Tigers

[Maus]

All true, problem is, they could not make FH plates that thick.

As far as we know. The techniques, components, and types of armour used in WWII tanks is not a subject one can simply look up and find good information on. It's one of those niche history things only a small group of people even atempt to delve into.

Why not, that's actually pretty good quality.

It's not about the quality, it's about the fact that in the years the tiger was in production... many things changed. Chief among them was the quality of steel used.

The quality probably varied much more then that, is what i was saying.

Again, all true, but not related to the Tiger at all.

It's related to German AFV's, and other AFV's, not the tiger specifically.

Yes, most the thinner plates were face hardend, it was technically impossible to fh the thicker ones though. (From what i learned)

What i learned is that the thicker the armour got, the increasingly difficult it got.

I never read, however, that the limit was at 80mm.

See above and Ferdinand != Tiger

That quote changes subject from BHN of ferdinand plates, to general German specs for armour of varying qualities. Which could also suggest face hardening occuring in, perhaps, thicker vehicles.

The important word is "could". I don't know it, i can't find a single source that tells me that the 100 mm plates were face hardened.

It's a hard subject to get reliable information on.

As long as you base your facts on speculation, you should not start a posting like that.

that is not a very kind thing to say, really. And good sir, i don't base my facts on speculation. I base them on what i learn and what i know.

 

[Sichartshofen]

This is the result of a German test at Kummersdorf proving grounds with a captured T34/85 against a Tiger E.

A captured T34/85 tested April 1944 at Kummersdorf. The T34/85 failed against front hull and turret of a Tiger at 500 meters from 0 degrees. Penetrations by 85mm were obtained against the side armor of the Tiger at 500 meters from 0 degrees by 85mm BR-365K.
The BR-365 (flat nose) round failed at all ranges, due to the rounds breaking up. BR-365K was more effective against the vertical tiger armor than the other flat nose BR-365 round. These rounds tested were all captured from the inside the tank.

T34/76 test. The first live fire tests against the Tiger E armor conducted by NIIBT at Kubinka April 25 30th 1943. The 76.2mm F-34 failed to penetrate the Tiger E side hull and turret armor at 200 meters. The second live fire tests conducted in September 1943. The 76.2mm F-22 USV, F-34 and Zis-3 failed to penetrate the Tiger E side hull and turret armor at 500 meters & 100 meters.

Source: The Wehrmacht Weapons Testing Ground at Kummersdorf - Wolfgang Fleischer
http://www.amazon.com/Wehrmacht-Kum...ef=sr_1_9/104-8004274-1029562?ie=UTF8&s=books

 

[Field Marshal Rommel]

Although the armor on the Tiger I is flawed in game and should only be penetrated by 2 tanks in game (frontally) such as the IS-2 and the T-34/85 (the only two tanks the Tiger should angle itself against) my biggest gripe with the Tiger is with its severely underpowered 88mm gun which never fails to deflect and takes much more than 1 shot to kill an enemy tank (mainly both T-34s whom are armored with only 45mm of hull armor and the SU-76 with its "coke can" armor).

Quote from WW2 magazine Oct 06:
(Although this quote is about a Flak 88 it is very similar to the Tiger I's main gun (This is an interview of Rolf Hertenstein))

Were you now facing T-34's alone?

We continued with the rear-guard action. At one point a halftrack pulling an 88mm antitank gun arrived and its crew asked if I had any orders for them. The tech sergeant in command had also lost contact with his unit. I had them go in position to help me meet the next wave of T-34s. The 88mm was the most feared German gun of the war because of its accuracy and tremendous penetrating power through almost any armor. I estimated the distance where I expected the Russians tanks to appear at 1,600 meters. This proved accurate.

The unexpected reinforcement must have been reassuring. How did the battle play itself out?

