German discarding sabot rounds

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
Post Reply
critical mass
Member
Posts: 740
Joined: 13 Jun 2017, 15:53
Location: central Europe

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#106

Post by critical mass » 14 Jun 2018, 22:48

At this point, we don´t know an answer to this question.

Chupacabra94
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 17 Oct 2012, 17:47

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#107

Post by Chupacabra94 » 01 Jul 2018, 14:18

Just noticed I had this document on my pc, lists some 15cm TS rounds

Image

Image


critical mass
Member
Posts: 740
Joined: 13 Jun 2017, 15:53
Location: central Europe

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#108

Post by critical mass » 01 Jul 2018, 14:41

Yes, this seems to have been the order of development for these sort of APCBC-DS projectiles. Mid 1942.
Notice that at this time, Pzgr39 was just entering production, penetration base was Pzgr Gg.

Account deleted

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#109

Post by Account deleted » 01 Jul 2018, 19:25

Let’s hope someone can find surefire documents confirming the existence of the other rounds for the Pak44 and Pak80.

But the 15cm/8.8cm ones would certainly make the Brummbar in WT far more attractive to buy, its a rather uncommon premium thing in WT.

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003, 06:16
Location: Canada

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#110

Post by Paul Lakowski » 01 Jul 2018, 21:46

MH4UAstragon wrote:Let’s hope someone can find surefire documents confirming the existence of the other rounds for the Pak44 and Pak80.

But the 15cm/8.8cm ones would certainly make the Brummbar in WT far more attractive to buy, its a rather uncommon premium thing in WT.

Brummbar was a very specialized piece of equipment and filled its role....it wasn't designed for war-games.

Account deleted

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#111

Post by Account deleted » 03 Jul 2018, 17:42

Paul Lakowski wrote:
MH4UAstragon wrote:Let’s hope someone can find surefire documents confirming the existence of the other rounds for the Pak44 and Pak80.

But the 15cm/8.8cm ones would certainly make the Brummbar in WT far more attractive to buy, its a rather uncommon premium thing in WT.

Brummbar was a very specialized piece of equipment and filled its role....it wasn't designed for war-games.
Oh believe me I know its specialized, but right now you never see anyone use it because its just painfully bad. It only has its 15cm HE and HEAT rounds.

Chupacabra94
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 17 Oct 2012, 17:47

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#112

Post by Chupacabra94 » 04 Jul 2018, 00:22

MH4UAstragon wrote:
Paul Lakowski wrote:
MH4UAstragon wrote:Let’s hope someone can find surefire documents confirming the existence of the other rounds for the Pak44 and Pak80.

But the 15cm/8.8cm ones would certainly make the Brummbar in WT far more attractive to buy, its a rather uncommon premium thing in WT.

Brummbar was a very specialized piece of equipment and filled its role....it wasn't designed for war-games.
Oh believe me I know its specialized, but right now you never see anyone use it because its just painfully bad. It only has its 15cm HE and HEAT rounds.
Again, I get that you like the game, I like it myself too, but this is not a thread about WT, you probably shouldn't bring it in in every comment you make here

Iluminas
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 11 Feb 2019, 22:00
Location: Here

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#113

Post by Iluminas » 11 Feb 2019, 22:03

Is there a source for this document
Image

critical mass
Member
Posts: 740
Joined: 13 Jun 2017, 15:53
Location: central Europe

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#114

Post by critical mass » 12 Feb 2019, 13:05

its from BAMA RH8-1326, primary source, unpublished.

Iluminas
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 11 Feb 2019, 22:00
Location: Here

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#115

Post by Iluminas » 12 Feb 2019, 18:57

critical mass wrote:
12 Feb 2019, 13:05
its from BAMA RH8-1326, primary source, unpublished.
thank u

critical mass
Member
Posts: 740
Joined: 13 Jun 2017, 15:53
Location: central Europe

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#116

Post by critical mass » 12 Feb 2019, 22:04

Some more information added.

The page attached is the developmental contract for various -TS (both long range HE and high velocity Pzgr-TS) projectiles. For Your orientation, these orders were recorded before the results were communicated in BAMA RH8-1326.

Several things may catch Your attention:

A) The 8.8cm/7.5cm Pzgr39 Ts was to be discontinued (dated 5th of may 1944) due to insufficient performance gain. This is in agreement with accounts from Krupp and Bochumer Verein, which did not expect a performance gain. Rheinmetall preferred the 88mm/75mm Pzgr 39 core and expected (sep 1943) 13% performance gain at 100m and 8% at 2000m My note: only the 88mm FLAK 18/36 and 88mm KWK36 could benefit from such a 88mm/75mm subcalibre projectile and with a gain of only 13%, You aren´t speaking about a terribly large increase in penetration in the first place....

