tanks main gun can be easily disabled

[NoelGallagher]

tanks main gun can be easily disabled after update

just one 76mm HE rounds on the gun and it's disabled which is not even close to realistic

not even that now it is able to penetrate the gun barrel at less than 20 degree angle 

which is complete nonsense...

i'm not gonna provide the video to prove my point which i did on aircraft side

becasue devs don't care anyway

also you can easily test this out in QMB

if this bug or new feature also gets ignored by devs

in their "own term" not as legitimate claim

good bye 

this is not a sim to me anymore

 

hey what about new 50.cal human head guided bullet?

 

 

Edited January 19, 2022 by NoelGallagher

[Voidhunger]

I was fighting yesterday, multiple mission in Panzer IV, Panther and Ferdinad and I had only once disabled main gun in Panther by the Su122 which is ok I think.

I will test more in the evening.

 

[Na-zdorovie]

i dont see much of a problem either, play TC a lot, dont get the invincible tanks or whatever

[Angry_Kitten]

ive only played TC for an hour since the year started, and it has serious issues.  big time.  

 

 

[Avimimus]

On 2/4/2022 at 4:55 AM, pocketshaver said:

ive only played TC for an hour since the year started, and it has serious issues.  big time.  

 

Maybe play it for two hours and see if the issues are still there?

 

IMHO, I only got it this year and I'm finding it pretty impressively accurate. I couldn't bounce an AP round off of the mantlet of the Panther in a useful way, I find myself a bit too easily suppressed by anti-aircraft guns, and I wish the AI was less accurate - but overall the power of the guns seems historical, the durability also seems pretty historical.

 

That said, I do sometimes try to fire one round into the tracks of a German heavy tank and then three rounds into the barrel in hopes of jamming the gun or damaging the optics. But I have a feeling that might work in real life. If one 76mm APHE round detonates against the barrel it should generate quite a shock and possibly damage mechanisms or distort the barrel itself - shouldn't it?

[Angry_Kitten]

8 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

 

Maybe play it for two hours and see if the issues are still there?

 

IMHO, I only got it this year and I'm finding it pretty impressively accurate. I couldn't bounce an AP round off of the mantlet of the Panther in a useful way, I find myself a bit too easily suppressed by anti-aircraft guns, and I wish the AI was less accurate - but overall the power of the guns seems historical, the durability also seems pretty historical.

 

That said, I do sometimes try to fire one round into the tracks of a German heavy tank and then three rounds into the barrel in hopes of jamming the gun or damaging the optics. But I have a feeling that might work in real life. If one 76mm APHE round detonates against the barrel it should generate quite a shock and possibly damage mechanisms or distort the barrel itself - shouldn't it?

its like this ,

 

im in the free german tank,   i see a sherman at 700 yards, not the ideal range but its doable.  I put an APHE round right into the white star. 

    the sherman rotates around at me, puts a single round that GLANCES off the machine gun mantles unit, and my entire crew is dead. 

    in a second scenario, same tanks, the sherman bounces a shell off of the tank hull, leaves a visual dent in the f4 view, yet my tank commander pops teh hatch, leaps onto the ground, flails a few seconds and dies. Yet the range is a mere 500, and putting an APHE directly into the joint between tank hull and turret does NOTHING..

    

The free russian tank fairs slightly better, as it seems to take 2 hits to die from the sherman

  yet in my best russian outing, it still took massive hits to kill it 

          range started at 650.  

              1 hit to star on side, nothing happened

              1 hit to front compartment, just in front of driver, nothing

              sherman turns to me, 

              1 shell hits ground under sherman and blows up, no damage to sherman

               1 shell hits directly on starboard tank track, NO DAMAGE  sherman procedes to race to me and close distance to 400

              1 shell hits on machine gunner/machine gun, no result

              1 clean miss i think might have bounced off the turret top

              1 shell hits the tank gun mantlet on the turret, entire turret is ripped off the sherman 

                     german victory

 

yet in a simple free range attack on truck convoys, the russian gaz aa truck takes my german tank track off with a single hit at 900 meters

 

im 40 meters from a gaz, i immobilize it with a single HE shell to the back, yet the truck is on fire, the driver is sitting behind the wheel looking around, the gun crew is alive and shooting at me,  required the use of THREE belts of machine gun ammo to kill the gun crew, two belts to kill the driver through windshield even though i was centering on the drivers chest. and an extra HE shell to actuall kill the aa gun, and to kill the truck. 

