it's automatically done ...
Abrams does not have an auto-loader.
Upvote
0
3D & Animation King Tiger - WIP
- Thread starter otester
- Start date
Abrams does not have an auto-loader.
yes i have played the Russians a few times and people know i have, but i did not buy this game to drive a t34
well I didn't know which is why I asked, and your response suggests thats an opinion you brought to the game, rather than finding over time you prefered using the German kit. There many ppl with the same outlook, and there's nothing wrong with that.
But thats the point I made about what different people want from the game- I've never said you like unfair matchups Karl, on the contary, but your main enjoyment from this game is from using German armour, which will affect your outlook somewhat.
I find myself agreeing with a fair bit of what people like Quietus say on topics like this. I have no inherent preference of sides, and while I love the different capibilities of the equipment and how that affects gameplay, I am concerned about the overall balance.
I just want to play in hard, fair battles regardless of the team I choose.
because the performance gap between an IS2 and a KT would probably dwarf than say from a Panther to an IS2. If the IS2 is in fact that much better than a Panther anyway, which is debatable.
Also, unless I'm missing a big joke here, surely in an M1 tank theres a certain degree of automation allowing the fast reloading of ammunition?
I have a feeling that mentioning the Abrams as a yardstick by which to base some aspects of the KT's performance may not be the best way to alleviate fears some may have about it's introduction.
Recce's old favourite pic shows us what we are talking about here- handle with care.
Upvote
0
Yes please do, and take your time, me is patient
Do you need the turret traverse speed for the "King" as well? This data is easy to come up with but just in case you do here it is:
Since the engine powered the hydralic turret drive the turret could be traversed 360 degrees in 19 to 77 seconds, depending on engine RPM. It could also be traversed by the gunner by hand using the hand wheel.
The turret traverse speed for the Tiger II (as well as the Panther) was dependant on engine RPM. It could do 360 degrees in:
19 seconds @ 2000 RPM
25 seconds @ 1500 RPM
36 seconds @ 1000 RPM
I will work on the ROF (rate of fire) or RPM (rounds per minute) on the "King" for you, should not take me to long. I will post it here when I come up with it!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I think my main point was that the KwK43 is going to be slower to reload than the KwK36. The picture shows that the KwK43 shell is considerably larger than the KwK36.
If you have a look at the attached picture, in the front row, left to right, you have a 17pdr APDS, a Sheman's 75mm HE, a Russian 85mm APCR, the 88mm PzGr39 APCBC for a KwK36 and a 88mm PzGr39 APCBC for a KwK43.
In the back row, 3 shells for a modern (or slighltly outdated) 105 rifled gun, a HESH projectile, a HEAT shell (I think) and a APDS.
You can see that the 105mm APDS is still shorter than the 88mm for the KwK36.
Most data I've seen for WWII era guns tends to state a "projectile weight". The 88m APCBC for BOTH the KwK36 and KwK43 is stated as 10.2Kg, although we can see that the shells are different sizes.
The projectile weight for a HEAT-MP-T round for the 120mm is 11.4Kg, and the entire shell weight is 22Kg.
The shell weight for a APDSFS shell is something like 40Kg to 42Kg.
I don't think comparing a gun designed in 1943 and a modern gun designed over 40 years later is fair comparision. The M1A2 gun is L/44 in length, but achieves a muzzle velocity that would have required a L/71 length barrel in '43 (HEAT rounds, not APDSFS). I think a modern gun is going to have a shorter recoil and be ready to reload faster.
I also think a 4 second firing time for the 120mm is too quick. For the 105mm, possibly. I did find this of a M1A2 SEP demo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42t4FBJMvp4
Have a look at around the 2:50 mark, I timed the quickest 2nd shot as 8 seconds. They are apparently firing sabot, which we know is a bloody heavy shell.
Attachments
Upvote
0
Tiger II shells are stored the turret (most of them) so this would make it faster to reload than the Tiger I. Weight would be less of a problem because there is no vertical lifting and well....little movements anyways.
A loader can achieve 4 second reload.
From watching that video it seems he was not under pressure/in battle conditions.
By the time it the commander has fired, the loader grabs a new shell, the gun will be back in place, I have seen various videos over the years and it takes about 2 seconds for it get back to base position from firing.
