Allied tank armor, quality control

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
Yoozername
Member
Posts: 1919
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by Yoozername » 09 Apr 2019 18:27

Mobius wrote:
07 Apr 2019 19:54
Yoozername wrote:
07 Apr 2019 16:47
I don't think there is any evidence the Pak 40 ever used anything but Pzgr 39, Pzgr 40 (very rare), Pzgr 38 HL/B up till December 1942. This actually shows the usage numbers. Note the number of HL/B being used along with Spgr.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/upfil ... AB7269.jpg

pak40.jpg
Weren't the AP shells 6.8 kg.?

I'm not sure what the Gr. 38 rot is.
3/1942 is long after the Gr. 38 hl/A was introduced.
There is some confusion regarding this. But from the early StuK Merkblatt, it seems it is HEAT. Compare the names given in columns 1 and 4.
grpatr38.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Mobius
Member
Posts: 495
Joined: 12 Jan 2005 20:45
Location: Glendale, CA

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by Mobius » 09 Apr 2019 18:50

I posted that somewhere didn't I? That the first 7,5 cm didn't have the 'Hl' as part of the name.

Maybe this guy that makes YouTube videos can make one on the 75mm KwK 40 K.Gr. rot Pz and ask the Munster Museum guys about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ugjg2ru5QQ

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 1919
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by Yoozername » 09 Apr 2019 19:16

Maybe that guy can paint that HE round green?

User avatar
peeved
Member
Posts: 8729
Joined: 01 Jul 2007 07:15
Location: Finland

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by peeved » 09 Apr 2019 19:48

Yoozername wrote:
09 Apr 2019 18:27
Mobius wrote:
07 Apr 2019 19:54
Yoozername wrote:
07 Apr 2019 16:47
I don't think there is any evidence the Pak 40 ever used anything but Pzgr 39, Pzgr 40 (very rare), Pzgr 38 HL/B up till December 1942. This actually shows the usage numbers. Note the number of HL/B being used along with Spgr.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/upfil ... AB7269.jpg

pak40.jpg
Weren't the AP shells 6.8 kg.?

I'm not sure what the Gr. 38 rot is.
3/1942 is long after the Gr. 38 hl/A was introduced.
There is some confusion regarding this. But from the early StuK Merkblatt, it seems it is HEAT. Compare the names given in columns 1 and 4.

grpatr38.jpg
7,5 cm Gr.38 mentioned in column four was a HE shell. See pic below from Geschoßringbuch.

Markus
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 1919
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by Yoozername » 09 Apr 2019 20:00

Maybe CM is thinking of this?

viewtopic.php?f=70&t=226502&start=15

See D 420/152 for more information

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 1919
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by Yoozername » 09 Apr 2019 20:13

This shows the 7,5 cm ammunition for the short 7,5 cm guns still used by 1944. Note that this is using the ammunition name. The projectile name is different. 'K.Gr.rot' would be the projectile for the 'Pzgr Patr KWK'.

So...what are those other ones? One of them (5) has no HE...the other (7), a smaller charge 0.051?
75.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
peeved
Member
Posts: 8729
Joined: 01 Jul 2007 07:15
Location: Finland

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by peeved » 09 Apr 2019 20:43

Yoozername wrote:
09 Apr 2019 20:13
This shows the 7,5 cm ammunition for the short 7,5 cm guns still used by 1944. Note that this is using the ammunition name. The projectile name is different. 'K.Gr.rot' would be the projectile for the 'Pzgr Patr KWK'.
In this context it is important to differentiate the K.Gr.rot Pz. used in AP rounds and the K.Gr.rot HE shell.
Yoozername wrote:
09 Apr 2019 20:13
So...what are those other ones? One of them (5) has no HE
Canister round.
Yoozername wrote:
09 Apr 2019 20:13
the other (7), a smaller charge 0.051?
If you mean (6) the 0,051 kg is probably a typo for 0,510 kg which corresponds well with K.Gr.rot HE shell when using cast HE filling.

Markus

User avatar
Mobius
Member
Posts: 495
Joined: 12 Jan 2005 20:45
Location: Glendale, CA

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by Mobius » 09 Apr 2019 21:16

The early HEAT shell looked like this.
75mm_HEAT_L24.jpg
This would have to be post 2/1941.
Alas poor Ullrich no tracer.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by Mobius on 09 Apr 2019 23:16, edited 7 times in total.

