Jump to content

tiger's frontal turret is penetrated by sherman???


NoelGallagher
 Share

Recommended Posts

[F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly
2 hours ago, Irishratticus72 said:

Still think we're dismissing the time travel theory a little bit too readily.

Yeah, chances are it's an L7 cannon through the temporal lend lease program that Labour ran. That scandal led directly to Thatcher unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irishratticus72
46 minutes ago, [F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly said:

Yeah, chances are it's an L7 cannon through the temporal lend lease program that Labour ran. That scandal led directly to Thatcher unfortunately.

The Iron Lady wasn't for turning. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly

So, the m-30 didn't get an HEAT round until may 1943, which counts it out for this, unless the HE round somehow shot clean through without donating and left a home smaller then itself, it's counted out. (If it could that would be great, but that does mean that literally any ap gun in the Soviet arsenal could penetrate there. Accepting this as a possibility widens the amount of guns that could've maken the shot). Unless time travel, at which point I question why Hitler's head wasn't detonated by a T34/85.

 

I'm unaware of when the ap round for the a-19 was introduced (I would like to know!), but given what we know about 85mm shells leaving holes that are (often significantly) bigger then the rounds themselves, how do this massive cannons leave holes that are somehow smaller then themselves?

 

I can't read Cyrillic let alone read Russian to the point that I can figure out how these Russians came to their conclusion, but reading through it it does seem that they've been less rigorous then we have been thus far. There's not even a single graph, Tiger schematic, or equation here!

4 hours ago, Irishratticus72 said:

The Iron Lady wasn't for turning. 

Do we have penetration statistics to prove that?

Edited by [F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

dragon_7611

I also found it. Maybe the Tiger was hit by an 85mm 52-K anti-aircraft gun :scratch_one-s_head:

 

http://www.tankarchives.ca/2013/03/soviet-85-mm-guns-vs-tigers.html?m=1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NoelGallagher

what's going on here haha

i found the reason why

it's becasue they carry the invincible roman ligionary inside the sherman

 

CelebratedNeedyIbex-size_restricted.gif

qsl8d3x1sfw51.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly

Anything to avoid accepting that mabye the tiger had a design flaw xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LachenKrieg
On 6/19/2021 at 12:04 AM, [F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly said:

The caption says Tiger 423, february 1943. If you wish to dispute that, take it up with the source.

 

Okay, let's assume this is correct. Here's a problem: Whilst we didn't figure out how through the course of this thread how big the holes left by 76.2 mm guns are, we do know how big the holes left by an 85mm AA gun firing into a Tiger tank are: At least 110mm (for a 1.45km shot into the side), going up to 150mm (1km shot into the front), topping out at a massive 350 by 230mm (800m shot into the side). So if we assume that the 100mm measurement of the breach entry hole is correct, we're most likely looking at a smaller round then 85mm.

 

I personally think 76.2 soviet is likely because of the date. The soviets simply did not have anything much bigger then 76.2 in service at that point  in time. the 85mm aa cannon on AT duty is another contender but it doesn't have to be:

The optics of a Tiger H1 are a weak spot: Around the optics the armor is 70mm cast iron, and to make matters worse for the gunner, the armor has holes drilled in it, so it is significantly weaker then a solid 70mm plate. In later tiger models the gunner optics were reinforced for this reason.

 

The ZIS-3 is capable of penetrating 70mm armour or more from 500 meters or less, 75% of the time. Given that 76.2 was the most ubiquitous AP gun that the soviets had at the time, it's simply the most logical option even if we simplify the armour in that spot to 70mm (which is an simplification in favour of the tiger tank thanks to the holes - arguably a smaller round could do it).

 

Ofc this is an educated guess at the end, but I do think an educated guess is better then an uneducated one.

 

On 6/19/2021 at 11:55 AM, [F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly said:

So, the m-30 didn't get an HEAT round until may 1943, which counts it out for this, unless the HE round somehow shot clean through without donating and left a home smaller then itself, it's counted out. (If it could that would be great, but that does mean that literally any ap gun in the Soviet arsenal could penetrate there. Accepting this as a possibility widens the amount of guns that could've maken the shot). Unless time travel, at which point I question why Hitler's head wasn't detonated by a T34/85.

 

I'm unaware of when the ap round for the a-19 was introduced (I would like to know!), but given what we know about 85mm shells leaving holes that are (often significantly) bigger then the rounds themselves, how do this massive cannons leave holes that are somehow smaller then themselves?

