US Tungsten rounds

[Georgie]

Help,calling all Grogs or players that have used it.How effective is HVAP in this game? I haven't played a scenario yet where they are available. I remember in CMBO they were fair depending on range and hit angle. I remember in CMBB the US tungsten was dismal no matter what, you were better of with regular AP. With the hit chances in CMBN ,tungsten, if it is modeled as being effective, might prove to be useful. I remember reading somewhere that IRL the first shot the gunner took was with AP and then switched to HVAP if he was on the target. I also remember in CMBO a tank or a tank destroyer was very reluctant to us the HVAP rounds. With the accuracy the way it is in CMBN HVAP should be the first round out of the barrel in a tank duel. If I remember correctly the Germans did not have any Tungsten rounds this late in the war.

[Vanir Ausf B]

http://gva.freeweb.hu/weapons/usa_guns5.html

[Blackcat]

Mr. B.,

Just for your info Norton says that link you posted is on a naughty website and blocks access.

[MikeyD]

I can't really say I've found myself facing heavy armor in August with late M10s that much. Surprisingly little experience with the APCR round. You're pretty much going to hole that PzIV no matter what so there's no test of APCR's capabilties there. I'd like to hear how people have found the 'super-round' in-game. I recall in CMx1 there was constant debate about the 'shatter gap', the specific condition where the round fails when it would've penetrated at longer range.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Mr. B.,

Just for your info Norton says that link you posted is on a naughty website and blocks access.

I won't argue with Mr. Norton, but I have looked around on that site many times and lived to tell the tale.

[Pak40]

as of 9:25 central, the link doesn't work at all.

[Vanir Ausf B]

A bit of testing in the game suggests that tungsten significantly increases the chance of penetration against Tiger and Panther front turret. Most -- but not all -- hits will penetrate, compared to 76mm AP which usually does not. This was at 500m. I did not test against Tiger front hull since the turret results almost guarantee that tungsten will work well there.

Against the Panther front hull tungsten doesn't do any better than AP, at least not at 500m. It may be able to penetrate the upper front hull at very short ranges, like 100m, but I didn't test it at that range.

[Narses]

A bit of testing in the game suggests that tungsten significantly increases the chance of penetration against Tiger and Panther front turret. Most -- but not all -- hits will penetrate, compared to 76mm AP which usually does not. This was at 500m. I did not test against Tiger front hull since the turret results almost guarantee that tungsten will work well there.

Against the Panther front hull tungsten doesn't do any better than AP, at least not at 500m. It may be able to penetrate the upper front hull at very short ranges, like 100m, but I didn't test it at that range.

True but the T4 tungsten rd could penetrate 157mm at 500 yards versus 98mm for the M62APC.But the crews firing the T4 were directed to fire at the Panther's mantlet which apparently caused penetration. (See Osprey M10 and M36 Tank Destroyers, pgs 19, 34 and 35).

Osprey says the first 2000 rds were airlifted to Europe in Aug 44 but did not become widely available until November. By March 1945 only 18,000 rds had been delivered (pg 34 & 35). Usually M10 and 76mm gun tanks might have 2 to 3 T4 rds on hand held for Panthers and Tigers.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Correct, but the OP was asking how they performed in-game.

[Narses]

We're in agreement. I was simply verifying what you said, adding some extra info on when the T4 was introduced (Aug 44 and mostly later) and it seems the game properly portrays the effectiveness of the T4 round.

[Georgie]

A bit of testing in the game suggests that tungsten significantly increases the chance of penetration against Tiger and Panther front turret. Most -- but not all -- hits will penetrate, compared to 76mm AP which usually does not. This was at 500m. I did not test against Tiger front hull since the turret results almost guarantee that tungsten will work well there.

Against the Panther front hull tungsten doesn't do any better than AP, at least not at 500m. It may be able to penetrate the upper front hull at very short ranges, like 100m, but I didn't test it at that range.

Thanks for the info Vanir Ausf B, sounds like the tungsten rounds will give the M10s a little help against the Panther and Tiger. I was concerned that they would be "nerfed" like they were in CMBB. I used to run a lot of tests like you did when I was playing CMX 1 but the editor in CMBN is still too confusing for me to do any testing.

