WWII Tank Gun Specifications

[Soren]

There is nothing in the linked post that suggest it was this round. Note this sentence
Two tests were conducted against inert 17-pdr HE Shells
17pdr HE shells were not made until 1943.

And so you automatically assumed it was APCBC shells fired, but it wasn't, I know of the test he speaks, the shells weighed 20.61 pounds (Not 22.5 lbs as the PzGr.39) and were of the PzGr. type. And these had frequent issues with the fuze.

So the claim is there were two seperate supply chains and 'older' ammo was diverted to the A/T guns? Was there some order where we can check where this was indeed the rule?

What AT guns? The PzGr. already delivered were naturally used up, is there anything odd about this in your mind m_kenny? In 1941 during the invasion of Russia the FlaK 18/36's started out using PzGr's, it was not until late 41 before the PzGr.39 started being delivered en masse and the older PzGr was shifted out. In 1943 the PzGr.39/1 was introduced, this round featured higher quality steel. The next round to appear was the PzGr.39/43, meant specifically for the KwK43 Pak43 guns, featuring wider driving bands to better cope with the higher pressures which in turn increased average weight to 10.4 kg.

 

[m kenny]

And so you automatically assumed it was APCBC shells fired,

I made no claims as to the shell type. You are the one doing the assuming without any evidence to back your assumption.

I know of the test he speaks, the shells weighed 20.61 pounds (Not 22.5 lbs as the PzGr.39) and were of the PzGr. type. And these had frequent issues with the fuze.

Can you post the data you have from WO 194/886. Date/location ect?
Do you have the original repost or if seen in a publication then the book details would help me locate it.

 

[Soren]

I don't have the document, however like I said I know of it. Co-author of the book WW2 Armor Gunnery Lorrin R. Bird actually wrote about it some years ago, and the shells were said to weigh 20.61 pounds, making them of the PzGr type. This also explained the results as the early PzGr's of all calibers suffered from unreliable fuzes.

The later improved BdZ fuzed PzGr's reportedly worked extremely well, igniting more than 9 time out of 10, causing enemy tanks to explode or catch flames almost emmidiately after first penetration.

 

[m kenny]

There are some interesting statements in the Tigerfibel. Contrary to the oft repeated claims for routine 3000-4000 meter 'kills' the booklet says:

Armor-piercing shell 39: Hits tanks and loopholes to 2000 meters
Armor-piercing shell 40: Hits the heaviest tanks to 1500 meters(dispersion)

Up to 2000 meters the gun fires point blank.
Only at 3000 meters does it fire 1 out of 3 shots to the side.
At 4000 meters only every 4th shot hits (dispersion)
So always ask yourself whether firing at long range is worthile.

If your[moving] target is over 1200 meters-stop, for you would fire too much ammunition at moving targets.

 

[Soren]

Page 76 from the Tigerfibel:

Directly translated:
You are at fault, not the cannon.
Out to 2000m the 8.8cm hits its mark. First at 3000m does it miss 1 out of 3 shots. At 4000m every 4th shot hits. (Dispersion.)

Not exactly what m kenny claims..

Page 77 from the Tigerfibel (Lessons on hitting the target, putting as minimum requirement that a target at 2700m is hit with the 3rd round by the gunner):

In short kills out to 3000 and even 4000m were very much possible, and indeed there were many incidents of this happening.

 

[Soren]

Page 71 from the Tigerfibel:

Once more the correct translation is:
Panzergranate 39:
Pierces tanks and defenses out to 2000m

Panzergranate 40:
Pierces the heaviest tanks out to 1500m. (Dispersion) First use it when the Panzergranate isn't sufficient.

 

[m kenny]

Once more the correct translation is:

Pierces tanks and defenses out to 2000M

Pierces the heaviest tanks out to 1500m. (Dispersion) First use it when the Panzergranate isn't sufficient.

So much clearer than my:

Armor-piercing shell 39: Hits tanks and loopholes to 2000 meters

Armor-piercing shell 40: Hits the heaviest tanks to 1500 meters(dispersion)

Oh by the way the wording I gave was not mine. It is taken directly from the Schiffer book by Spielberger. Someone should tell them how they got it so wrong.

And why are you so keen to answer me on these points but you completely ignore this request:

Is there any reason why you can not post the images of the Tiger II's you claim have side penterations?
Why do you not post them?
If you can not post them tell me where I can find them.

I have to say I do not believe you have any such photos

from
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/ww...ration-about-d25t-gun-15755-5.html#post622776

 

[warlab_zorg]

I have a question, do you have info about Pak40 L46 penetration data ? Interisting data for PzGr 39 projectile.

sorry for my bad english.

 

[Juha]

Practically same as KwK 40 L/48,

Juha

 

[warlab_zorg]

Thank you, but as I know Pak40 have more powerful shell – 75x714R. KwK40 shell – 75x495R. So Pak40 gun must be more powerful against armor.

 

[Shortround6]

Not really. you Know the lengths of both cartridge cases but those figures do not give the diameter or tell you the working (chamber ) pressure. the 75x495R was 111mm over the rim while the longer 75x714R was only 100mm over the rim. case body's are slightly smaller than the rim. The longer case has about 83% of the volume of the shorter case for much of it's length. The British 77mm case (in the Comet) was only 441mm long and 102mm over the rim but operated at higher pressure.

 

[tomo pauk]

The MV for PzGr 39 (6,8 kg projectile) was 740 m/s for L43, 790 m/s for L48, 792 m/s for L46.
The German choice of 5 (five) 7,5cm shell types is quite extraordinary

 

[warlab_zorg]

Thanks!

 

[dutchman]

As you know when they made assult guns and tank destroyers the Germans tended to "upgun" to the next level. It was a great way to get a heavier gun of a smaller chassie. Like the 75mm on the THNP chassie. Or the long 88 on the Nashorn. Did they ever try to put the "small 88" of the Tiger 1 into an assult gun or tank destroyer? This would have been as effective a tank killer as the PZKW 4's 75mm and though at 1000 meters and in the Panther would out preform it, as the distance increases the gap in the preformance narrows. Not to mention it's HE's abilities would be far better with the larger shell.
I have never seen anything about them even attempting it, I would have thought they might have given it a look. Any thoughts???