         In that convoy regular transports were needing a hit to both the canvas covered pack and the engine comparment/driver to kill it

[Avimimus]

So the free German tank is a Panzer III Ausf. L with 25mm-70mm of frontal hull armour and 30mm-50mm of frontal turret armour. The Sherman can easily penetrate you at 700 metres. 

 

It sounds like your round bounced off a mantlet and your opponent's round penetrated... simple story really - I don't see the problem.

 

The simulation is accurate enough that not every penetration is effective, and the angle of impact is carefully calculated (allowing rounds to bounce depending on exactly where they hit). It also takes into account what is behind the armour - so it is possible to fire an AP round into a tank with no effect in one spot (or no apparent effect anyway) and by aiming slightly to the side the Tank will explode.

 

I've noticed this quite a bit - when I aimed at the weak point in the lower rear side of the Panther they started exploding, when I aimed for the ammo racks of the ISU-122... it started exploding. Before I figured this out I was much less effective though.

 

As for the GAZ - some of the AI vehicles have simple damage models (including trucks with invincible windscreens)  - so you might be on to something there.

 

P.S. Not sure about your failure to track the Sherman using the T-34... but then I don't know that much about tank track durability or where exactly you hit).

[Yogiflight]

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

Panzer III Ausf. L with 25mm-70mm of frontal hull armour and 30mm-50mm of frontal turret armour.

57mm turret front and 50mm hull front, both with additional 20mm distance armor. And a distance armor is more effective than welding additional 20mm armor to the normal armor, as it makes the projectile start tumbling before hitting the normal armor. The disadvantage is, if not hit exactly from the 12 o'clock direction, but more 11.30 or 12.30, the round could go through the opening for the driver's sight or the hull machinegun and hit the 50mm front armor, without having to penetrate the distance armor first.

[Avimimus]

35 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

57mm turret front and 50mm hull front, both with additional 20mm distance armor. And a distance armor is more effective than welding additional 20mm armor to the normal armor, as it makes the projectile start tumbling before hitting the normal armor. The disadvantage is, if not hit exactly from the 12 o'clock direction, but more 11.30 or 12.30, the round could go through the opening for the driver's sight or the hull machinegun and hit the 50mm front armor, without having to penetrate the distance armor first.

 

Better and more precise than me. But couldn't the Sherman's 75mm still penetrate at 700 metres (even with your more precise calculations)?

[Angry_Kitten]

as to the sherman penetration 

 

vist the following page as it doesnt cut and paste well, 

 

M4 Sherman tank with 76mm gun – WW2 Weapons (ww2-weapons.com)

 

seems a tad unrealistic compared to how they fail to determine what model gun was used to make the stats they qoute.  

[Yogiflight]

1 hour ago, Avimimus said:

 

Better and more precise than me. But couldn't the Sherman's 75mm still penetrate at 700 metres (even with your more precise calculations)?

TBH, I don't think so. Shooting at that distance from the front, I would go for a track or the lower hull, to stop it from moving and take it from the side.

 

5 minutes ago, pocketshaver said:

as to the sherman penetration 

 

vist the following page as it doesnt cut and paste well, 

 

M4 Sherman tank with 76mm gun – WW2 Weapons (ww2-weapons.com)

The Sherman we have in game has the shorter 75mm gun.

According to the specifications in game it penetrates with APHE 83mm at 500m and 75mm at 1000m and with AP 91mm at 500m and 76mm at 1000m.

AP might be able to penetrate at 700m, but I would not bet on it.