Upvote
0
Sorry, wrong link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCkqztqltA0
Guessed as much when you said "he", as there were 4 tanks.
Upvote
0
The Tiger II with Porsche turret carried 80 rounds of ammunition, while the production version with the Henschel turret carried 86 rounds. 75% percent of that ammunition was stored along the hull sides, and the remaining 25% was stored in the rear of the turret. The turret of the King was one of the best amo/loading ergonomic designs of WWII tanks, so don't know how much effect that had on the ROF. Due to the fact that the rounds for the 88mm gun weighed almost 44 pounds each (20 kg), I believe would have effected and had a greater impact and thus would have resulted in a relatively slow rate of fire. I will work on the exact numbers for you, have to find all my R.P. Hunnicutt volumes to get the data.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
i have one of the best king tiger books and it says this is the turret speed of a king tiger with the king tiger engine speed of 3000 rpm the turret could be traversed 360 degres in less then ten seconds and at 2000 rpm 19 seconds.... this is from one my books.. its in this book http://www.amazon.com/Kingtiger-Heavy-Tank-1942-45-Vanguard/dp/185532282X
with the king tiger engine speed of 3000 rpm the turret could be traversed 360 degres in less then ten seconds and at 2000 rpm 19 seconds.... this is from one my books.. its in this book http://www.amazon.com/Kingtiger-Heavy-Tank-1942-45-Vanguard/dp/185532282X
Last edited:
Upvote
0
i have one of the best king tiger books and it says this is the turret speed of a king tiger
Wow, that is fast!!! Can you imagine swinging that huge turret with such a big gun a full 360 degrees in less than 10 seconds! Amazing piece of machinery! All my data showed was at 2000 rpm's/19 secs., 1500 rpm's/25 secs., 1000 rpm's/36 secs. I do not have that particular New Vangard book, any info on the ROF for the King? otester says he needs it please.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Max ROF of the 8.8cm L71 PaK43 was 10 RPM, 6 seconds per reload. I would expect the same for the Tiger II.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Oneshot, its all in the "gearing ratio" the turret rotation 'gearbox' is the heart of the matter.
Upvote
0
American & British tanks don't have them. German Leopard 2 has one. French LeClerc has one. Most Russian tanks have one standard, T-64, T-72, T-80, T-84, T-90. Even the T-55 & T-62 can if fitted. All Chinese tanks have them.
Upvote
0
Makes sense Mike and I understand gearing ratios. So then theoretically extrapolating the data ( 9 secs @ 3000 rpm, 19 secs @ 1500 rpm, 36 secs @ 1000 rpm) the King could spin its turret a full 360 degrees in say 4 seconds at 4000 RPM's? Seems to be a point when the hydraulics would fail due to the pressure created by the engine revs.? You know how I am about details,
I would like to know what the actual best travers time was in WWII for the King. I must believe that it was 9 seconds based on the data posted here. However, just like ROF, books say 20 rpm for the 76mm Sherman, this is of course theoretical data, but in reality that number probably could not be achieved in combat. Guess have to find a surving WWII veteran King Tiger gunner to find out for sure
Upvote
0
Makes sense Mike and I understand gearing ratios. So then theoretically extrapolating the data ( 9 secs @ 3000 rpm, 19 secs @ 1500 rpm, 36 secs @ 1000 rpm) the King could spin its turret a full 360 degrees in say 4 seconds at 4000 RPM's? Seems to be a point when the hydraulics would fail due to the pressure created by the engine revs.? You know how I am about details,
No....... increasing the RPM's to levels as such would first, blow the engine and seconf the turning gear ratio would "top out" too. For further details... heh heh do the legwork.
Upvote
0
yes you most read this book i have 5 king tiger books but this one is the best http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/185532...&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=269487701&pf_rd_i=283155Makes sense Mike and I understand gearing ratios. So then theoretically extrapolating the data ( 9 secs @ 3000 rpm, 19 secs @ 1500 rpm, 36 secs @ 1000 rpm) the King could spin its turret a full 360 degrees in say 4 seconds at 4000 RPM's? Seems to be a point when the hydraulics would fail due to the pressure created by the engine revs.? You know how I am about details,
Upvote
0