Soon some T- 34s advanced toward us after they saw some poor German infantrymen retreating from them. We then opened fire on the Russian tanks. The 88mm blew up two Russian tanks with the first two rounds. The 88 hit a third tank with its third shot. We saw it start to burn and then turn around and disappear behind the hill; it then blew up, too. The Rusasians very quickly retreated behind the hill again. They hadn't seen us and didn't know what hit them.

Tiger I was armed with powerful 88mm gun (originally developed from 88mm Flak 36 L/56 gun) that made it a very dangerous opponent for any Allied tank, and its thick (but not shot deflecting) armor made it virtually indestructible

Therefore the 88mm should rarely deflect and most tanks should never survive more than 1 direct shot from an 88mm.

 

[Maus]

This is the result of a German test at Kummersdorf proving grounds with a captured T34/85 against a Tiger E.





Source: The Wehrmacht Weapons Testing Ground at Kummersdorf - Wolfgang Fleischer
http://www.amazon.com/Wehrmacht-Kum...ef=sr_1_9/104-8004274-1029562?ie=UTF8&s=books

Good find!! And provides just a bit more evidence in the case of history vs. Red Orchestra.

(Although this quote is about a Flak 88 it is very similar to the Tiger I's main gun (This is an interview of Rolf Hertenstein))

What's sweet about this is that the flak 88 never achieved performance levels of the 88 gun inside the Tiger... It was close, but the tigers 88 was even better then the flak gun that was originally placed into it... as odd as that is.

 

[[TW]schneidzekk]

that is not a very kind thing to say, really. And good sir, i don't base my facts on speculation. I base them on what i learn and what i know.

O.k. i asked you to give me some decent links.

You posted a lot of text but not a single proof that the tiger used FHA for his 100 mm plates.

Every book tells me it has RHA armor. Every book tells me that they only made FHA armor up to 50-55mm, 80 mm for some Panther plates.

Sorry i wasn't the guy who told the people in this thread that they have no idea what they are talking about

 

[Maus]

O.k. i asked you to give me some decent links.

I pulled one that actually had something to do with what was being discussed.

Sorry i wasn't the guy who told the people in this thread that they have no idea what they are talking about

Oh but it was posts like the ones on the first pages that drove me to say that. I might be making a mistake about FHA vs. RHA, and i could be wrong about minor details like exactly how hard the armour was, but that's an offshoot of the original point i was trying to make... that the 85 is indeed overpowerd when facing the Tiger.

800m standoff range is a joke, really. Even with RHA armour.

 

[TheClosedPistachio]

This is the result of a German test at Kummersdorf proving grounds with a captured T34/85 against a Tiger E.





Source: The Wehrmacht Weapons Testing Ground at Kummersdorf - Wolfgang Fleischer
http://www.amazon.com/Wehrmacht-Kum...ef=sr_1_9/104-8004274-1029562?ie=UTF8&s=books

Wow, That is very interesting.

Actually though, that matches up pretty good with the figures given here:
http://www.freeweb.hu/gva/weapons/soviet_guns7.html

The T-34/85 isn't effective at <800, like most people are saying, but rather <500 meters. Really under 400 meters if you want to get an effective frontal penetration.

I was under the impression that the T-34/85 was a bit better.

So in game the 85 should be nerfed a bit. Now, I can get frontal 1st shot kills on Tigers from accross the map on Arad(6-700 meters).

Perhaps a randomeness factor can should be added to russian tank rounds, simulating the sometimes bad quality of them and have the round break up and not penetrate(?).

So based on this, the T-34/85 in RO should:

1. Not be able to penetrate Tiger's front hull at any angle at any range over 450 meters

2. Not be able to penetrate Tiger's gun mantle at any range/angle (you can now).

3. Perhaps add a random factor to Russians rounds having them break up sometimes, even at ranges where they should penetrate.

That is, of course, if the information provided is accurate.

 

[Maus]

There's PLENTY of information that says the 85, poor for it's calibre, was very ineffective vs. the front of the tiger except at close ranges (under a half kilometer)...