[NoelGallagher]

15 hours ago, Avimimus said:

That said, I do sometimes try to fire one round into the tracks of a German heavy tank and then three rounds into the barrel in hopes of jamming the gun or damaging the optics. But I have a feeling that might work in real life. If one 76mm APHE round detonates against the barrel it should generate quite a shock and possibly damage mechanisms or distort the barrel itself - shouldn't it?

you are correct on that point 

but you miss the point anyway

the point of this discussion was that the incoming shell were able to penetrates and disable the barrel at less than 10 or 20 degree of angle(even hurricanes 40mm does this less than 40 degree angle)

altho it is possible to get penetrated from side and i have no problem with that 

furthermore 75mm HE rounds detonating "around" the barrel causing the gun disabled is not really accurate at all

oh yes yes yes if it hit directly it might have a chance to disable the gun 

well in the game you can just put the rounds somewhere around the barrel and make it disable

all this problem occurerd after the new update

 

 

14 hours ago, Avimimus said:

So the free German tank is a Panzer III Ausf. L with 25mm-70mm of frontal hull armour and 30mm-50mm of frontal turret armour. The Sherman can easily penetrate you at 700 metres. 

 

It sounds like your round bounced off a mantlet and your opponent's round penetrated... simple story really - I don't see the problem.

 

The simulation is accurate enough that not every penetration is effective, and the angle of impact is carefully calculated (allowing rounds to bounce depending on exactly where they hit). It also takes into account what is behind the armour - so it is possible to fire an AP round into a tank with no effect in one spot (or no apparent effect anyway) and by aiming slightly to the side the Tank will explode.

 

I've noticed this quite a bit - when I aimed at the weak point in the lower rear side of the Panther they started exploding, when I aimed for the ammo racks of the ISU-122... it started exploding. Before I figured this out I was much less effective though.

 

As for the GAZ - some of the AI vehicles have simple damage models (including trucks with invincible windscreens)  - so you might be on to something there.

 

P.S. Not sure about your failure to track the Sherman using the T-34... but then I don't know that much about tank track durability or where exactly you hit).

now you tell me it simulates accurately after watchig this video...

 

 

 

well this was just about sherman in it?

 

how about other problems

sc50 contains similar explosive as what 300mm naval shell contains

now to put that in persepctive sc250 has 5times more explosive charge in it

if this was the reality 

that t-34 would torn in to metal pieces at the degree that you could not even recognize it as it was once a tank lol

and contradictory to this we have 152mm HE killing the tanks with ease

hmm something is inconsistent isn't it?

 

 

Edited February 7, 2022 by NoelGallagher

[messsucher]

That Sherman was the famous Ghost Sherman. And haha, nukes were made because of T-34 ?

 

Also, you are doing it wrong, according to old Ubisoft forums .50 cals will turn over Tiger I when strafed. They are so powerful :DDD

Edited February 7, 2022 by messsucher

[DD_Friar]

When we are looking at Sherman stats from WW2 do we need to mindful of the fact this Sherman is based on the lend lease Russian version which had a slightly older / different gun?

I am basing this on testing I have done following reading an historical history of the Sherwood Rangers where the commanders commented on them having faster rate of fire then the Panzer Iv's. When I tested this our sherman was slower to get 5 rounds off by about 5 or 6  seconds

Apologies if I am incorrect.

[BlitzPig_EL]

The in game Sherman model was also used by the USMC in the Pacific Theater.

 

[Avimimus]

7 hours ago, NoelGallagher said:

now you tell me it simulates accurately after watchig this video...

 

The first video - most of the point blank hits shown in the video seem plausible to me. If solid AP is being used rather than APHE, the areas hit in the first few shots are some of the emptiest in the tank (look up a schematic). Behind the driver, and under the turret - sending rounds towards the drive shaft (or around it). So that seems fine to me.

 

The turret hit would probably be more devastating though, as part of the shell would rotate below the mantlet and there is a lot more to damage at that level. So you may have a convincing point with that turret hit.

 

I'll watch the other videos later if I can find a spare moment.

 

Note: This is all also assuming that the DVD decals accurately show where the impacts occurred.

[NoelGallagher]

4 hours ago, Avimimus said:

The first video - most of the point blank hits shown in the video seem plausible to me. If solid AP is being used rather than APHE, the areas hit in the first few shots are some of the emptiest in the tank (look up a schematic). Behind the driver, and under the turret - sending rounds towards the drive shaft (or around it). So that seems fine to me.

yup but there's no solid AP rounds available for german tanks so it was APHE rounds

and i tested the damage model numorous time apart from this video

and if you see the 2nd video the trajectory of the shell actually pass by where the gunners and commander are located at 

so even if we ignore the effect of internal fragmmentation and explosive charge in APHE rounds

the crew should be knocked out anyway

 

4 hours ago, Avimimus said:

The turret hit would probably be more devastating though, as part of the shell would rotate below the mantlet and there is a lot more to damage at that level. So you may have a convincing point with that turret hit.

