visit to army museum in vienna

[anteportas]

This weekend i was in Vienna in het Heeresgeschichtes Museum. They had some interesting things exhibited. They had a 76.2 mm russian AT gun and a 7,5cm german at gun. The former had a reported feuergeschwindigkeit (rate of fire) 12/min the latter 20/min!

Is this correct? Did not experience this difference in CMBB. Should i ask back my museum fine .

Also there was a T34/85mm and a SU100 in display. What really amazed me was the quality of the armour. The weld lines were really crude and the armour did not seem to have a high qualtity, especially the cast turret.

The german tanks that i have seen seem to have a better armour quality.

For the rest, there was the car where Franz Ferdinand was shot in, which started the first world war.

Well these were my observations for the ones who are interested

[Da Beginna]

double post, sorry

[Da Beginna]

Originally posted by anteportas:

Also there was a T34/85mm and a SU100 in display. What really amazed me was the quality of the armour. The weld lines were really crude and the armour did not seem to have a high qualtity, especially the cast turret.

The german tanks that i have seen seem to have a better armour quality.

I experienced the same at "Panzermuseum" in Munster, Northern Germany. Anyway, if one can produce 10 times more of those not-so-perfect russian trash bins - one can obivously win the war.

[flamingknives]

Certainly the surface finish of russian WWII tanks is crude at best, but that does not necessarily reflect on the quality through the thickness of the plate.

The rate of fire given is probably a maximum value - essentially how fast you can stuff rounds into the breech and pull the trigger. It doesn't allow for observing the fall of shot and adjusting, or laying the gun onto target.

[Dandelion]

Originally posted by anteportas:

They had a 76.2 mm russian AT gun and a 7,5cm german at gun. The former had a reported feuergeschwindigkeit (rate of fire) 12/min the latter 20/min!

As for the Pak 40, 20 rounds per minute would be a feat of olympic proportions. Crews were initially expected to manage 12 rounds per minute but standards were lowered during the war and crews making 10 were graduated. The figure in general use in most literature is thus 10. Remember that this is a static target figure and only takes reload time into account - against live moving targets at varying ranges, rate of fire was lower.

You can look the Pak 40 up here if you wish some more background. I have tried to include the more orthodox facts from the sources at hand, and left out any disputed or controversial issues that I have been able to identify as such.

As for the Soviets, I have no source that would help out here.

Cheerio

Dandelion

[JasonC]

Guns really aren't that hard to fire rapidly, even big ones. I've personally fired 155s twice as fast as they fire in CM.

[Dandelion]

The maximum rate of fire is the rapid fire count of a weapon. An apparent problem in CM is wether or not to give weapons their sustained fire count or their rapid fire count. With corresponding effect for both firepower and ammunition. I note that the latter is generally chosen, though IRL weapons would not be perpetually rapid firing as they are in the game. One would have liked to see these rapid fire modes limited by crew- and in some cases weapon-fatigue in some manner. One would have also liked to be able to use normal sustained fire rates, if for no other reason than to conserve ammunition. But nothing such as far as I know.

IIRC the US 155mm howitzer in Vietnam - no idea if it is the same model as used in WWII - had a maximum rate of fire of 4 rounds per minute, and a sustained rate of fire of 1 round per minute. 4 rounds seems a handsome feat to me. A 155mm shell weighs around 45 kg (100some pounds) as far as I know? All pieces of it weighed together I mean.

In the game the 105mm M2A1 is given a cycle of some 10-12 seconds between discharges. Which lands at a standard of 5 rounds per minute. Don't know the piece myself but it sounds generous. It sounds like rapid fire.

I say that because I do know the 105mm lFH 18, which boasted 6 to 8 rounds per minute in rapid fire. Whereas the sFH 18 could achieve only 4 - 5 rounds per minute in spite of a 12 man crew. Very much like the US 155 in Vietnam thus. Such a rate is described as very laborious. A shell weighed 43.5 kg, all pieces together. They couldn't keep it up for long. Sustained fire rate was 1 round per minute.

20 rounds per minute as described for the Pak 40 here must be a typo. It leaves 3 seconds for a cycle of discharge, recoil and reload. It is twice the rapid fire rate demanded of crews of an antitank rifle in German infantry training, and indeed twice that of soldiers equipped with a bolt action rifle.

Cheerio

Dandelion

[flamingknives]

The 155mm projectile weighs 45kg.

[Dandelion]

Language fight!

Projectile

noun

1. A fired, thrown, or otherwise propelled object, such as a bullet, having no capacity for self-propulsion. (=Your choice)

2. A self-propelled missile, such as a rocket.

adjective

1. Capable of being impelled or hurled forward.

2. Driving forward; impelling: a projectile force.

3. Zoology. Capable of being thrust outward; protrusile.

Shell

noun

1. The usually hard outer covering that encases certain organisms, such as mollusks, insects, and turtles; the carapace.

2. A similar outer covering on an egg, fruit, or nut.

3. The material that constitutes such a covering.

Something resembling or having the form of a shell, especially:

4. An external, usually hard, protective or enclosing case or cover.

5. A framework or exterior, as of a building.

6. A thin layer of pastry.

7. The external part of the ear.

8. The hull of a ship.

9. A light, long, narrow racing boat propelled by rowers.

10. A small glass for beer.

11. An artillery projectile containing an explosive charge. (=my choice)

12. A metal or cardboard case containing the charge and primer for a piece of firearms ammunition, especially one also containing shot and fired from a shotgun.

13. An attitude or a manner adopted to mask one's true feelings or to protect one from perceived or real danger.

14. Any of the set of hypothetical spherical surfaces centered on the nucleus of an atom that contain the orbitals of electrons having the same principal quantum number.

15. An analogous pattern of protons and neutrons within a nucleus.

16. A usually sleeveless and collarless, typically knit blouse, often worn under another top.

17. The outermost layer of a lined garment such as a coat or jacket: a parka with a waterproof shell.

18. A program that works with the operating system as a command processor, used to enter commands and initiate their execution.

19. A company or corporation with few or no assets or independent operations that is acquired by another company in order to allow the acquiring company to conduct business under the acquired company's legitimate legal standing.

----

Now, Mr Iamanativeenglishspeaker, which of these choices would you describe as the most precise for describing what I just described?

I am German. Precision - as impossible as it is to achieve with your adorable but regrettably inaccurate tongue - is the meaning of life.

Cheerio

Dandelion

PS - just edited away a typo that I just know you would have spotted and hit like a tonne of bricks.