Jump to content


Photo

Panther Gets Too Much Love And Hate?


  • Please log in to reply
367 replies to this topic

#321 alejandro_

alejandro_

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,911 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oxfordshire, UK
  • Interests:History, cinema, football, aviation, armour, military history.

Posted 06 February 2017 - 0425 AM

I asked Hilary Doyle about the middle vehicle. His response: "See Panzer Tract No.16-1 - it is the of the early Bergepanther"

 

Manic and cbo, many thanks for your answers.



#322 mkenny

mkenny

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 06 February 2017 - 1107 AM

I do remember reading some WW2 history book where a Churchill did "the bounce" at near-point-blank range and knocked out a Panther, and there was something about the crew having nervous breakdowns immediately afterward. I'd love to track it down, if only because it sounds like garbage on so many levels. :)

 

Its 'Flamethrower' by Andrew Wilson. That appears to me to be the one and only source.

 

https://www.amazon.c...n/dp/0552093823

 

 As I said earlier it is first mentioned in his 1956  book and has become so widely repeated that it appears now to be a 'well known fact'. 

Wilson's writing style is rather odd not helped by always refering to himself in the third person. 


Edited by mkenny, 06 February 2017 - 1111 AM.


#323 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,107 posts

Posted 07 February 2017 - 1858 PM

Thanks very much for that! I probably read something by one of the authors who repeated it. 



#324 mkenny

mkenny

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 07 February 2017 - 2321 PM

Firing trials in the UK that show a mantlet deflection

 

8aZFx1.jpg
hWej4Z.jpg
 
This Panther is one of 6 from 2nd Pz Division destroyed by Infantry (DCLI) just outside Cheux in late June 1944. Very well known as it appears in many of the Normandy DVDs. 
jpVjDP.jpg
 
It slipped from a field into the road whilst trying to escape the fate of its comrades also in that field in the photo below.
Jqsejv.jpg

Edited by mkenny, 07 February 2017 - 2324 PM.


#325 mkenny

mkenny

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 07 February 2017 - 2344 PM

doqc5B.jpg
 
TBnoBz.jpg
 
IiDeoe.jpg
 
4VLGWm.jpg
9btau3.jpg


#326 mkenny

mkenny

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 08 February 2017 - 0004 AM

YKj06P.jpg

 

 

 

Link to original report.

 

https://photos.googl...3o5SzJZNWJfdS1R


Edited by mkenny, 08 February 2017 - 0012 AM.


#327 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,259 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Live from his Bunker of arrogance, deep beneath the Cotswolds.

Posted 08 February 2017 - 0303 AM

As said, I dont think anyone doubts it happened. What I  doubt is that a gunner could arrange his show to go in that matter without providence a significant amount of luck on his shoulder. Is there anyone that could boast they did it more than once?



#328 cbo

cbo

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,089 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 February 2017 - 0842 AM

As said, I dont think anyone doubts it happened. What I  doubt is that a gunner could arrange his show to go in that matter without providence a significant amount of luck on his shoulder. Is there anyone that could boast they did it more than once?

 

Yes - well, not the bounce but the ability to hit a very specific target with a tank gun at normal combat ranges.

 

A certain L. R. Price from APG, who was a civilian expert on the 90mm M3 gun, gave a lecture on boresighting of the 90mm gun at Aachen in Germany in February 1945. He showed the gunners that the 90mm gun was sufficiently accurate that gunners should not"...just aim at the enemy tank, but to aim at a particular spot on that tank and his demonstration showed it was possible to hit that spot." Later, he used German steel helmets as targets, picking the off with the 90mm at 625 yards. "...veterans rapidly duplicated his markmanship, once they got the feel of the weapon."

 

Source: Hunnicutt: "Pershing" p. 16-17


Edited by cbo, 12 February 2017 - 0853 AM.


#329 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 12 February 2017 - 1442 PM

 

As said, I dont think anyone doubts it happened. What I  doubt is that a gunner could arrange his show to go in that matter without providence a significant amount of luck on his shoulder. Is there anyone that could boast they did it more than once?

 

Yes - well, not the bounce but the ability to hit a very specific target with a tank gun at normal combat ranges.

 

A certain L. R. Price from APG, who was a civilian expert on the 90mm M3 gun, gave a lecture on boresighting of the 90mm gun at Aachen in Germany in February 1945. He showed the gunners that the 90mm gun was sufficiently accurate that gunners should not"...just aim at the enemy tank, but to aim at a particular spot on that tank and his demonstration showed it was possible to hit that spot." Later, he used German steel helmets as targets, picking the off with the 90mm at 625 yards. "...veterans rapidly duplicated his markmanship, once they got the feel of the weapon."

 

Source: Hunnicutt: "Pershing" p. 16-17

 

If you believe that then you have to believe that the tanks of the US military, tank cannons, and ammunition have become less accurate over the last 70 years.


Edited by DKTanker, 12 February 2017 - 1443 PM.


#330 mkenny

mkenny

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 12 February 2017 - 1452 PM

Firing at a known range as a practise shoot is not the same as combat. I also thought when I first read that how close do you have to get to the helmet to dislodge it! Note that the reason it was a 600 yd shoot over a lake  because they could not find anywhere that allowed longer range shooting. Confirmation that the average range of NWE combat was 800 mtrs/yds



#331 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,190 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 12 February 2017 - 1736 PM

If you believe that then you have to believe that the tanks of the US military, tank cannons, and ammunition have become less accurate over the last 70 years.

 

90mm M3 dispersion @ 1000m is something like IIRC (going from a memory but ~ accurate) 16x12cm vert/hor.

