20mm taking out shermans...think about it, front on at 250m....
i know action (confirmed by both sides) when battery of 2cm KO 4 T-34
never experienced KO with frontal shots with 2cm or 3.7cm Flaks actually...
pic shows 2 3.7cm Flak37 fired some 20-30 shells at Sherman III at some 150m. Immob Sherman and incap 1man. Tank didn't KO AAG with one shot...
"The Canadian forces that landed on Juno Beach faced 11 heavy batteries of 155 mm guns and 9 medium batteries of 75 mm guns, as well as machine-gun nests, pillboxes, other concrete fortifications, and a seawall twice the height of the one at Omaha Beach. The first wave suffered 50% casualties, the second highest of the five D-Day beachheads."
from wikipedia
Cause Juno seems like the easiest beach for Allies not hardest in game.
Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 1:18 am Post subject: Re: German 20mm
ANZAC_Tack wrote:
I have found through all versions so far, the german 20mm is a truely awsome weapon, to strong?
I always loose with tehtrah's,i lost some shermans!,and killed some shermans, yes even front on, takes a few minutes though....
20mm taking out shermans...think about it, front on at 250m....
The german 20mm 115 cal ver was able with SP Ammo at 100m to penetrate 106mm!!!!
they knocked T34s on the russian front as well and were used in common use to do this late in the war after 44.
i will supply info soon.
Tank and Anti-tank Guns Shell Type Penetration
2 cm L.55 KwK 30/38 A.P.H.E. (Pz.Gr.) 24 mm
A.P. (Pz.Gr. 39) 31 mm
A.P. (Pz.Gr. 39-1) 40 mm
A.P.C.R. (Pz.Gr. 40) 52 mm
Apparently, there are pictures of the FlaK 38 on a low carriage for use as an anti-tank gun by Volkssturm militia units. It is very likely that this gun had substantial anti-tank capabilities or at least stocks of good ammunition to commend it for that role. The gun was also popular during the early Russian campaign for firing at Soviet T-26 and B.T. tanks. There are photos of Sd.Kfz. 221 light armoured cars mounting this weapon, instead of the light machine gun they had previously been armed with exclusively.
2 cm L.112.5 FlaK 30/38 A.P.H.E. (Pz.Gr.) 49 mm
A.P. (Pz.Gr. 39) 57 mm
A.P. (Pz.Gr. 39-1) 81 mm
A.P.C.R. (Pz.Gr. 40) 106 mm
3,600 fps
Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:30 am Post subject: mmm
keep in mind when the germans were in stalingrad they already had a serious tungsten shortage.As all nations did as they couldnt mine it as fast as they could use it.
And sometime in 1943 an order was given that it be used only for tool building purposes.As so to be able to keep on making weapons,which was considered more important (and fair enough too).
DDay happened in the middle of 1944,at no time between stalingrad and DDay did the germans get Tungsten delieveries.
And if they did,im sure some general in charge somewhere would of slapped (executed) down the idiot who gave the order to turn their last tungsten into ammo for a 20mm/37mm flak gun.
Forget words,actions will show your true ambitions!The Battlefield,In many cases, the terrain of a battlefield can be the best resource a commander has. A clump of trees, an abandoned house, or a drainage ditch can all be powerful tools in the right hands
Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:37 am Post subject: Re: mmm
ANZAC_Lord4war wrote:
keep in mind when the germans were in stalingrad they already had a serious tungsten shortage.As all nations did as they couldnt mine it as fast as they could use it.
And sometime in 1943 an order was given that it be used only for tool building purposes.As so to be able to keep on making weapons,which was considered more important (and fair enough too).
DDay happened in the middle of 1944,at no time between stalingrad and DDay did the germans get Tungsten delieveries.
And if they did,im sure some general in charge somewhere would of slapped (executed) down the idiot who gave the order to turn their last tungsten into ammo for a 20mm/37mm flak gun.
Yer this is true but they must have made up stock piles of this ammo if to be use in the cases i have read about.
The 28/20mm AT gun was the one i know were Tungsten was in the most use and they stoped making this gun because of this shortage.
Also it may have not been Tungsten they were using for the ammo?
Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 11:14 am Post subject: Canadian losses
Quote:
The first wave suffered 50% casualties
I have heard of this myth before.
I think if you look at this a bit closer you will find that in fact ONE of the assault Companies actually suffered this casualty rate over the whole day.
Total losses on 6th june for Juno sector were in the region of 900 men.
The first wave consisted of the Rifle companies of 4 battalions, approx. 3,000 men.
True there were high losses in the first wave, due in part to the armour landing later than the infantry instead of before them as planned. However by midday the rest of the front 2 Brigades had landed and were pushing inland, and taking their share of losses too.
