celebrate Thursday their 71st anniversary.

The history of the airborne troops commenced on August 2, 1930, when at the exercises of the Moscow military district near Voronezh 12 soldiers baled out for the first time.

The first airborne troops subdivision was the aviation motorized assault detachment (164 men) in the Leningrad military district. The creation of mass airborne troops was stipulated by the ordnance of the Revolutionary military council of December 11, 1932.

By the start of 1933 special aviation battalions had already been formed in Belarussian, Ukrainian, Moscow, and Volga military districts. By the summer of 1941 the formation of 5 airborne corps, each with a strength 10,000 people, had been completed.

A lot of those were used in normal units, so you are off by a factor of say...10.

Also see the Red Army Handbook.

Only thing I'll bite on so others don't buy that BS.

Rune

Before the war, Soviet DB-3f and SB bombers as well as the TB-1 and TB-3 bombers (of which Stalin had about a thousand had been modified to carry airborne troops as well as bomb loads. By mid-1941 the Soviet military had trained hundreds of thousands of paratroopers (Suvorov says almost a million) for the planned attack against Germany and the West. These airborne troops were to be deployed and dropped behind enemy lines in several waves, each wave consisting of five airborne assault corps (VDKs), each corps consisting of 10,419 men, staff and service personnel, an artillery division, and a separate tank battalion (50 tanks). Suvorov lists the commanding officers and home bases of the first two waves or ten corps. The second and third wave corps included troops who spoke French and Spanish.

Because the German attack prevented these highly trained troops from being used as originally planned, Stalin converted them to "guards divisions," which he used as reserves and "fire brigades" in emergency situations, much as Hitler often deployed Waffen SS forces.

[OZ77]

Originally posted by Fishu:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by OZ77:

yes they still can have bad ammo.But does the "good ammo" help to German panzer crew then they meet KV?

1. with certain gun, you have better capability of penetrating the KV

- Good example is 5cm KwK 39 - with bad ammo it wouldn't have a hope of penetrating KV.

However it can do it, thanks to the 'good' ammo for the gun.

2. with certain tanks, you won't get the field address changed to "6ft down" after the first hit by KV.

- good example being the uparmoured PzIII's, which could withstand a hit from KV, without instantly breaking up.

With well designed and manufactured ammo, there would be far lesser chance of surviving a hit.

In any case, KV's had higher reputation than production numbers

So you'd have to make the example with more common lighter tanks. </font>

[OZ77]

[Soddball]

Originally posted by OZ77:

The Russians introduced their giant Klim Voroshilov tanks into action near Raseiniai [Lithuania]. Models weighing 43 and 52 tons surprised the Germans, who found the KVs nearly unstoppable. One of these Russian tanks took 70 direct hits, but none penetrated its armor.

In short, Germany took on the Soviet colossus with tanks that were too light, too few in number, and inferior in performance and fire power. And this disparity continued as the war progressed. In 1942 alone, Soviet factories produced 2,553 heavy tanks, while the Germans produced just 89

Your point being what, exactly? Numbers of heavy tanks mean nothing. The crews sucked, production quality was dire. What about the logistical ability to move them around? What about tactical and strategic deployment? What about medium and light tanks to support them?

As for your Nazi Propaganda claptrap about a million paratroopers - please. You're living in a neo-nazi fantasy world. Transporting tanks by aeroplane in 1942? Yeah, there was a lot of that going on. I expect they had flat-pack KV-1s all just-a-ready for the evil Communist invasion of the free-thinking, cruelly oppressed Germany who under no circumstances killed and butchered millions of people.

Do you have your blood group tatooed on your body yet?

[Meach]

Soddball, i think he is going on about Russian para's here? Nazi propaganda?...ummm?

Anyways..here is a question for all the informed ppl here...What MikeyD is saying is that a 37mm caliber weapon could theoretically use any 37mm ammunition? If the projectile was say 5" long and the shell was 12" long as standard..rough guess here folks, could they use a 37mm shell 10" long with a projectile 7" long? Same for small arms ammo, i was led to beleive that the casing had to be a certain length to be used in certain gun. I am just trying to keep up with the thread here and need to clarify a bit, pardon the ignorance.

[Fishu]

Johndsalt,

Zb26 and early bren had very little difference - since the bren is originated from Zb26.

What comes to bigger calibers, look at the bofors, that was used by many countries and each country had it different.

OZ77,

Finns knocked out two KV's with 20mm Lahti ATR's :>

[SgtMuhammed]

Originally posted by Meach:

Anyways..here is a question for all the informed ppl here...What MikeyD is saying is that a 37mm caliber weapon could theoretically use any 37mm ammunition? If the projectile was say 5" long and the shell was 12" long as standard..rough guess here folks, could they use a 37mm shell 10" long with a projectile 7" long? Same for small arms ammo, i was led to beleive that the casing had to be a certain length to be used in certain gun. I am just trying to keep up with the thread here and need to clarify a bit, pardon the ignorance.

While the round might fit into the weapon the different casing size would prevent it from working. If the casing is the wrong size the round will either not fire because it can't seat correctly on the bolt face or a myriad of other reasons, or it might fire but burst as any gaps in the chamber will cause the casing to swell and pop. Remember, the casing isn't really designed to handle the stress of the round going off. It forms the inner wall of the chamber and the chamber takes the force of the blast. Improperly seated shells can cause everything from misfires to explosions.

