Bigduke6 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Man, I'm learning all sorts of things in this game I'm playing. So, after waxing the 88, I decided it was time to hand-push the 57mm up the slope a bit to get better LOS, and to smack a MKIV from the rear. Still in the scattered woods. My boys start hauling, and low and bejeezus but my opponent drops some kind of indirect on the woods. :eek: Who wouldathunk? So what does the gun crew do after four or so impacts in the general vicinity? Panic, that's what! Meaning my beautiful rear shot on the MkIV is wasted. I was going to put them in for a medal, maybe promote them to Guards, but not any more. They're still expendable! :mad: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zalgiris 1410 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 BugDuke6 the 6 pdr crew might recover their senses, if they are or you can get them under command of course. They may make good and take account for that PzIV with a sodomistic rear AP shot if you are lucky. Have they abandoned the gun (and spiked it) yet or are they going to get killed manning it from tree bursting indirect fire? Either way you got the most out of them so far, an 88mm and all that indirect ammo for a 57mm ATG is not a bad exchange IMO, 'Hero of the Soviet People's Order' all around for the crew members, posthumously of course! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigduke6 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Yeah, it's a couple turns down the line, and everything is fine for now. Other sources KOed the MKIV, and so the 57m crew decided to unpanic. They never abandoned their piece, but then they're Red Army artillery, so abandoning your cannon is not allowed. They want Hero of the Soviet Union, there's Tiger lumbering around they can deal with. Still it's a ton of fun. I generally play Soviets and I have a few games under my belt, but somehow I don't have much experience playing with the 57mm. Mobile little suckers, they fire fast as all get out, and I'm guessing their signature is less than the ZiS-3. Sure behind-armor and anti-personnel effects aren't so hot, but there is something to be said for an AT gun that can punch through most armor, is tough to find, and is light enough to move around - carefully - once the shooting starts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zalgiris 1410 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Yeah I have developed a very high CM playing opinion of 57mm / 6 pdr ATGs for the Russians as well, though that's after quite awhile. Actually I've never understood why the Germans never extended their PAK 38s beyond L/60 to L/70 or L/80 to compare with its performance like how the Russians extended their light 45mm ATG's gun length during the War? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 17, 2005 Share Posted October 17, 2005 I guess they just thought the 50mm PaK would be a better horse to bet on. Since those were at least somewhat effective and in use to the end of the war, looks like they were right. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zalgiris 1410 Posted October 17, 2005 Share Posted October 17, 2005 Michael Emrys I'm referring to the fact that the penetrating performance of the PAK 38's velocity wasn't improved by lengthening the barrel of the German's 50mm L/60 to L/70 or L/80, that is from 3 metres to up to 3.5m to 4m or something realistic. The Russians managed to keep their light 45mm ATGs viable to a degree to the end of the war by extending the barrel length of the late war models. I wasn't complaining that the German's had bet on the wrong horse between 50mm or 57mm calibre for their medium ATG, however OTOH broaching the subject... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 17, 2005 Share Posted October 17, 2005 Okay, I misread your original post. Instead of seeing "PaK 38", I thought it was "PaK 36". Big difference, eh? Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 Bigduke6, There's a reason the Russian towed AT guns were known as "Farewell the Motherland!" Once deployed, they defended in place, with the tow vehicles removed from the area to promote devotion to duty. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 I'm no expert on this but ISTM that if you lengthen the barrel without adding more propellant, you MV will actually decrease. The Soviets could probably include more propellant in the charge, or increase its efficiency, therefore lengthening the barrel would actually do some good. Also, I think the Soviet 57mm were all CW lend lease 6pdrs, rather than built in house, that's why in the game they are more use as the CW propellant was of a higher quality. The Soviet 76mm seems dreadfully under modeled to me. But then, I'm not qualified to have an opinion . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Originally posted by Other Means: Also, I think the Soviet 57mm were all CW lend lease 6pdrsHuh? Where did you get that idea from? I've never heard that before. :confused: Isn't it a Zis? Checking from CMBB, the Zis-2 is 57/L73, while the British 6pdr in CMAK is 57/L43. Looks clear to me. Oh, and L&L Valentine IX and Churchill III (?) in CMBB do however have the British guns, of course. Of these, Valentine's gun is L50. The ingame L73 is slightly more powerful than L50, which is again slightly more powerful than L43. An interesting difference is that the Soviet gun has a blast value of 26 compared to 19 for both Brit guns. [ October 24, 2005, 06:22 AM: Message edited by: Sergei ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Anyway, just increasing the amount of propellant is not unproblematic, as the gun then has to tolerate a greater amount of pressure, which leads to greater production costs. Which is why these guns remained rare - that the 76.2mm gun is ways better for murdering footmen was another factor. [ October 24, 2005, 06:25 AM: Message edited by: Sergei ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigduke6 Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 No, the Soviets designed their own 57mm. It was called the ZiS-4 if you are talking about the tank-mounted version. The towed version was developed during the late 1930s. Its fielding was slowed by the fact that the 76mm was a better gun for the things it would be shooting at, in the early part of the war. Both could defeat practically any existing armor but the 76mm did far more damage, and could double as a field piece. The armor thickness race of the 42-45 period gave the 57mm a new lease on life as the 76mm slowly became obsolete in some AT roles. Here's another bit of trivia, the Soviets made SP 57mms by plopping the gun on a Kirovets tractor. Called it the Z-30. Not pretty, but theoretically get enough of them together in one place and you can make trouble for Panthers. They were the standard equipment of AT batteries in tank brigades on the south and southwest fronts. Can't have 'em in CMBB however. Not that I'm whining. Apparently only 100 or so were made starting in 1941, and by 1942 they were all busted, captured, or otherwise lost. Still, it would be fun to have one in a Babarossa scenario. Here's a linky: http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=128&Itemid=55〈=ru 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Originally posted by Other Means: I'm no expert on this but ISTM that if you lengthen the barrel without adding more propellant, you MV will actually decrease.Not as long as the barometric pressure behind the projectile is greater than in front of it. Of course there are friction losses, and I suppose that's what you have in mind, but unless you are adding 25% or more to the barrel length, I don't see that as the dominant factor. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Originally posted by Sergei: An interesting difference is that the Soviet gun has a blast value of 26 compared to 19 for both Brit guns. Wouldn't that be due to the fact that the Soviets used a more powerful but less stable explosive in their shells? How do the US and USSR 76mm HE shells compare? Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Originally posted by Sergei: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Other Means: Also, I think the Soviet 57mm were all CW lend lease 6pdrsHuh? Where did you get that idea from? I've never heard that before. :confused: Isn't it a Zis? Checking from CMBB, the Zis-2 is 57/L73, while the British 6pdr in CMAK is 57/L43. Looks clear to me. Oh, and L&L Valentine IX and Churchill III (?) in CMBB do however have the British guns, of course. Of these, Valentine's gun is L50. The ingame L73 is slightly more powerful than L50, which is again slightly more powerful than L43. An interesting difference is that the Soviet gun has a blast value of 26 compared to 19 for both Brit guns. </font> 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.