Weta43 Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 Don't you think they've over-done the tracers & ricochets ? (Seriously - interesting vid, thanks) Cheers.
zaelu Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 (edited) OMG... I thought it was a myth started by kids... now I see it's started by grown ups... hesus! :doh: This is like in a Scooby Doo animation... the bad guy has a laser gun and see Scooby Doo (or whatever the good guy was) points the gun towards Scooby and fire... but!!! It was not Scooby Doo it was his reflection on a mirror... so now... be cause it was a mirror and silly kids don't know much about reflection rules the laser just get's back towards the shooter instead bouncing from mirror towards Scooby Doo just as the light reflecting from him. Obviously the bad guy dies. The same with the mighty 1km spread 12.5mm rounds fired from a mile at 30 degrees angle in the dirt behind the tank... Some of the bullets after plowing through the ground decide to ricochet upwards without loosing any energy (heck... gaining, like a DU shell) and is not hiting the "weak armor" (ha ha... paper?) of a... tank at same 30 degrees angles and richoche even more off the metal surface... nooo... it comes right at 90 degrees with the energy of a 500kg armor piercing bomb and gets inside the tank and... pssssss..... BooOOOOMM! Bwahahahahaha!!! Loony tunes! That's all folks! ...if you believe it... Edited April 28, 2013 by zaelu [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] I5 4670k, 32GB, GTX 1070, Thrustmaster TFRP, G940 Throttle extremely modded with Bodnar 0836X and Bu0836A, Warthog Joystick with F-18 grip, Oculus Rift S - Almost all is made from gifts from friends, the most expensive parts at least
Phantom88 Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 The Jugs 8 .50 cals Won The War,be sure!!:D Great Video....and I LOVE Looney Tunes:thumbup:I Believe!!!!!;) Patrick
RIPTIDE Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 Don't you think they've over-done the tracers & ricochets ? (Seriously - interesting vid, thanks) I've seen these vids before. AFAIK they are remastered with colour from the original B&W. Are you guys suggesting that the vids are completely fake? :huh: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
otto Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 (edited) After hitting the ground the bullets tumble and twist, loose a lot of energy, and hit the underside of the tiger's armour at a steep angle, not 90 degrees.It's next to impossible to penetrate 1 inch armour in such conditions. In my opinion the video is fake. Edited April 28, 2013 by otto
hegykc Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 The commentary is saying that the tanks carried a trailer with a fuel tank in it. And they would leave the tank (armored vehicle) alone, and shoot the trailer, and the fuel tank (container) it carried. Meaning the trailer and the fuel tank (container) weren't armored underneath, so it might have been just a sheet of thin aluminum underneath the trailer. www.replikagear.com
TimeKilla Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 Good tactics now we just need fuel tanks behind ingame. :joystick: YouTube :pilotfly: TimeKilla on Flight Sims over at YouTube.
zaelu Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 (edited) The commentary is saying that the tanks carried a trailer with a fuel tank in it. And they would leave the tank (armored vehicle) alone, and shoot the trailer, and the fuel tank (container) it carried. Meaning the trailer and the fuel tank (container) weren't armored underneath, so it might have been just a sheet of thin aluminum underneath the trailer. Let's be serious... the commentary says clearly that the tanks (till now you could say they mean the fuel tanks from the trailer) were not armored underneath but armored above... (now all doubts are blown off) A trailer is not armored at all... that's why they shoot at it in the first place... but especially above has nothing and beneath is a flimsy chassis. The movie is legit... the commentary is just funny. I heard a lot of these war stories similar to the ones of fishermen. "Man... once I caught an 20 feet long tuna in my toilet bowl..." "Sure... after so many beers anything is possible." Once I heard that some pilots used to kill soldiers with the prop blades from their two engine ground attack planes... From a hate fantasy or a freak accident/one in a million event to "used to" is such a long way that only people that are sufficiently drunk can endeavor on it. Edited April 28, 2013 by zaelu [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] I5 4670k, 32GB, GTX 1070, Thrustmaster TFRP, G940 Throttle extremely modded with Bodnar 0836X and Bu0836A, Warthog Joystick with F-18 grip, Oculus Rift S - Almost all is made from gifts from friends, the most expensive parts at least