2nd video was made specifically to test that

and the sherman crew were somehow manage to fire back after recieve 3hit on the turret

4 hours ago, Avimimus said:

Note: This is all also assuming that the DVD decals accurately show where the impacts occurred.

exactly for that reason

i slow down the video to show the actual trajectory of the shell so we can clearly see and identify it

 

just to make my point clear

i'm not insisting that they have to model everything accurately as the reality 

that is not my point at all

my point is that damage model they are using is inconsistent

and also it'd be way better if they share how damage model works in TC 

but they never share that(it's been asked since it was in EA and still no answer)

Edited February 7, 2022 by NoelGallagher

[Yogiflight]

2 hours ago, NoelGallagher said:

yup but there's no solid AP rounds available for german tanks

except the sub caliber ammunition (PzGr. 40), which has greater chance to penetrate, but does less damage inside than a normal solid round, because it is much smaller.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Yogiflight

[[SN]_Reaper_]

I am now playing for the blue side and I want to say that the Sherman is some kind of shell eater. It easily tolerates several hits of 75 or 88 mm to the forehead, and even when shooting from 200-300 meters to the side, almost at right angles, right into the ammo, it calmly rolls on  

 

And yes, the cannon became more damaged by return fire.

[Avimimus]

So, I've watched the other videos now!

 

The third video I don't see anything wrong with - the first hit misses anything important - the next two hits to the engine light the Sherman on fire (but don't disable the turret crew) - the Sherman gets off one shot which presumably hits the pistol port on the Tiger's turret at point-blank-range.

 

The second video seems to actually show evidence of a problem - as multiple penetrating hits to the turret should disable the turret (even if the driver and mechanism are undamaged and the tank keeps rolling).

 

Note: I am always asking 'what is behind the armour at the point of impact'... if there ammunition, fuel, crew, engine components? A hit to the engine shouldn't cause the turret to explode. Killing the turret crew shouldn't kill the driver or the engine etc.

  

15 hours ago, NoelGallagher said:

how about other problems

sc50 contains similar explosive as what 300mm naval shell contains

now to put that in persepctive sc250 has 5times more explosive charge in it

if this was the reality 

that t-34 would torn in to metal pieces at the degree that you could not even recognize it as it was once a tank lol

and contradictory to this we have 152mm HE killing the tanks with ease

hmm something is inconsistent isn't it?

 

Hmm... In my experience it requires multiple direct hits with the 152mm shell to kill an enemy tank. Obviously a direct hit with an SC50 or SC250 should be more effective.

 

The issue though is that an SC50 or SC250 will almost never be a direct hit. It will either bury itself in the mud or detonate on the surface at some distance. The detonation will produce splinters (i.e. shrapnel) and overpressure (i.e. blast). The splinters are not necessarily very fast and are not designed to penetrate armour, so at even a moderate distance most of the splinters will be stopped by even moderate armour.

 

The crew will also have some protection from blast. Because the blast is expanding into a volume (three dimensional) its pressure falls off very quickly. So even a relatively short distance between the tank and the detonation should provide quite a bit of protection... dramatically so: Inverse-square law - Wikipedia

 

So I don't see a problem. There is a reason why people prefer cluster munitions and direct hits from things like PTAB (from the Il-2 1943), rather than relying on larger bombs, when dealing with tanks.

 

P.S. As for the video on tracking tanks - you are firing on multiple different types of tanks - which makes it unclear whether it is an issue with the guns or with the damage models of specific tanks. So doing the same tests always against the same type of AI tank would be more convincing.