By the end of the day the great majority of 3rd Canadian Division was ashore, 20,000+ men, and they had made the furthest penetration into Normandy of all the allied armies.
There are quite a few sites on the web about the Canadian landings, I personally look for sites that give a reference from where their facts are drawn from, they tend to be more reliable.
Cause Juno seems like the easiest beach for Allies not hardest in game.
as all other beach sectors Juno consisted of several beach landing zones. The GJS Juno map represents one of the landing zone where canucks planned to land main forces. But in reality they missed and main forces landed in Coursailles area where defence wasn't suppressed enough and simply was better protected. Thus high casualties at Juno as Cours. was part of Juno sector.
Tigercub,
Quote:
The german 20mm 115 cal ver was able with SP Ammo at 100m to penetrate 106mm!!!!
brr, 106mm .
Jentz gives 40mm@100m with PzGr40 tho that's for 2cm L/55 but i don't expect L/115 will have much higher penetration. Maby several mm more on each range.
Quote:
they knocked T34s on the russian front as well and were used in common use to do this late in the war after 44.
yes i've read one sov. reports where 4 T-34 were KO by battery of 2cm FlaKs.
But that wasn't common, it was like KO T-34 with mortar . And thing is that tungsten core has just usually fallen on the floor of combat compartment of penetrated tank as core spent all it's energy to perforate.
So imo that's not amust that they didn't KO tanx with PzGr39. Examples: burst at barrel = tank is KO, at turret ring and the turret is jammed = tank KO, at rollers = tank KO,etc.
Quote:
There are photos of Sd.Kfz. 221 light armoured cars mounting this weapon, instead of the light machine gun they had previously been armed with exclusively.
sure they didn't have KwK38?
Lord4war,
Quote:
keep in mind when the germans were in stalingrad they already had a serious tungsten shortage.As all nations did as they couldnt mine it as fast as they could use it.
at Stal time germans were on a peak of using APCRs.
Quote:
And sometime in 1943 an order was given that it be used only for tool building purposes.
Somehow since 1943 they produced APCRs for KwK42, for Pak43/KwK43, for KwK36, KwK40/StuK40/PaK40, etc.
Quote:
at no time between stalingrad and DDay did the germans get Tungsten delieveries.
really?
One example: Portugal ceased deliveres of tungsten in summer 1944 after allies landed in Norm.
And the Portugal wasn't the only country that exported hvy metals to Germany during war .
Quote:
And if they did,im sure some general in charge somewhere would of slapped (executed) down the idiot who gave the order to turn their last tungsten into ammo for a 20mm/37mm flak gun.
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:48 am Post subject: mmm
Quote:
at Stal time germans were on a peak of using APCRs.
Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France.
Forget words,actions will show your true ambitions!The Battlefield,In many cases, the terrain of a battlefield can be the best resource a commander has. A clump of trees, an abandoned house, or a drainage ditch can all be powerful tools in the right hands
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 2:43 am Post subject: mmm
Dima
Quote:
haha
just try to get some information about the time germans invented APCR shells and when units started to receive them .
if u think the germans invented them ur entitled to ur opinion.
in 1940 the pak35/36 recieved the pzgr40 for the first time.lengthening its time on the front line.
not the first use of tungsten in german ammo,but of that sized calibre.
before that it was majority 2cm kwk and flaks who had the stocks of it.
Russia being Germanys primary Tungsten supplier.
Portugal and Spain could never supply enough or really wanted to for fear of retribution from the allies.
Tigercub
Quote:
The 28/20mm AT gun was the one i know were Tungsten was in the most use and they stoped making this gun because of this shortage.
Also it may have not been Tungsten they were using for the ammo?
Tiger!
yes they had some various different core materials such as steel,soft and hard iron,but none could match the tungsten for penetration,and the production cost was too much for the lil extra it provided over the basic Pzgr39 style ammo
yes this gun and the Pak 41 were both made in a very limited production run.
i guess the 41 gives away when they were made,keep in mind they also ceased being made that year,for u guessed it no other reason than tungsten shortages.
as they were both very effective guns.
Forget words,actions will show your true ambitions!The Battlefield,In many cases, the terrain of a battlefield can be the best resource a commander has. A clump of trees, an abandoned house, or a drainage ditch can all be powerful tools in the right hands
if u think the germans invented them ur entitled to ur opinion.
invented/designed/developed/etc german APCR.
Quote:
in 1940 the pak35/36 recieved the pzgr40 for the first time.lengthening its time on the front line.
so how does it correspond with: Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France. (c)Anzac_Lor4war ?
Quote:
Russia being Germanys primary Tungsten supplier.
at least put "imho" in such lame statements.
Quote:
Portugal and Spain could never supply enough or really wanted to for fear of retribution from the allies.
study history .
Quote:
yes this gun and the Pak 41 were both made in a very limited production run.