B) the ideal subcalibre Pzgr for the 12.8cm gun was the 8.8cm Pzgr39. It states that "a performance increase of more than 20% is sure". Notice that Krupp and Rheinmetall had concerns about stability of the 12.8cm/8.8cm when fired by the 12.8cm K40 (that´s the L/61 gun, which went into Dicker Max) and intended to investigate the less optimal 12.8cm/10.5cm Pzgr39 here. Bochumer Verein continued with the 12.8cm/8.8cm in anticipation of use for "12.8cm KwK L/55 (Maus)" (emphasized in red in the attachment by me). My note: This confirms the intent of development of this ammunition for 12.8cm KwK L/55, with MAUS explicitely (!!!) mentioned.

C) while tungsten indeed was short, there was a Führerbefehl dated august 1943, requiring continuation of TS-trials for various guns (75mm PAK 40, 88mm KWK36 und -43, 12.8cm KwK and -StuKa beeing mentioned explicitely) -with heavy emphasize on anti-tank use (my note: by 1943 the 12.8cm StuK was for what later became the JAGDTIGER while the 12.8cm KwK was MAUS, no other applications intended, nomenclature changed 1944). Additionally, the order required an intensification of the uranium processing for rigid cored projectiles ("für H.K. Geschosse"). My note: This touches, if I understand it correctly, uranium cored Pzgr.40 H.K. -very curious what happened to those.

D) The 15cm/8.8cm Pzgr TS was developed but it´s mass production for 15cm sFH18 was not whished My note: that function went to HL-MLW / HL-KLW (HEAT-FS) instead, which had 210 to 240mm penetration at 30°, irregardless of range and much better obliquity penetration (120-125mm @ 60°, tested up to 500m/s i.V. in s.F.H.18)
Attachments
devOrdTS.jpg

seppw
Member
Posts: 106
Joined: 24 Dec 2017, 01:49
Location: Central Europe

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#117

Post by seppw » 13 Feb 2019, 00:26

critical mass wrote:
12 Feb 2019, 22:04
B) the ideal subcalibre Pzgr for the 12.8cm gun was the 8.8cm Pzgr39. It states that "a performance increase of more than 20% is sure". Notice that Krupp and Rheinmetall had concerns about stability of the 12.8cm/8.8cm when fired by the 12.8cm K40 (that´s the L/61 gun, which went into Dicker Max) and intended to investigate the less optimal 12.8cm/10.5cm Pzgr39 here. Bochumer Verein continued with the 12.8cm/8.8cm in anticipation of use for "12.8cm KwK L/55 (Maus)" (emphasized in red in the attachment by me). My note: This confirms the intent of development of this ammunition for 12.8cm KwK L/55, with MAUS explicitely (!!!) mentioned.
Sturer Emil :P
Great post nonetheless, mate.

critical mass
Member
Posts: 740
Joined: 13 Jun 2017, 15:53
Location: central Europe

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#118

Post by critical mass » 13 Feb 2019, 22:32

I happily stand corrected on the St. Emil.

Krupp and Rheinmetall each received contracts for 50 specimen 12.8cm/10.5cm pzgr39ts for trials. These eyed on 12.8cm Flak and k40 guns. However, unlike the 12.8/8.8cm discarding sabot B.V. provided for the infamous KwK44, the K40 development path was abandoned. At least as late as oct/nov 1944, only the KwK44 (Maus) with 88mm pzgr39 core was recorded as finnished development as per RH8-1326.
So, judging from the sources, I‘d caution that evidence seems to be against TS for Sturer Emil.
In my opinion, it looks like there is a correlation between discontinuation of pzgr40 H.K. and the -TS development Start.

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003, 06:16
Location: Canada

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#119

Post by Paul Lakowski » 14 Feb 2019, 01:40

In the 60s/70s there was a Canadian research paper on using uranium carbide instead of tungsten carbide in APDS rounds. While it showed little material performance advantage over WC, it was more dangerous to used. I immediately though of the Nazi in WW-II. Was there any Nazi research done on this as substitute for WC ?

Iluminas
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 11 Feb 2019, 22:00
Location: Here

Re: German discarding sabot rounds

#120

Post by Iluminas » 14 Feb 2019, 23:45

Paul Lakowski wrote:
14 Feb 2019, 01:40
In the 60s/70s there was a Canadian research paper on using uranium carbide instead of tungsten carbide in APDS rounds. While it showed little material performance advantage over WC, it was more dangerous to used. I immediately though of the Nazi in WW-II. Was there any Nazi research done on this as substitute for WC ?
u may want to read up here
viewtopic.php?t=161700

also in the last attachment poste by Critical

line
37222/43 g
13.8

the last bit:
more intensive processing for Uranium as subsditude for HK rounds.

rough translation

Post Reply

Return to “The Ron Klages Panzer & other vehicles Section”