[NoelGallagher]

1 hour ago, Avimimus said:

Note: I am always asking 'what is behind the armour at the point of impact'... if there ammunition, fuel, crew, engine components? A hit to the engine shouldn't cause the turret to explode. Killing the turret crew shouldn't kill the driver or the engine etc.

yup yup yup 

i tested this also in quick mission 

and even if the shell goes right through where the ammunition is stored 

it doens't kill the crew nor make it explode 

it's just fine as if nothing happned 

(sometimes it explodes and sometimes not it's just weird and the test condition was exactly same)

1 hour ago, Avimimus said:

Hmm... In my experience it requires multiple direct hits with the 152mm shell to kill an enemy tank. Obviously a direct hit with an SC50 or SC250 should be more effective.

i tested this again with ferdinand(88mm HE shell) against panther 

and when you hit the panther somewhere around the cupola "the entire tank" explodes right away with one shot

you can also kill the t-34 with tigers 88mm HE shell by putting it somewhere under the tank

also for 152mm HE shell you can kill the tiger and panther by putting it somewhere very close to their side so it doens't require direct hit

 

 

and again after new update you can disable most of the gun with one HE shell anywhere near the gun barrel(which is not realistic)

now the gun performance and the armour protection became utterly meaningless 

well just put one HE shell anywhere near the gun you will disable them right away

and many of the players already knows this trick 

now they don't even use AP rounds in multiplayer

they shoot HE rounds and disable the tiger or panther with t-34 like nothing 

this became really big problem

1 hour ago, Avimimus said:

The issue though is that an SC50 or SC250 will almost never be a direct hit. It will either bury itself in the mud or detonate on the surface at some distance. The detonation will produce splinters (i.e. shrapnel) and overpressure (i.e. blast). The splinters are not necessarily very fast and are not designed to penetrate armour, so at even a moderate distance most of the splinters will be stopped by even moderate armour.

yes i agree on this 

but again then the logic is very inconsistent (i'm pointing out damage modeling logic)

so let's say splinters and fragmmentation can't damge the tank easily then how come one 75mm shell exploding just near the gun barrel can disable the gun

see how it's all mixed up?

1 hour ago, Avimimus said:

The crew will also have some protection from blast. Because the blast is expanding into a volume (three dimensional) its pressure falls off very quickly. So even a relatively short distance between the tank and the detonation should provide quite a bit of protection... dramatically so: Inverse-square law - Wikipedia

that's right shockwave can dissipate very quickly

but not with this big bombs like sc250

it has 130kg of explosive filling inside 

generally saying that is 130times more explosive filler than the normal tanks HE shell contains

the shockwave would be too great 

it'll either flip the tank upside down or blow the turret off from the hull

we have real case of this in ww2 such as falaise pocket bombing

and even if it doesn't flip the tank upside down 

it will knock out all the crew inside and damge the internal compartment severly 

 

some other evidence of big bomb torn the tank apart 

 

and about the tank track test 

hmm i doubt that they gave the different value for each of the tank tracks 

so yes it was tested with the assumption of that all the tank tracks has same damage value inside the game

Edited February 8, 2022 by NoelGallagher

[Wold]

On 2/7/2022 at 10:38 AM, NoelGallagher said:

that t-34 would torn in to metal pieces at the degree that you could not even recognize it as it was once a tank lol

what fantasy world you live in ? 

 

 

PzIV(very weak structural strenght) vs 2x250kg boms at very close hit(7 and 9 meters from tank)

 

https://twilightpliskin.livejournal.com/4617.html

https://thunder-games.livejournal.com/126712.html

 

in real life bombs is not effective(not that much as many thought ) as an AT weapon, and "100% kill" can be achived only if you direct hit it with 250kg bomb, or very close hit with 500kg and heavier, omiting the fact that each tank will have different structural strength and each bomb strike will give different results, such as high delayed bomb will simply dig in to the ground and do nothing etc...

 

in one ocassion US bombers turned 4 villages in Europe in to moon surface only to block tank movement there, they even didn't try to use bomb against tanks because of it's almost non existent effectivness 

Edited February 8, 2022 by Wold

[Yogiflight]

9 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 Killing the turret crew shouldn't kill the driver or the engine etc.

Depends on the ammunition you are using. A 88mm APHE hit, with the hatches all closed, has good chances to kill the whole crew in the small compartment

 

[NoelGallagher]

44 minutes ago, Wold said:

what fantasy world you live in ? 

