Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
A slightly better ballistic performance doesn't explain the fact that the Panther starts out at 168mm and ends up at 91mm, while the 17 pdr starts out at 163mm and ends up at 107mm, since if the L/70 has better high target angle performance this should offset the increase in target angle at long range which occurs as a natural result of the projectile trajectory.
Hi Vincenzo
The 90 mm gun fired a 22.2 lb AP round at a muzzle velocity of 2,756'/sec.6 It's maximum range was 15,000 yards.6 It could penetrate 5.63"@0° at 500 yards.
I t makes for an interesting comparison with the German 88mm series
Here's data from the same source for the 17 pdr APDS:
500m = 256mm
1,000m = 233
1,500m = 213
2,000m = 194
2,500m = 178
3,000m = 162
Perhaps Soren could post the data for the 6 pdr APDS?
Sure can, but like I've said before APDS was a poor ammunition type during WW2, it was inaccurate and poor against sloped armour, had poor killing power once penetration was achieved and in short supply. So I really do not understand why you're so obsessed with this projectile type. APCBC rounds were the most lethal AP projectiles used during WW2, and were prefered for that very reason, Firefly gunners prefering the APCBC over the APDS round.
You've certainly said this and been corrected for saying it, but 6 pdr APDS was not inaccurate and had none of the problems that 17 pdr ammo had. 6 pdr APDS was more accurate than APCBC, and it was available from day one of the Normandy Campaign.
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/ww2-general/best-tank-ww2-20189-9.html#post615840You're making one untrue claim after the other. 6 pdr APDS ammunition was not at all more accurate than APCBC, the APDS rounds of the time all suffered from the same problems, and again they were in short supply. And where exactly have I ben corrected on this issue? So far I've only seen you being corrected after making claims again and again and again.
Those are estimated chances, hence the good performance of the 17 pdr APDS round on that sheet. In reality the APDS rounds proved poorin terms of accuracy, as demonstrated in actual tests.
LOL, show some tests were the 6 pdr APDS did poorly.
That's all fine and dandy but are there actual tests available to confirm the theory? Fact is that the 17 pdr performed far worse with APDS ammunition than the sheet estimates, and so pure logic tells us that the 6 pdr would suffer from the same issues. You have now provided documentation for why the 6 pdr probably didn't suffer from the same issues with accuracy, but we have no real tests to confirm it, as we have with the 17 pdr which proved to have poor accuracy with APDS ammunition.
If you can find real tests that conclude good accuracy with a large sample of 6 pdr APDS ammunition as the Germans did with all their ammunition types, then you will have convinced me that the 6 pdr was accurate with APDS ammunition.
Even so APDS ammunition still suffered from problems with lack of destructive power after penetration, shattering and low availability. All countries had sub caliber ammunition which could penetrate a lot of armour, but due to shortages in tungsten it never became available in huge numbers, and due to its lack of destrutive power after penetration it was generally turned down in favour of APCBC ammunition which also worked better against highly sloped armour.