User avatar
peeved
Member
Posts: 8729
Joined: 01 Jul 2007 07:15
Location: Finland

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by peeved » 09 Apr 2019 22:10

peeved wrote:
09 Apr 2019 19:48
Yoozername wrote:
09 Apr 2019 18:27
Mobius wrote:
07 Apr 2019 19:54
Yoozername wrote:
07 Apr 2019 16:47
I don't think there is any evidence the Pak 40 ever used anything but Pzgr 39, Pzgr 40 (very rare), Pzgr 38 HL/B up till December 1942. This actually shows the usage numbers. Note the number of HL/B being used along with Spgr.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/upfil ... AB7269.jpg

pak40.jpg
Weren't the AP shells 6.8 kg.?

I'm not sure what the Gr. 38 rot is.
3/1942 is long after the Gr. 38 hl/A was introduced.
There is some confusion regarding this. But from the early StuK Merkblatt, it seems it is HEAT. Compare the names given in columns 1 and 4.

grpatr38.jpg
7,5 cm Gr.38 mentioned in column four was a HE shell. See pic below from Geschoßringbuch.
After reading the missing bits of manual online the Gr.38 mentioned does seem to have been a HEAT shell. No doubt a source of confusion even back then to have both a HE and HEAT shell with the same designation.

Markus

User avatar
Mobius
Member
Posts: 495
Joined: 12 Jan 2005 20:45
Location: Glendale, CA

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by Mobius » 09 Apr 2019 23:19

I don't think the Gr. 38 is a HEAT shell. The Gr. Patr. 38 is a HEAT shell. The charge is shaped. My previous post is from the Merkbatt.
It seems there is some kind an air gap in the Gr.38 shell. I don't know what that does.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 1919
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by Yoozername » 09 Apr 2019 23:55

Mobius wrote:
09 Apr 2019 23:19
I don't think the Gr. 38 is a HEAT shell. The Gr. Patr. 38 is a HEAT shell. The charge is shaped. My previous post is from the Merkbatt.
It seems there is some kind an air gap in the Gr.38 shell. I don't know what that does.
Gr. Patr. 38 KWK is the designation for the whole cartridge. That is...Patrone. The actual projectile is then 'Gr.38'. Sprengladung means load (explosive), and it says 'Sprengladung dur 7,5 cm Gr 38'. See your drawing...

Also, here is an example for the 7.5 cm Gebirgsgeschütz 36. Since the piece loads separately, the projectile is called out as a Gr 38....
gebirg.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
peeved
Member
Posts: 8729
Joined: 01 Jul 2007 07:15
Location: Finland

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by peeved » 10 Apr 2019 04:52

Since that Geb.G. 36 shell was charged on 3.9.39 it should be HE. Is there a way to externally differentiate between HE and HEAT Gr. 38 shells before the Germans started marking the latter with HL?

Markus

Avalancheon
Member
Posts: 166
Joined: 23 Apr 2017 06:01
Location: Canada

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by Avalancheon » 10 Apr 2019 11:34

I decided to upload a couple of pictures to show the performance of the 6 pdr gun with regular AP shells. The first image shows its effect against the hull of a Tiger. The second image shows its effect against the hull of an M4A1 Sherman.

While the 6 pdr gun has a longer range against the Tiger, its also showing major issues with shatter gap. Whereas it has a shorter range against the Sherman but no real issues with shatter gap.

I think this is an interesting example of how thick, flat armor performs relative to thin, sloped armor. At least against smaller caliber guns like this.

Image

Image

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 1919
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by Yoozername » 13 Apr 2019 19:31

peeved wrote:
10 Apr 2019 04:52
Since that Geb.G. 36 shell was charged on 3.9.39 it should be HE. Is there a way to externally differentiate between HE and HEAT Gr. 38 shells before the Germans started marking the latter with HL?

Markus
It could be the HEAT round was developed from a small HE shell..... From Brish Pamphlet 1
smallhe.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 1919
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Allied tank armor, quality control

Post by Yoozername » 14 Apr 2019 03:55

In any case, this is the earliest mention (Dez 1942) for ammunition for the KWK 40 and StuK 40. And it only mentions Pzgr 39. In the case of ammunition like the HL/X varietals, they include previous versions...HL/A, HL/B and HL/C...I don't see any 'early' version of APCBC here. Likewise, there is a similar listing for Dez 42 for the Pak 40.
dez42.jpg
BTW, the term 'substitute standard' refers to ammunition that is still around, and approved to fire. An example is the US 75mm M61 round being standard, and the M72 round being a substitute standard.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

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