 

 

PzIV(very weak structural strenght) vs 2x250kg boms at very close hit(7 and 9 meters from tank)

 

https://twilightpliskin.livejournal.com/4617.html

https://thunder-games.livejournal.com/126712.html

 

in real life bombs is not effective(not that much as many thought ) as an AT weapon, and "100% kill" can be achived only if you direct hit it with 250kg bomb, or very close hit with 500kg and heavier, omiting the fact that each tank will have different structural strength and each bomb strike will give different results, such as high delayed bomb will simply dig in to the ground and do nothing etc...

 

in one ocassion US bombers turned 4 villages in Europe in to moon surface only to block tank movement there, they even didn't try to use bomb against tanks because of it's almost non existent effectivness 

okay even tho i have something to say about your data i wouldn't 

becasue it blurs the main point of this topic 

so i'll make the assumption that your data is correct 

then how come 75mm HE shell detonating near the gun barrel disables the gun

and 152mm HE shell (which contains 4kg of explosive charge ,sc250=130kg) exploding near the tiger and panther tank ever  can kill the tank

becasue it does in this game

you see how logic is completely messed up? 

that's my point 

i'm fine with whatveer the way they approach in terms of damage modeling 

but it's neither that nor this 

it's mixed up it's contradictory it's' inconsistnet 

 

Edited February 8, 2022 by NoelGallagher

[Wold]

15 minutes ago, NoelGallagher said:

hen how come 75mm HE shell detonating near the gun barrel disables the gun

 

75-76mm HE close explosion can break through panther turret roof which is 16mm and tiger sponson bottom which is 26mm, try to guess what is wall thickness on gun barrel IRL ? 

 

as for heavy HE like 122-152mm it will disable even modern tanks without any problems

 

 

as for reality of NON-penetration influence on structural integrity it's HUGE topic for discussion, shock from AP hit can crack all otpical devices in tank, shock from HE can disable a lot of internal components etc, even without any penetration/spalling etc

 

90mm HE fired on M47 turret side 

 

"a hit by a 90 mm M71 HE round hitting the turret at 11 o'clock (i.e. right cheek of the turret front) is mentioned, the warhead of the is fuzed without delay and impact angle (relative to armor) is about 45°. The round is fired from 100 meters away, hitting 200 mm left and 500 mm below the optical range finder.

 

Following the hit by the HE round under 5., the following happened:

a) the gunner's sight is disaligned even more

 

b) the commander's sight's alignment couldn't be measured, because it broke

 

 c) the following damage could be noticed at the rangefinder: The left opening already broke away after a hit form the 40 mm (Bofors) gun, now after being hit by a 90 mm HE round, the right optical opening of the rangefinder has broken away too. The shockwave of the detonation was enough to tear away the six screws(diameter 12.7 mm) holding in the (armored) protection cover in place. After removing the rangefinder and examining its status, it became apparent that all mirrors inside the rangefinder broke away from their mounting points. The dots and patterns inside the reticle weren't visible anymore, even though the illumination was still working. None of the mirrors was actually unfastened from the bonding, but the glass mountings broke.

 

d) Five vision blocks of the commander were damaged. Two are completely useless (the glass in one is broken, the glass in the other has become misty), while the others are broken, but still can be used to some extent.

 

5.1 The shock caused damaged to the optical connection of the commander's sight, again a mirror was knocked out of the mounting.

 

5.2 Further test firing according to the (planned?) hit pattern was not possible, because the hits from the 90 mm gun damaged the turret mechanically in such a way, that it couldn't be turned anymore. These damages are mentioned in the report of the test facility 91 Meppen.

 

4. Firing of a 90 mm HE round from the M48 tank and a distance of 50 m. One hit occured at the right turret side at the lower section, total distance to the rangefinder of the impact location was  600 mm. Result: Armored cover of the rangefinder torn away, right port of the rangefinder broken away. Turret slewing gear loosened (several screws torn away), no hydraulic operation (i.e. turning of the turret) possible anymore. Turret bearing blocks after turning a few degrees. No visible damage caused to the crew (simulated by cardboard cylinders). The tank is for the time being not fit for action."

 

 

 

15 minutes ago, NoelGallagher said:

you see how logic is completely messed up? 

i see only your complete lack of knowledge 

Edited February 8, 2022 by Wold

[NoelGallagher]

2 hours ago, Wold said:

 

75-76mm HE close explosion can break through panther turret roof which is 16mm and tiger sponson bottom which is 26mm, try to guess what is wall thickness on gun barrel IRL ? 

