roqf77 Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 well. this isnt so contraversioul if at all(excuse spelling). but i found an interesting link on the axis history forum. its about the performence of the 6 pounder v tiger with hvap(not apcr up propellanted ap!)(again sorry for spelling im dyslexic no joke!). just general thoughts and plus any other info how did apcbc fair? from one site ive lost i saw a table that said l50 6 pounder ap penetrated 135mm at 100 yards and 105mm at 500 yards, whereas apcbc penetrates 115mm at 100 yards but 110mm at 500 yards. is this true? plus i also read because of the apcbc shell's manufacture it penetrated less at closer ranges but still did more physical damage. is this true? plus general thoughts. oh and it would be nice for one of the treads i start not to turn into a flame pit if thats okay? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roqf77 Posted July 11, 2005 Author Share Posted July 11, 2005 http://www.geocities.com/vqpvqp/nih/Documents/Tiger-6pdr-data.html sorry forget to post the address 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicky Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Topic: 6 pdr APCBC vs Tiger 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roqf77 Posted July 11, 2005 Author Share Posted July 11, 2005 doesnt realy answer my question. that is a good post. but thats for the l43 6 pounders not the l 50. note the muzzle velocity. plus it doesnt give any performence other than that in the game. and i have knocked out tigers frontaly in game. im talking about real life performence. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roqf77 Posted July 11, 2005 Author Share Posted July 11, 2005 sorry just re read it. but the post is in contradiction to much i have read. not just on this site. more than a few tigers were knocked out by 6 pounder in north africa. some frontaly so i believe they can. just wondering other thoughts. but thanks for the reply wicky. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 In Jentz's 'Tigers in Combat' he had some very interesting shots showing a hulk Tiger hull peppered with 6 pdr shot. Gives you a renewed respect for the little 6 pdr! That's one reason why 6 pdr Churchills could still be found mixed into 75mm gun units up through war's end. it was a superior door-knocker. Generically, your stats looks like other allied gun comparisons of HVAP or sabot rounds with 'normal' APC rounds. HVAP has a great initial velocity and its narrow diameter tungsten core concentrates all its energy into a small spot. But the round is disproportionately affected by drag and loses a lot of its energy in flight. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 But the 6pr didn't use APCR (HVAP), it used APDS, which has a smaller cross-sectional area. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Since the account is originally off another forum the HVAP designation might've been a simple typo for otherwise accurate stats. 76mm HVAP was a tungsten sabot round like 57mm APDS, but the light metal sabot didn't get discarded, it stayed attached for the ride. The closest modern equivalent may be some medium caliber autocannon rounds like .50 cal SLAP (You wouldn't want to fire over the heads of your troops if you were raining tiny metal sabot pieces down on them! ). From accounts, HVAP and APDS seem to have had fairly similar problems with accuracy, range, etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doodlebug Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Originally posted by MikeyD: 76mm HVAP was a tungsten sabot round like 57mm APDS, but the light metal sabot didn't get discarded, it stayed attached for the ride. Are you talking about what I've always understood to be called APCR (Armour Piercing Composite Rigid) rounds? Are HVAP and APCR one and the same or have I got my terminology way off the mark? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 AFAIK, the US 76mm HVAP is an APCR round. Sabots usually refer to a discarded component. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Hey, I just figured they named it APDS to distinguish it from the Ss that don't D. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 But none of the S's that don't D are called S's. So perhaps they are not S's after all, but C's that are R or NR 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John D Salt Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Originally posted by Doodlebug: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MikeyD: 76mm HVAP was a tungsten sabot round like 57mm APDS, but the light metal sabot didn't get discarded, it stayed attached for the ride. Are you talking about what I've always understood to be called APCR (Armour Piercing Composite Rigid) rounds? Are HVAP and APCR one and the same or have I got my terminology way off the mark? </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roqf77 Posted July 12, 2005 Author Share Posted July 12, 2005 and I believe 6-pdr APCR, although it was designed, never saw service). http://www.freeweb.hu/gva/weapons/british_guns4.html this website says it was issued from october 1943. but only in small quantities. well it says so in the footnotes 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.