[dieseltaylor]

The military writer Terry Gander thinks the APC round could do 100mm armour at 915 metres [1006yards]. Rather curiously the HE shell is shown with a higher muzzle velocity than the AP -100ft/psec higher.

[Andrew H.]

Thanks for the info Vanir Ausf B, sounds like the tungsten rounds will give the M10s a little help against the Panther and Tiger. I was concerned that they would be "nerfed" like they were in CMBB. I used to run a lot of tests like you did when I was playing CMX 1 but the editor in CMBN is still too confusing for me to do any testing.

What's your evidence for the fact that they were nerfed?

[JasonC]

Vanir - on the test results, I'd expect it to be quite sensitive to range, with 500m just above the effective range of plain AP.

By the standard formulas, the US 76mm with plain AP (capped, but not tungsten) would be expected to penetrate the Panther turret front and the Tiger I hull front out to about 900 meters. In practice, between about 400 meters and that 900 meters range it experienced shatter gap failures - meaning the round had sufficient energy to penetrate but the round itself could fail before the plate struck did so - a "shell broke up" result in CMx1 terms. Some models of shatter predict a renewed possible penetration window at 800-900 meters (the energy of the impact falling below that the shell can withstand; hence term "gap" in shatter gap).

At 400 meters the plain AP was entirely effective against both plates - and those ranges were very common in Normandy (and later in fog fighting at Arracourt e.g.). It was also of course entirely effective against the side plates of either, to 1500 meters (Tiger sides) or more.

Tungsten should make penetration of either plate virtually certain out to medium range (1000 meters or more). It would not however defeat the Panther glacis - high slope minimizes the penetration gains from tungsten ammo. British 17 pdr or US 90mm could at closer range.

[Georgie]

What's your evidence for the fact that they were nerfed?

Hello Andrew H: Start CMBB and take a look at the penetration specs for the US tungsten rounds for the Sherman and compare them to the penetration specs of the regular AP rounds. AFAICT you were better off to just use regular AP unless you were going to be within a hundred meters or so and dead on. Now start CMBO and take a look at the specs for the US tungsten rounds for the Sherman and compare them to the specs for the US AP rounds. Hope my memory is accurate.

[Bastables]

Hello Andrew H: Start CMBB and take a look at the penetration specs for the US tungsten rounds for the Sherman and compare them to the penetration specs of the regular AP rounds. AFAICT you were better off to just use regular AP unless you were going to be within a hundred meters or so and dead on. Now start CMBO and take a look at the specs for the US tungsten rounds for the Sherman and compare them to the specs for the US AP rounds. Hope my memory is accurate.

Did you try CMAK where APCR was more effective at ranges up to 2000m unless it was greater than 40/50deg impact angles?

[Georgie]

Did you try CMAK where APCR was more effective at ranges up to 2000m unless it was greater than 40/50deg impact angles?

No, I didn't play CMAK to any extent. I tried it but liked CMBO and CMBB better.That sounds good thought and I hope that is more like how it is modeled in CMBN.

[Georgie]

What's your evidence for the fact that they were nerfed?

Hello Andrew, I took a look at CMAK and CMBB specs for the Sherman 76mm. Couldn't find my CMBO disc.

In CMAK : APCBC 100m @ 0deg 142mm @30deg 110mm

500m @ 0deg 131mm @30deg 102mm

Tung 100m @ 0deg 239mm @30deg 172mm

500m @ 0deg 209mm @30deg 150mm

In CMBB : APCBC 100m @ 0deg 123mm @30deg 96mm

500m @ 0deg 113mm @30deg 89mm

Tung 100m @0deg 131mm @30deg 94mm

500m @0deg 93mm @30deg 67mm

As you can see there is a big difference between the two and if memory serves me CMBO fell in between CMBB and CMAK. I can only hope that CMBN models tungsten for the US 76mm like CMAK did.