 

as for heavy HE like 122-152mm it will disable even modern tanks without any problems

gun barrel is not like a turret roof 

it is rounded so if the shell explode around the barrel the frag woud most likely get deflected becasue of the angle 

also the shockwave from the explosion would lost most of it's effectiveness due to it's rounded shape

 

now i'm not gonna argue about this never ending parallel discussion

i think you're just keep fulfilling your own hypnosis lol

think if you have a brain

as i clearly stated above i'm not here to argue about these technical data

 

so your logic is 75mm HE can pen the gunbarrel and damge the track and do all these things

but the bomb that contains 130 times more explosive charge can't blow the tank up if it explodes near by the tank?

 

what kind of drug are you on?

il-2 is all fine it can't be wrong ~~~ drug?

 

 

 

 

Edited February 8, 2022 by NoelGallagher

[Avimimus]

People who know a lot more than me have entered the thread... so I think I'll increasingly retreat to the sidelines of this discussion.

 

I will note that - because of the inverse square law the blast damage of an SC500 should be equal to that of an SC50 if one is three times the distance away from the detonation. So, even though the bomb grows ten times in size - a 3 metres lethal radius only grows to become a 9 metres lethal radius. U.S. Army data using more modern bombs agrees by the way (from Kiwan 1997):

 

I am quite curious about just how much explosive were buried directly under the tank by the makers of this propaganda footage (if anyone knows more about it):

  

15 hours ago, NoelGallagher said:

some other evidence of big bomb torn the tank apart 

 

and about the tank track test 

hmm i doubt that they gave the different value for each of the tank tracks 

so yes it was tested with the assumption of that all the tank tracks has same damage value inside the game

 

Regarding the tank-tracks - having watched this developers for over 10 years - they'd certainly try to model differences in tank tracks. This would certainly be true of the player controllable vehicles (some of the older AI vehicles have simpler damage models).

 

So I don't think one can make that assumption. We could check though.

 

**Edit** I checked the LUA files (from a few patches back) - Panzer 38T has 0.8cm tracks whereas the KV-1 1941 has 2cm tracks. So - yes, they are modelled differently, even in the AI vehicles.

Edited February 8, 2022 by Avimimus

[Avimimus]

6 hours ago, NoelGallagher said:

gun barrel is not like a turret roof 

it is rounded so if the shell explode around the barrel the frag woud most likely get deflected becasue of the angle 

also the shockwave from the explosion would lost most of it's effectiveness due to it's rounded shape

 

now i'm not gonna argue about this never ending parallel discussion

i think you're just keep fulfilling your own hypnosis lol

think if you have a brain

as i clearly stated above i'm not here to argue about these technical data

 

so your logic is 75mm HE can pen the gunbarrel and damge the track and do all these things

but the bomb that contains 130 times more explosive charge can't blow the tank up if it explodes near by the tank?

 

what kind of drug are you on?

il-2 is all fine it can't be wrong ~~~ drug?

 

Here is a word of advice - do with it what you will:

 

If you want to be taken seriously - don't insult people.

 

Provide evidence, try to understand others, and respond to the evidence other people provide with counter-evidence.

[Avimimus]

 

Returning to the OP (before all of the off-topic claims) - Having tested the Sherman it hardly seems invincible (either when I'm driving it or when I score a kill with my first shot from the Panzer III at 1 km range)! However, the issue of HE rounds disabling guns seems to be replicable.

 

In the Quick Mission Builder it is pretty easy to set up enemy tanks so they only have HE rounds on board:

 

Any shell  75mm or larger does have a high probability of disabling the main gun of a tank (even if it hits the hull far away from the gun). Usually 1-3 HE hits anywhere on the front of the tank is enough.

 

I have doubts that the fragments would be large enough to do damage from some of the distances of these hits - so it probably bears some investigation/experimentation.