 

[karl stiner]

Although the armor on the Tiger I is flawed in game and should only be penetrated by 2 tanks in game (frontally) such as the IS-2 and the T-34/85 (the only two tanks the Tiger should angle itself against) my biggest gripe with the Tiger is with its severely underpowered 88mm gun which never fails to deflect and takes much more than 1 shot to kill an enemy tank (mainly both T-34s whom are armored with only 45mm of hull armor and the SU-76 with its "coke can" armor).

Quote from WW2 magazine Oct 06:
(Although this quote is about a Flak 88 it is very similar to the Tiger I's main gun (This is an interview of Rolf Hertenstein))




Therefore the 88mm should rarely deflect and most tanks should never survive more than 1 direct shot from an 88mm.

yes good post i got killed again tonight by a t34/76 it hit my tiger in the front with 1 shot

 

[TheClosedPistachio]

There's PLENTY of information that says the 85, poor for it's calibre, was very ineffective vs. the front of the tiger except at close ranges (under a half kilometer)...

I see.

yes good post i got killed again tonight by a t34/76 it hit my tiger in the front with 1 shot

Are you sure it was a 76 and from the front? I 've played Orel 88vs76 a few times and I let a t-34/76 shoot me several times at close range to the front, not angled, and the best he could do was make my engine flash red. Not saying it's not possible, but I haven't seen it yet.

 

[Field Marshal Rommel]

1. Not be able to penetrate Tiger's front hull at any angle at any range over 450 meters
2. Not be able to penetrate Tiger's gun mantle at any range/angle (you can now).
3. Perhaps add a random factor to Russians rounds having them break up sometimes, even at ranges where they should penetrate.
That is, of course, if the information provided is accurate

Yes, the Soviets upped their caliber to compensate for poor penetration due to their low quality ammuntion which is why the Soviet IS-2's 122mm main gun penetration data is very close to the Tiger I's L56 88mm main gun.
I would also like to add that if the Tiger I is angled roughly at 30 degrees the T-34/85 had to come around 100 meters to penetrate the front.

BR-365 ( Armor Piercing ) at 30 degrees
100m: 96mm
As I said earlier the Tiger I should only angle itself against the T-34/85 and the IS-2.

 

[[TW]schneidzekk]

I pulled one that actually had something to do with what was being discussed.

I may have missed that.

Oh but it was posts like the ones on the first pages that drove me to say that. I might be making a mistake about FHA vs. RHA, and i could be wrong about minor details like exactly how hard the armour was, but that's an offshoot of the original point i was trying to make... that the 85 is indeed overpowerd when facing the Tiger.

Ok, the posts drove you to make up stuff, all the FHA stats you posted are minor?

So let's summarize: Suddenly the 85 can penetrate the front of a Tiger.

Guys, seriously, it is getting ridiculous.

 

[[TW]schneidzekk]

There's PLENTY of information that says the 85, poor for it's calibre, was very ineffective vs. the front of the tiger except at close ranges (under a half kilometer)...

And that is what you see in game most of the time.

 

[TheClosedPistachio]

One point I'd like to make is the big unknown/random factor.

For example in that test mentioned, could it have been a particularly bad batch of ammo?
Perhaps the Tiger hull tested was an earlier version with better quality armor than that which could be found in later war tanks.

Also, sometimes in real life, that round that "shouldn't" penetrate, does. Maybe a particularly good quality russian round meets a not as great quality Tiger glacis.

I think that random factor should be allowed in also. Where the odd round that shouldn't penetrate sometimes does; and the round that shouldn't bounce, bounces.

 

[Heler]

not really because a tiger taking a frontal hit from a t34 will turn yellow.

It shouldnt. The round should ricohet off or the tank should suffer no damage.

 

[Maus]

I see.

Check a number of links, on just this page alone.

But i'll post the stats for the Russian 85mm anyway.