~2800 of sPzB = v limited production run?
Quote:
i guess the 41 gives away when they were made
so u r trying to tell that they were all made in 1941?
and according to yer logic MG.34 was made in 1934?
Quote:
keep in mind they also ceased being made that year,for u guessed it no other reason than tungsten shortages.
interesting,
stupid germans didn't know that they've ceased production of tapered-bore guns in 1941 (according to yer previous phrase) and kept producing them and ammunition for them till at least mid of 1943.
Quote:
as they were both very effective guns.
PaK42 was v effective ATG as well but somehowe production was ceased. Reason - tungsten shortage?
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 1:25 am Post subject: mmm
Quote:
invented/designed/developed/etc german APCR
or copied would be more historically correct.The german army were very efficient at stealing their enemies weapons and putting them to use.
Quote:
so how does it correspond with: Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France. (c)Anzac_Lor4war ?
simply coz of supply they had in stock at the time period,with most of it being 20mm.Also no war with Russia was a big factor too.
and then there is how much more tungsten is needed for a 3.7cm compare to 20mm.Then follow the natural progression for the ammo to be introduced
to the 5cm pak.It places the timeline for you,and the situation of supply.If u cant look at it in a logistical way,its like food in a mess tent,
you have been told the availability is low,you then have to ration it before it runs out,or you run out faster.
Quote:
at least put "imho" in such lame statements.
imho you and your denial are/is lame.
Quote:
study history
the fact that spain and portugal became germanys main supplier from mid 1941 is not being disputed by me.the fact that they couldnt supply enough is.
please provide evidence that spain and portugal could supply Germany with enough.
Quote:
~2800 of sPzB = v limited production run?
well yes,take into account the weapons range up to 500metres,lets say 400metres to be on safe side.compare its range to a Faustpatrone or Panzerfaust
it comes out on top,now compare its accuracy,it comes out on top again,now consider its R.O.F.
then consider how many throwaway zooks they made.
Reason - tungsten shortage?,quick hit the history books.
Quote:
and according to yer logic MG.34 was made in 1934?
no im afraid thats your logic on its own.where did u get that from ?
Quote:
so u r trying to tell that they were all made in 1941?
no a msn friend just said to say that to get u rambling,lol.
Sorry dude it is german logic!All three of the German tapered-bore guns bear the same date of standardization—1941.(stupid germans you may say)
2.8 spzb rolled out in 1940,when they made the only 24 Sd.Kfz 221.fitted with the 2.8cm sPzB 41(of which 10 survived 4years to represent in TRSM)
maybe would be better represented in a SdKfz 250/11 for the time period.
and the 7.5cm Pak 41 first rolled out in new year of 42 (150 of them)
with the 4.2-cm Pak 41 being released in between.
Quote:
interesting,
stupid germans didn't know that they've ceased production of tapered-bore guns in 1941 (according to yer previous phrase)
and kept producing them and ammunition for them till at least mid of 1943.
its ur opinion the germans were stupid.
my previous statement was in reference to the 2.8cm sPzB
hmmmm maybe u think i said germans had no tungsten stockpile?
coz they were great at logistics,they knew what they were facing before they had to face it.
their greatest losses were predicted by their own military,caused just for pleasing Hitler.
Quote:
PaK42 was v effective ATG as well but somehowe production was ceased. Reason - tungsten shortage?
not that it has anything to do with current debate (like MG34),so maybe first u could enlighten me to the fact it does.
id be glad to debate about it,if that is what you want,it is ur opinion or a dickhead throwaway statement?
Forget words,actions will show your true ambitions!The Battlefield,In many cases, the terrain of a battlefield can be the best resource a commander has. A clump of trees, an abandoned house, or a drainage ditch can all be powerful tools in the right hands
or copied would be more historically correct.The german army were very efficient at stealing their enemies weapons and putting them to use.
if u had any experience with industry u'd know that to steal and copy is possible (i say again possible) only with v simple things.
APCR isn't simple thing. So if u want to copy that u'll need to adjust everything according to your production possibilities and experience with it. And that means develop yer own thing.
Quote:
Also no war with Russia was a big factor too.
yes of coz lol.
ever tried to make logical conclusions from what u read/hear?
well i will try to give some tips:
1)Who had the most armored AVF in 1940 according to germans?
2)When and why did the germans decide to make the tank that will be named PzVI in 1942?
Quote:
Then follow the natural progression for the ammo to be introduced
to the 5cm pak.
what year? 1940?
and i will give u another tip .
Production of 3,7cm-Pzgr40 in 1000 shells:
1940 - 286,6
1941 - 885,2.
so how does it correspond with: Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France. (c)Anzac_Lor4war?
