How to kill a Panther

Really?

Do you know why the Tiger E did not have fh armour?

Is it because it was a late-war tank and they had stopped using fh by then?

 

I don't know why, I just know it didn't.

 

not a problem. us apcbc was of a poor manufacture compared to other nations. if you check british gun tables on the most part british capped rounds penetrated more rha and fha.
especialy when you consider the fact british capped round unlike us ones, failed only rarely to the shatter gap.
e.g us 76mm apcbc m62 only penetrated the panther mantlet up to about 200 yards.
Where as post ww2 british test showed the 6 pounder penetrating with apcbc, the mantlet to just over 500 yards.

Doubley so on sloped armour, ap for the 6 pounder penetrated 74mm at 30 degree aoi. but apcbc penetrated 80mm at the same.

Taken from.
Macksey, 1988
"Tank versus Tank", Kenneth Macksey, Guild Publishing, 1988. Ranges in metres at which "highvelocity
projectiles fail to penetrate" the specified target at 30º.
Weapon Ammo Target Armour Range

57mm L50 (6-pdr) APCBC Tiger I 110 200

 

Never stated otherwise.

Never stated otherwise.

 

sorry then. you must have commented on something else.

Just an interesting note, in normandy the m-10 76mm round could only pentrate the panther turret and mantlet up to 200 yards.

The 6 pounder penetrated it up to 500 yards with apcbc.

Despite the fact on paper the us 76mm was a more powerful gun.

Tungsten ammo improved the situation somehwhat though.

With hvap us 76mm could get about 25% of hits penetrating the panther glacias at 200 yards. the 50% limit was reached at 600 yards v the nose.
And the mantlet was completely penetrated up to 600 yards.

 

The penetration went up as distance increased?? :-?

 

American ammunition shattered when a certain round was hitting the armor at a certain velocity. When you're closer than the shatter gap, the velocity is so great that it'll push the round through the plate even if it shattered. If you're further than the gap, the velocity is low enough to prevent shattering.

The American 76.2mm APCBC M62 (The standard Armor-piercing round on the 76mm armed Shermans, for example) would cause failures against the Tiger's glacis from 50m and 900m.

It was caused because the soft caps on American APCBC ammunition were too soft. As far as I know, we didn't have this problem with uncapped ammunition.

 

Ah, ok - thanks for explaining it.

 

thats is true. but no thats not what i meant. the glacias is the upper hull.
The nose is the lower hull.
Panther glacias is 84mm sloped to 55 degree's.
The nose is about 50-60mm(depending on model) sloped to 55 degree's.
us 76mm hvap was a bit marginal against the glacias. but was reasonably effective against the nose.

 

I never said the Glacis wasn't the upper hull.

jdbuk, I am the single most reactionary member of these forums and I have an extremely low tolerance of people stuffing words in my mouth. I could tell you are an educated person in our debate on the Jumbo thread where you got me to concede unconditionally (not something a ton of people have managed to do.) But with all due respect, knock off the jackassery.

 

moving along

the cap issue is worth discussing

 

sory thats not how i meant to post. i was just explaining what i meant. as upper hull and lower hull are also perfectly good ways of describing the tank plate location.
What you said was 100% correct. but i was refering to hvap which did not suffer from the shattter gap to the same extent as m62.
Im not trying to shove words down your mouth, i was thinking acualy that is it roel or ricky? misunderstood my post. or it may have been made in responce to something else.
Im sorry if i have offended you.

 

[/quote]jdbuk, I am the single most reactionary member of these forums ....

 

Actually SgtBob, Danyel Phelps was banned from these forums a few months ago.

Welcome back!

 

Can't say it surprises me, so much ability yet so little tact.....

 

Killing a Tank Infantry Style

If you can't take out a tank without an anit-tank weapon, just call a soldier to run to the back of the tank. As the tanks in World War 2 have very limited vision, the enemy will not even notice a soldier dropping a grenade into the tanks fuel canister.

 

But tanks rarely work alone, which is the main flaw of all these tank vs tank scenarios. Once a tank is required to go near enemy positions held by infantry a good commander will make sure it has infantry support of its own, which will make sure that the enemy infantry doesn't get close enough to actually open up the tank. Besides, not all tanks had accessible fuel canisters.

 

Even lacking close infantry support, I've read numerous accounts by tankers of every nationality about "hosing each other's tank" or other phrasing where they mean spraying a nearby friendly tank with machinegun fire in order to kill attacking infantry who are attempting to crawl onto it.

 

Excellent. I'm sure that junior tank crews would be very grateful for that. Now if only we had a "How to kill a Tiger" pamphlet...

 

See the mythbuster topic for details...

http://www.fun-online.sk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3753