 

I can't read Cyrillic let alone read Russian to the point that I can figure out how these Russians came to their conclusion, but reading through it it does seem that they've been less rigorous then we have been thus far. There's not even a single graph, Tiger schematic, or equation here!

Do we have penetration statistics to prove that?

So while I was given a little break from the forum, nice to see sith wasn't BTW, I have been trying to nail down more facts about the mantlet area in question. As of now, I can report that the area described by peasant doesn't seem to be completely accurate, and the actual amount of armor in that area is more than what was accounted for in the calculation done. The attached plan view of the area shows that it is tapered and not stepped as originally thought. So while it seems theoretically plausible for a Sherman to penetrate a Tiger there, the plausibility itself cannot be 100% confirmed given the information discussed.

 

That aside, The two quoted posts above are what makes the actual size of the hole in the early Tiger photo relevant to this discussion. If we know that the distance between the two view ports is 82mm, and the diameter of the outermost face of the view ports themselves is 35mm, then that hole is at least 117mm across because both view ports are completely obliterated, and it could easily be 120mm+. The other point is that a hole in that location will likely look different from a hole made in solid even armor plating. The armor in that area offers less resistance, and therefore the shell passing through it should deform less, staying closer to its original size.

 

So if I was correcting your homework for you, I could only give you half marks for that particular answer because you only got the "guess" part right. I can see you still need more time to work out the intelligence part.

 

But what Moeras wants us to believe is that someone using the name "CautiousKerbal" provided a date to a photograph which Moeras claims corroborates his story that it has to be a 75mm shell.

 

I am not saying that the date is incorrect, but only that I am not certain. If we want to talk about the photo itself, the LSSAH wasn't made into a full division until October of 1943.

 

CautiousKerbal also claims that the dead gunner and radio man are under the tarp. How does he know that? Does CautiousKerbal have other information about the photo that he has not shared, or is he just guessing? I mean it is easy to guess that both the radioman and gunner are dead from the penetration marks, but I can only make out what appears to be one body under the tarp in the photo. So if he is using the hole in the radio position to guess what is under a tarp, what else is he guessing/contriving/assuming? The photo could be from winter 1942 to winter/ early spring 1944 unless CautiousKerbal, or someone else can shed more light on the situation.

 

What do we know for sure; we know that the Chieftain uses sensationalism as a presentation style like when telling a group of Americans one or two generations removed from WWII that the American made Sherman tank defeated the Tiger tank in battle without pointing out that the four Tiger tanks he is referring to were unaware until it was too late that they were being shot at from the side as they traversed an open area.

 

We know that the size of the opening in a Tiger's mantlet as shown in a photo posted by sith is not 75mm, 76.2mm, or 93mm. In fact we know that it is at least 117mm across. Why is this important, because Moeras wants to attach a fictionally reduced opening size to an unknown date as proof that a 75mm gun made that penetration mark at 1000m. We aren't even 100% certain that a 75mm round from a Sherman can penetrate the Tiger tank there at 1000m.

 

   

telescope.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly

 

6 hours ago, LachenKrieg said:

So while I was given a little break from the forum, nice to see sith wasn't BTW, I have been trying to nail down more facts about the mantlet area in question. As of now, I can report that the area described by peasant doesn't seem to be completely accurate, and the actual amount of armor in that area is more than what was accounted for in the calculation done. The attached plan view of the area shows that it is tapered and not stepped as originally thought. So while it seems theoretically plausible for a Sherman to penetrate a Tiger there, the plausibility itself cannot be 100% confirmed given the information discussed.

 

It should be noted that that diagram you posted is from a later model tank, one that fixes the weakspot that we were discussing here. You can tell because the armour around the optics is sloped rather then perpendicular. You can also tell because, assuming that the 1pixel=1mm thing is correct, the holes are 50mm across rather then the 35mm of the Tiger H1 we are discussing. Once again you're pointing at an Tiger E to assert false things about the Tiger H1.

 

  

6 hours ago, LachenKrieg said:

Why is this important, because Moeras wants to attach a fictionally reduced opening size to an unknown date as proof that a 75mm gun made that penetration mark at 1000m.

 

I have literally never made this claim about the picture and neither has anyone else.

Edited by [F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SYN_Haashashin locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...