[Meach]

Thank you, I appreciate all the time and effort ppl go to help me with understanding all the bits and pieces. So in short..correct shell for correct gun or Mr PaK is no longer your friend?

[MikeyD]

A gun can take any number of shell types. Just look at the large number of types (and range of performance) for U.S. 75m gun for example. So working within the same chamber dimensions that 37mm gun could've produced all sorts of penetration ranges with (those theoretical) different rounds... within reason of course.

I'm just not convinced the Russian 37mm gun specs in the game are within reason. If we accept that the Russians were firing solid shot with an increased tendence to shatter (though even that is anecdotal), that still seems to go againsts the much higher mv and VERY much lower penetration in-game.

Did the pre-war U.S. 37mm gun fire solid shot shell at any point? What was the mv and penetration for that round?

[Fishu]

Why would soviets under license necessarily build the chamber for same case lenght..

[flamingknives]

MikeyD

The US 37mm gun was mounted in the Stuart, used by the British. The British were known to use AP shot for all AT work, so there should be some data for AP shot in British studies on the US 37mm gun.

Fishu

If you start changing the chamber size, you have to test the gun all over to ensure that it works. And as John pointed out, rechambering a gun in such a manner as to reduce its effectiveness makes no sense.

A thought occurs, however. If Soviet manufacturing was as dire as suggested, perhaps they needed to increase chamber wall thickness (thus decreasing chamber size, assuming external dimensions remain the same) to make sure that it did not fail.

[tracer]

Hey, I have a ammo box full of still wrapped russian 7.62 by 54 ammo from the 40's and believe it or not, I haven't had a single misfire. And you can shoot differnt ammo out of a weapon (with high risk) even if it's not made for that weapon. Look at the viet cong, they were some using WWII vintage rifles and using any ammo that would fit in the chamber, (Kinda wobbly going down the barrel).

[manchildstein (ii)]

Originally posted by tracer:

Hey, I have a ammo box full of still wrapped russian 7.62 by 54 ammo from the 40's and believe it or not, I haven't had a single misfire. And you can shoot differnt ammo out of a weapon (with high risk) even if it's not made for that weapon. Look at the viet cong, they were some using WWII vintage rifles and using any ammo that would fit in the chamber, (Kinda wobbly going down the barrel).

i had some cz-52 czech pistols and a 'tokarev'... all chambered in 7.62x25... i had a box of '50s 7.62x25 and many of the casings were 'split'... they still worked fine... some people said 'don't do that' and others said, 'what me worry?'...

[Fishu]

Originally posted by manchildstein II:

i had some cz-52 czech pistols and a 'tokarev'... all chambered in 7.62x25... i had a box of '50s 7.62x25 and many of the casings were 'split'... they still worked fine... some people said 'don't do that' and others said, 'what me worry?'...

Problem could been that the '50s 7.62 has higher powder loading, which could harm the pistol.

I don't know the situation, but often it can be so

[MikeyD]

I rooted around on the 'Russian Battlefield' site for any Russian 37mm gun info I could find:

I found reference to a 37mm ZIS-19 tank gun (on the BT-2?) with a caliber length of 66.7, an AP round fired at 915ms, and able to penetrate 58mm at 90 degrees from 100m, and 41mm at 90 degrees from 500m.

Reference is also made to a 37mm PS-2 tank gun (on which chassis?) with a 45 caliber length, a mv of 880ms, and estimated 35mm at 90 degrees penetration at 500m.

If we assume both guns share the same ammo the difference in penetration would be purely due to mv from the different-length gun tubes. It's interesting the Stuart's 37mm gun has a caliber length of 53.5 - just halfway between the two Russian guns and the velocity and penetrations appear to fall between the two Russian guns as well.

It looks like the Russians introduced the 45mm gun not for better anti-tank performance but for the improved HE charge. I really am of the opinion any Russian 37mm gun specs should fall in line with the pre-war Rheinmetall gun standard. I can see no reason for wildly divergent (and myserable) specs in the game.

[Fishu]

Mikeyd,

Take a look at Bofors loads sometimes.

You'll find out somewhat varying changes in the ammo in each country which used it.

[tracer]

Cool, I have a Cz52, and the 762.25 ammo is some hot loaded crap. I picked up the pistol at a pawn shop, came with holster and cleaning tool for $150, aresanl refinished, accurate pistol. The neat thing about it is the locking mechanism,cool little pistol.

[tracer]

OOPs, sorry about getting off the subject on the 37MM AT. But I'm putting together a PPsH sub gun from a kit. (calm yourselfs, this ones non firing), but one thing I can say about the rusky WWII weapons, basic but effective. And as far as ammo quality well maybe not that good, or maybe not. I ahve never had any probs out of it. I have a Nagant revolver, and it shoots the 762,25 but not the same as the tok or Cz, (the shell seals itself in the cylinder, hard to explain). But the ammo I have for it is 40s manufactured still in the box ( The box comes with a target on it for practice shooting), and it hasn't gave me any misfires yet either, and I shoot the piss out of it.

[White Phosphorus]

Originally posted by OZ77:

Because the German attack prevented these highly trained troops from being used as originally planned, Stalin converted them to "guards divisions," which he used as reserves and "fire brigades" in emergency situations, much as Hitler often deployed Waffen SS forces.

Wow, such an accusation, and not a shred of concrete proof. Could you provide a list of relevant devisions, so that we may study their history.