Vs. a plate angled at 30 degrees from the horizontal vs. RHA (0 is the same as 90. 0 is horizontal, 90 is vertical. Two different scales)... a slight angle.

with BR-365, solid AP shot.

100 meters : 97mm --> A 85 crew would have to get a pretty good shot on the upper front hull at just the right angle with this ammunition. Even then penetration was far from assured, even at 0.1 kilometers.

500 meters : 84mm --> A good chance of a flank shot, but really no chance of a frontal penetration... ANYWHERE on the front.

1000 meters : 71mm --> Pretty much no chance of killing the tiger, unless the shot managed to land in the small space between the roadwheels and the sider upper hull of the tiger, a very small spot usually covered by a thin flap that was 60mm thick.

1500 meters : 59mm --> Maybe if the gunner was jesus, it could take out the tiger.

2000 meters : 49mm --> plink


BR-365 K Armour Piercing Capped rounds

100 meters : 112mm --> COULD take out the tiger frontally, unless it was in a hull down position. Again would have to aim for the upper front hull to hope for penetration.

500 meters : 100mm --> It had semi-decent chance of penetrating the front upper hull, but still would have to get a good shot at a good angle to do so. Non-penetrating shots would likely cause internal spalling that could harm the crew, however.

1000 meters: 86mm --> If the trajectory remained true and the shot didn't angle down too much, it had a pretty good chance of penetrating the side of the tiger. But also a really good chance of not penetrating... this shot would all depend on angles, angles, angles.

1500 meters : 75mm --> No chance, if it did manage to hit the 60mm part it probably would at an awkward angle dissalowing penetration.

2000 meters : Yawn


BR-365 P... the 85mm's superweapon. The dreaded, yet highly uncommon, tungsten round.

100 meters : 140mm.. --> Tiger dead.

500 meters: 107mm --> Has a slightly better chance then the BR-365 K of penetrating at this range, and even then only the front upper hull.

1000 meters: 76mm --> Tungsten is heavy, and tungsten rounds loose velocity FAST. Over long distances they are highly ineffective, unless inside something like a tiger II where even at 2000 meters it out performs the standard German APCBC rounds in penetration. But for the 85mm gun, shooting at these ranges is a waste of a good round... And it's trajectory really took a dive at this point, making it about as effective, maybe even less effective then the solid AP 85mm ammo.

1500 meters: 54mm --> waste of tungsten ammunition. Less effective at this range then even solid AP shot.

2000 meters: 39mm --> Good luck killing that panzer III...


http://tarrif.net/

Ok, the posts drove you to make up stuff, all the FHA stats you posted are minor?

Guys, seriously, it is getting ridiculous.

No, the FHA stats are true. The fact that FHA might have not been used on the tiger tanks is the minor mistake. Nothing was purposely fabricated by me.

So let's summarize: Suddenly the 85 can penetrate the front of a Tiger.

Of course, it's just very difficult to do so.

A Sherman can penetrate the front of a tiger under the right circumstances.

 

[TheClosedPistachio]

***

Hehe, nice post.

Anyone know offhand roughly how much of each type the T-34/85 carried?

I'd imagine the tungsten was rationed out to the tanks expected to come across a German heavy.

What would be neat in the future would be the to be able to choose between all the different types of AP rounds(and HE rounds ). But then you would have to code the performance of 2 or even 3 types of round just for one gun. Probably a pain in the ass.

But that way you could more accurately represent the penetration values. I guess the generic AP round in the 85 in game would more closely represent the 'K' performance.

 

[karl stiner]

I see.