Quote:
It places the timeline for you,and the situation of supply.If u cant look at it in a logistical way,its like food in a mess tent,
you have been told the availability is low,you then have to ration it before it runs out,or you run out faster.
hehe, these statements sound so familiar .
Quote:
imho you and your denial are/is lame.
good, u start to learn how to have civilized argues . Tho u still substitute lack of knowledges by speculations and insults.
Now let me tell u the facts:
during 18 monthes of Soviet-German trade agreement, Germany received 500 tons of tungsten. Does it tell u anything?
I don't even tell u why did the soviets supply tungsten to germans . Maby u can try to make a guess?
Quote:
the fact that spain and portugal became germanys main supplier from mid 1941 is not being disputed by me.
that's good already .
had time to read something since yer last post?
Quote:
please provide evidence that spain and portugal could supply Germany with enough.
well, u know enough is v subjective word. f.e. for u 1000$ is enuf and for me 10000$ is not enuf or vice versa.
objective thing is that they supplied to germans 1100tons per month in 1944. Now try to compare with the Soviet supplies in 39-40 and mining capabilities of tungsten of USSR or USA (or just world mining capabilites ).
Quote:
well yes,take into account the weapons range up to 500metres,lets say 400metres to be on safe side.compare its range to a Faustpatrone or Panzerfaust
well yes, take Pupchen into account...
Quote:
it comes out on top,now compare its accuracy,it comes out on top again,now consider its R.O.F.
then consider how many throwaway zooks they made.
Reason - tungsten shortage?,quick hit the history books.
same for Pupchen.... reason - tungsten shortage?
Pupchen and sPzB.41 r like twin borthers in terms of employment.
Quote:
no im afraid thats your logic on its own.where did u get that from
really?
what do u mean by that then: i guess the 41 gives away when they were made,(c)Anzac_Lord4war ?
Quote:
no a msn friend just said to say that to get u rambling,lol.
ye figured already .
Quote:
Sorry dude it is german logic!All three of the German tapered-bore guns bear the same date of standardization—1941.(stupid germans you may say)
so how does this statement correspond with : i guess the 41 gives away when they were made(c)Anzac_Lord4war.
Quote:
2.8 spzb rolled out in 1940,when they made the only 24 Sd.Kfz 221.fitted with the 2.8cm sPzB 41(of which 10 survived 4years to represent in TRSM)
huh ho, so SdKfz 221 with sPzB.41 appeared in 1940? Thats another historical breakthough!
Anyway, to fill the gaps in yer knowledges i will tell u that operation of mounting/dismounting of the sPzB on SdKfz 221 or SdKfz 250 or SdKfz 251 could be pretty fast made by field repair units.
Quote:
maybe would be better represented in a SdKfz 250/11 for the time period.
maybe would better for u to start to study subject?
Tips for u:
1)Try to get information in what role was sPzB41 used in SS-PzD after reorganization in 1943 i.e. which units inside the division had them.
2)If u speak about 21.Pz, just get some good book about it, start with J-P Peregault's.
Quote:
and the 7.5cm Pak 41 first rolled out in new year of 42 (150 of them)
with the 4.2-cm Pak 41 being released in between.
so how does it correspond with: i guess the 41 gives away when they were made,keep in mind they also ceased being made that year(c)Anzac_Lord4war
Quote:
its ur opinion the germans were stupid.
it was irony on yer statement:keep in mind they also ceased being made that year(c)Anzac_Lord4war
Quote:
my previous statement was in reference to the 2.8cm sPzB
hmmmm maybe u think i said germans had no tungsten stockpile?
i don't think that u said, i can clearly c that u told: i guess the 41 gives away when they were made,keep in mind they also ceased being made that year(c)Anzac_Lord4war
Quote:
coz they were great at logistics,they knew what they were facing before they had to face it.
sure, and maybe Napoleon was great and Charles XII and many other....
Quote:
their greatest losses were predicted by their own military,caused just for pleasing Hitler.
ohh, those genious generals could do everything...if not stupid Hitler/general Frost/T-34/human waves/etc lol
anyway last 2 statements and my comments r off our topic.
Quote:
not that it has anything to do with current debate (like MG34),so maybe first u could enlighten me to the fact it does.
of coz i will enlight u - ask more .
Thing with MG.34, FlaK.37, leIG.18, KwK.36 etc is that they were not made the year that their index says. That was told just to point that: i guess the 41 gives away when they were made(c)Anzac_Lord4war - often is not correct.
Thing with PaK.42 is same as with Pak.41. Try to guess what is it .
Tip:
Pak.41 even with AP shot with steel insert could penetrate more than Pak.40 with APCBC.
Quote:
id be glad to debate about it,if that is what you want,it is ur opinion or a dickhead throwaway statement?
well, again, why do u try to insult if u want good debate?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
.
0019c54f28640c2f254.jpg)