[Vanir Ausf B]

My testing of 76mm tungsten was of the quick and dirty variety. Only about 40 observed hits each on Panther and Tiger turret. Penetration was not "virtually certain" against either, but the odds were high; I would estimate around 80% for each ( I did not record them, so don't quote me on that number ). That compares to 24.5% for APCBC*, which I did record and was derived from a vastly larger sample size..

* Panther turret front and Tiger turret front resistance vs. 76mm APCBC at 500m is effectively identical in the game.

I did run a test of the Panther turret at 300m. Chance of penetration in-game is 33.6%. That is on 289 observed impacts. So you are gaining only about 9% moving from 500m to 300m. I'll let the grogs wrap their heads around that one.

All testing done using Panther A (mid).

A couple of other observations not directly related to tungsten:

1) At the ranges and angles tested -- 3-500m, straight-on equal elevation -- the odds of a shot trap ricochet into the top hull is so low I wonder why the Germans bothered with the mantlet chin on later models. I have only seen it happen twice in over 700 observed impacts. Do the math

2) The game does not model the Panther hull machine gun port as a weak point, or if it does the chances of a penetration there are infinitesimal. I have never seen any hit on the upper front hull penetrate. I do not record hits on the upper front hull (what's the point?) but the number of observed hits there must be well over 500 by now.

[Georgie]

My testing of 76mm tungsten was of the quick and dirty variety. Only about 40 observed hits each on Panther and Tiger turret. Penetration was not "virtually certain" against either, but the odds were high; I would estimate around 80% for each ( I did not record them, so don't quote me on that number ). That compares to 24.5% for APCBC*, which I did record and was derived from a vastly larger sample size..

Sounds impressive, what was the range in the tungsten tests? How did you get the Sherman or M10 to fire the tungsten rounds? They were very reluctant to do so in CMX1.

[dieseltaylor]

Georgie - if you only give them tungsten rounds they fire tungsten

[Vanir Ausf B]

Sounds impressive, what was the range in the tungsten tests? How did you get the Sherman or M10 to fire the tungsten rounds? They were very reluctant to do so in CMX1.

Range was 500m. I didn't have to do anything special to get them to use tungsten. They seemed more willing to use it than in CMx1, in most cases using both rounds right away (they only get 2). There is some randomness. Sometimes they would fire 1 round of AP then switch to tungsten, sometimes firing one round of tungsten then 1 round of AP then switching back to tungsten. Other combinations were seen here and there, but I would estimate that the first shot was tungsten at least 2/3 of the time.

[Amizaur]

I have seen once the penetration of Panther's upper front hull in the game - it was penetrated by Tiger's KwK36 from few hundreds meters (something like 300-400m). All other hits against Panther's upper front hull (I've run a few turns of 10 Panthers against 10 Tigers, so it had to be something like 30-50 hits on this plate) failed (even at closer ranges like 100m) so I thought it was something like "weak point penetration".

The equal resistance of the Tiger's and Panher's front turret armor suggests, that it's something like 100 or 110mm (so the thickness of Panther's front plate and mantlet). And the Tiger had something like 130mm (on average) of high-quality cast armor covering the opening in front turret armor.

So maybe it's something that needs to be corrected in the game ? Tiger's mantlet was much more massive and had greater average thickness than Panther's mantlet.

The Panther's mantlet was round, but it was also tapered - so the thickness of the armor was max at the center (close to gun) and decreased when going up or down, so the idea of the constructor was probably to keep the resistance about the same over the whole frontal projection of the mantlet.

On the other hand, the Tiger's mantlet - beside a few weaker spots (around the optics port and MG port) - was about 135mm or more (in some places 140, 150mm), 90-100mm was only the thickness at the edges of the mantlet, that were anyway backed up by 100mm front turret plate. So - destroy Tigers's gun, optics, damage it's gun elevation mechanism - with an 80-110mm penetator - sure, but to penetrate to crew compartment and kill it, usually the enemy would need something with more than 135mm of penetration.

[Georgie]

Georgie - if you only give them tungsten rounds they fire tungsten

Hello dieseltaylor, I'v read the Editor instructions and clicked every thing I can find in the editor but cant come up with a way to alter a tanks ammo loadout. How do you do that?

[Vanir Ausf B]

You can't.