Are you sure it was a 76 and from the front? I 've played Orel 88vs76 a few times and I let a t-34/76 shoot me several times at close range to the front, not angled, and the best he could do was make my engine flash red. Not saying it's not possible, but I haven't seen it yet.

hehe i am sure i am very good in all german tanks the tiger is weak they need to go back to the last patch, on orel in the last patch in a few battles i got hit 6o times, and i last the full round i did not die, and we knocked out 25 t34s and some su76s ask a guy called whooper he was in the tiger with me ;-) the tiger needs to be like that. with a good players inside it

 

[ROMMEL34]

each type the T-34/85 carried? I'd imagine the tungsten was rationed out to the tanks expected to come across a German heavy

From a number of different websites:

Limited numbers of APCR rounds were ever issued.

The Red Army developed APCR rounds after examining captured German stocks of ammunition. Only very limited quantities were issued to troops -- a tank might be lucky to be carrying four rounds.

Soviet armour piercing ammunition in the early-war period was of low quality. The ammunition had poor quality fuses (often resulting in the round exploding before it had fully penetrated the tank’s armour), and were poorly engineered (causing the shell to disintegrate on impact with the enemy tank). As a result the Russian anti-tank guns did not always perform up to expectations. The quality problems with Soviet ammunition were not completely rectified until late 1944.

 

[[TW]schneidzekk]

Check a number of links, on just this page alone.

But i'll post the stats for the Russian 85mm anyway.

Vs. a plate angled at 30 degrees from the horizontal vs. RHA (0 is the same as 90. 0 is horizontal, 90 is vertical. Two different scales)... a slight angle.

with BR-365, solid AP shot.

100 meters : 97mm --> A 85 crew would have to get a pretty good shot on the upper front hull at just the right angle with this ammunition. Even then penetration was far from assured, even at 0.1 kilometers.

500 meters : 84mm --> A good chance of a flank shot, but really no chance of a frontal penetration... ANYWHERE on the front.

1000 meters : 71mm --> Pretty much no chance of killing the tiger, unless the shot managed to land in the small space between the roadwheels and the sider upper hull of the tiger, a very small spot usually covered by a thin flap that was 60mm thick.

1500 meters : 59mm --> Maybe if the gunner was jesus, it could take out the tiger.

2000 meters : 49mm --> plink


BR-365 K Armour Piercing Capped rounds

100 meters : 112mm --> COULD take out the tiger frontally, unless it was in a hull down position. Again would have to aim for the upper front hull to hope for penetration.

500 meters : 100mm --> It had semi-decent chance of penetrating the front upper hull, but still would have to get a good shot at a good angle to do so. Non-penetrating shots would likely cause internal spalling that could harm the crew, however.

1000 meters: 86mm --> If the trajectory remained true and the shot didn't angle down too much, it had a pretty good chance of penetrating the side of the tiger. But also a really good chance of not penetrating... this shot would all depend on angles, angles, angles.

1500 meters : 75mm --> No chance, if it did manage to hit the 60mm part it probably would at an awkward angle dissalowing penetration.

2000 meters : Yawn


BR-365 P... the 85mm's superweapon. The dreaded, yet highly uncommon, tungsten round.

100 meters : 140mm.. --> Tiger dead.

500 meters: 107mm --> Has a slightly better chance then the BR-365 K of penetrating at this range, and even then only the front upper hull.

1000 meters: 76mm --> Tungsten is heavy, and tungsten rounds loose velocity FAST. Over long distances they are highly ineffective, unless inside something like a tiger II where even at 2000 meters it out performs the standard German APCBC rounds in penetration. But for the 85mm gun, shooting at these ranges is a waste of a good round... And it's trajectory really took a dive at this point, making it about as effective, maybe even less effective then the solid AP 85mm ammo.

1500 meters: 54mm --> waste of tungsten ammunition. Less effective at this range then even solid AP shot.

2000 meters: 39mm --> Good luck killing that panzer III...

http://tarrif.net/

No, the FHA stats are true. The fact that FHA might have not been used on the tiger tanks is the minor mistake. Nothing was purposely fabricated by me.

Of course, it's just very difficult to do so.

A Sherman can penetrate the front of a tiger under the right circumstances.

a) Let's introduce a new factor, 30