What is it for 90mm M36, 90mm M41, 105mm M68 and 120mm M256?



#332 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 12 February 2017 - 2202 PM

 

If you believe that then you have to believe that the tanks of the US military, tank cannons, and ammunition have become less accurate over the last 70 years.

 

90mm M3 dispersion @ 1000m is something like IIRC (going from a memory but ~ accurate) 16x12cm vert/hor.

What is it for 90mm M36, 90mm M41, 105mm M68 and 120mm M256?

 

Depends on the ammo.  For training ammunition the round to round dispersion error budget is .3 mils for M490 (105mm HEAT TPT) and M724 (TPDS) when fired from the M68.  The same for M831 (120mm HEAT TPT) and M865 (CSTPDS) when they are fired from the M256.  The service round counter parts were or are supposed to be in the .15 mil neighborhood.  However, as we both know it isn't as simple as having a gun and ammunition that can group tightly, it has to be able to do it at all effective ranges and all environmental conditions.  

 

Sure, zero the 90mm at 625 yards and plink a helmet, let me move that helmet 90 degrees away from the boresight line but now the gun has a 5 degree cant.  Same range, but the odds of hitting that helmet have now changed dramatically for the worse.  Or, let us suppose that you boresighted and zeroed the gun at 625 yards at 2:00 PM with temperatures at about 4c.  8:00 AM the next morning you clean the frost from your optics (temps are about -10c) to see a Panther at 625 yards, sitting directly over the helmet you shot yesterday.  Anybody want to hazard a guess as to the probability of hitting the Panther much less hitting the lip of the gun mantlet?  

 

Bojan, I understand that you know exactly what I'm talking about, but there are some serious misconceptions amongst others.



#333 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 12 February 2017 - 2209 PM

Firing at a known range as a practise shoot is not the same as combat. I also thought when I first read that how close do you have to get to the helmet to dislodge it! Note that the reason it was a 600 yd shoot over a lake  because they could not find anywhere that allowed longer range shooting. Confirmation that the average range of NWE combat was 800 mtrs/yds

Having lived in NWE for more than a decade I can assure you that finding a 600 yard, or meter, range is not difficult at all.  The average combat range may have been 800 meters, but that has as much or more to do with the probability of hitting what you're aiming at.  Now the probability of a hit increases with each round fired, but first round hit probability at 800 meters was much closer to 0 than to 1.



#334 mkenny

mkenny

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 13 February 2017 - 0008 AM

I never take much notice of the expected hit % in firing tables. Ammo used and kills claimed is a better measure, Jentz in his  Panzer Tract book on the 8.8cm has some detailed Unit consumption rates for specific engagements and 11 AP rounds per tank kill claim was  the norm in NA and Russia. The book on the Pz IV Abt in 12th SS also has ammo consumption figures and that also works out at around 10  AP rounds per claimed tank kill. 


Edited by mkenny, 13 February 2017 - 0010 AM.


#335 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,877 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 13 February 2017 - 0159 AM

That's in large part because they keep shooting at tanks till they burn or explode, eliminating doubts about whether the hostile tank is still a threat.



#336 mkenny

mkenny

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 13 February 2017 - 0822 AM

That's in large part because they keep shooting at tanks till they burn or explode, eliminating doubts about whether the hostile tank is still a threat.

 

Perhaps.  A very detailed survey on some 131 British AP tank casualties in 1945 found 27% were scooped, 51% were penetrated once and 16% twice. The remaining 6% had 3 or more penetrations.

I think it more  likely that a good number of shots simply miss.


Edited by mkenny, 13 February 2017 - 0823 AM.


#337 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,877 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 13 February 2017 - 1005 AM

There are differences in behaviour.

 

Take for example an ATG battery that gets to fire flanking shots at tanks on a road. They can tell fairly easily that a tank that stops and doesn't rotate its turret is knocked out and don't need to keep firing at it. Maybe they cannot even continue firing because the single battery was overrun by a company or two of tanks.

 

A tank company on the other hand may detect and shoot at hostile tanks at 600 m, but before it advances from its hull down position towards the presumed wreck is it's ever more exposed to the possibility that a single semi-conscious gunner may rotate a turret by a few degrees and pull the 'trigger'. They sure are motivated to eliminate this possibility.

 

 

And then there's the issue that some battlefield targets other than tanks merit the expenditure of AP rounds (bunkers, for example).



#338 seahawk

seahawk

    military loving leftist peace monkey

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,886 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The land where time stands still

Posted 13 February 2017 - 1021 AM

The big problem is that the Panther would be shooting back and he can hit the opponent nearly every where and penetrate.



#339 mkenny

mkenny

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 13 February 2017 - 1055 AM

And then there's the issue that some battlefield targets other than tanks merit the expenditure of AP rounds (bunkers, for example).

 

 

 

 

 

Not in the desert.  It was an '88' Unit. 11 rounds was for 'average' ranges. Shooting at 'long range'  upped the count to 20 rounds per claimed kill.   HE rounds were used in both examples  but that total was excluded. The one-shot-one-kill reputation seems to be a trifle overblown.

 


Edited by mkenny, 13 February 2017 - 1057 AM.


#340 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,877 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 13 February 2017 - 1204 PM

depends on the timeframe

https://en.wikipedia...Siege_of_Tobruk

 

 

Modern missiles for killing aircraft often have claimed probabilities of kill in the range of 0.80...0.90, and in real combat it ends up being more like 0.02...0.50 (figures from memory).

That's a very, very common phenomenon about munitions and in fact about combat in general.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users