[Wold]

continuing on HE vs tanks

 

25pdr HE(87mm) vs Sherman

 

 

Churchill after 105mm direct hit on visor front plate

 

after this accident they try to improve situation by adding support frames under central plate 

 

after 2nd shot of 105mm driver controls were fractured , after 3rd all weld failed 

 

 

 

if any game try to simulate real world NON-penetration effects(NPE) on tanks, most of tanks will be disabled by a few non penetration hits of AP round, or by few HE hits, omiting the fact that if any game try to simulate real driver controls most players will kill tank even before they got in to actual battle 

 

 

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

I have doubts that the fragments would be large enough to do damage from some of the distances of these hits - so it probably bears some investigation/experimentation.

depends on how game simulate fragments(if it simulate fragments instead of having simple "kill sphere"), same goes btw for in-game APHE, IRL APHE have pretty tight spall cone, no "hand grenade" effect after bursting charge explode.

 

 

as for HE IRL there is a lot of  factors affecting HE effectivness, explosive used, steel used for body, fuze delay, striking velocity, angle of hit etc 

 

 

 

some light HE direct hit on barrel 

 

 

75mm from M3 medium vs Stug 

Edited February 9, 2022 by Wold

[DD_Crash]

We needz a 25 pounder

[NoelGallagher]

19 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

Here is a word of advice - do with it what you will:

 

If you want to be taken seriously - don't insult people.

 

Provide evidence, try to understand others, and respond to the evidence other people provide with counter-evidence.

hmm i wonder who started first? hahahahaha what?

7 hours ago, Wold said:

continuing on HE vs tanks

 

25pdr HE(87mm) vs Sherman

 

 

Churchill after 105mm direct hit on visor front plate

 

after this accident they try to improve situation by adding support frames under central plate 

 

after 2nd shot of 105mm driver controls were fractured , after 3rd all weld failed 

 

 

 

if any game try to simulate real world NON-penetration effects(NPE) on tanks, most of tanks will be disabled by a few non penetration hits of AP round, or by few HE hits, omiting the fact that if any game try to simulate real driver controls most players will kill tank even before they got in to actual battle 

 

 

depends on how game simulate fragments(if it simulate fragments instead of having simple "kill sphere"), same goes btw for in-game APHE, IRL APHE have pretty tight spall cone, no "hand grenade" effect after bursting charge explode.

 

 

as for HE IRL there is a lot of  factors affecting HE effectivness, explosive used, steel used for body, fuze delay, striking velocity, angle of hit etc 

 

 

 

some light HE direct hit on barrel 

 

 

75mm from M3 medium vs Stug 

you better read what i wrote before keep posting the pitures and evidence that is not relavant with the topic  

wake up from your self hypnosis plz 

Edited February 9, 2022 by NoelGallagher

[SCG_Neun]

The game is going to have some inconsistencies with so many variables to factor in for the Devs to update this and that so why not post your findings NoelGallagher in the suggestions section so the Dev's can evaluate your tests and deem the need for a specific change. ( my apologies if you have already done this)  Back and forth with this conclusion and that, will never change anything as this will just get to be another locked thread. 

 

Many of us play this game and notice some things from time to time, so the fact that you take the time to post and try and better the game is a good thing, but not everyone is going to agree with your findings.  In the end, the only one that really matters is what the Devs see as a serious issue, and not the community at large and the Suggestions section would highlight your concerns in a specific category set aside for just that purpose.

Edited February 9, 2022 by SCG_Neun

[Peasant]

On the topic of effectiveness of US 75mm tank guns against late models of Pz.III:

Navy Ballistic Limit against 50mm of FHA + 20mm spaced plate, both at 30°, about 1750fps from this test:

(1000yards)

 

Spoiler

 

Same against combined thickness of RHA (70mm=2,75in/30°): 2000fps.

 

Spoiler

 

The effective thickness of layered 50+20mm would've been less than the geometric sum of thicknesses, estimate about 65mm(2,55in). The ballistic limit at 30°: 1850fps

The spaced configuration is likely much more effective against small caliber capped (for example the US 37mm M51 shot) and subcaliber shells(Soviet 45mm APCR) and spin stabilized HEAT shells.

The combined weight of 20mm plate and holding brackets was likely similar to that of an additional 30mm plate welded on top of existing 50mm armor. Such design would've been superior against the US 75mm gun, if that were the goal.

Edited February 10, 2022 by Peasant