hegykc Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 Yep, plenty of super hero stories in some of the accounts. This one just seemed a little less unbelievable. Maybe the Germans made field modifications, putting armored plates on top of the trailers and whatnot... I'm no expert by any means, just saying. www.replikagear.com
RIPTIDE Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 Well, in the day every German Tank was a Tiger from some accounts haha. But some of the lighter tanks might have been somewhat vulnerable. Above all having your tank raked by .50cal must have been a bit demoralizing. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Cookie Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 This is actually the first time I heard about trailers being towed behind tanks. As far as I know, that has never been doctrine of the German army. It´d be kind of pointless too, because in the later days of the war there wasn´t even enough fuel around to top off the tanks themselves, nevermind a trailer... Maybe the commentator is confusing it with the Russians? They (to this very day) carry extra fuel on the outside of their tanks. The idea is to use this fuel to get to the combat area and then jettison it before the shooting starts (much like drop tanks in aviation). The German army has never done a similar thing though. Luckily I know some tank crew veterans from back then, I will ask them about it and get back to you guys. - Two miles of road lead nowhere, two miles of runway lead everywhere - Click here for system specs
tflash Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 Well, there are other sources on the web that confirm this story of P-47's succesfully engaging Tiger Tanks this way. Just do a Google search. Whether it all goes back to the same hoax, I wouldn't know. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
TimeKilla Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 Dont think this is a hoax, Just the pilot was in a area where the German SOP's were different and not as good. :joystick: YouTube :pilotfly: TimeKilla on Flight Sims over at YouTube.
Invader ZIM Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 I think you guys are thinking a "Kill" is a spectacularly exploding King Tiger after being strafed by P-47's, but I think what seems to have really happened is mobility kills, damage caused on the back and topside of the tanks by API .50 cal ammo was known to cause fires in stored fuel, and enter the ventilation areas on the back of the tanks messing with cooling systems, etc. Enough to cause a fire in a fuel line, or start an oil fire and soon you have to abandon the tanks because of it. And to a fighter pilot that sees a tank burning for any reason, it's a kill. Even if it's a mobility kill the tank can't get to where it's supposed to. We need to model these in DCS. It must have been a problem for the German Army because: "Starting with Fgst.Nr.251075 in April, 1944, wooden decking was installed over the top of the upper fuel tanks to catch shell fragments and bullet splash coming down through the cooling grating." Germany's Tiger Tanks, DW to Tiger I Thomas L. Jentz & Hilary L. Doyle And: It should be noted that the fuel system, as well as the cooling system, was extremely vulnerable and there was significant risk if any shrapnel, bullets or bullet splash entered the engine compartment. The fuel system consisted of a number of separate tanks with numerous lines and other components, having well in excess of 100 connections. Even with the most fastidious maintenance, leakage - and the consequent buildup of petrol vapour - was always a problem. The Panther and King Tiger had much the same problems, using simlar engine/cooling/fuel system arrangements and, like the Tiger, they had large areas of vulnerable grille openings in the engine decks. In Jentz & Doyle's 'Panther Tank - The Quest for Combat Supremacy', they say the following: "As an expedient to increase protection against strafing aircraft and splinters from artillery shells, steel covers were installed over the air intake and exhaust louvres on the rear deck" These are illustrated by technical drawing and match the photographs I have seen showing them installed on Panthers. They were usually fabricated from the 5mm thick 'Schurzen' anti-bazooka plates that were used for side protection. There is also mention of the same modification on King Tigers, in their book 'Germany's Tiger Tanks - VK45.02 to Tiger II: Design, Production and Modifications', where they state: "As reported on 28 February 1945, Wa Pruef 6 experimented with a Tiger II (Fgst.Nr 280404) by covering the air intake gratings on the rear deck with thin steel plates to prevent damage to the radiators caused by bullets from strafing aircraft or shell fragments." In this instance, however, it has not been determined how often, if ever, this modification was actually implemented but we can see that it was seriously considered nevertheless. While the risk from artillery, mortars, shell splinters etc was much the same for most of the war, the risk from strafing aircraft was not. By 1944/45, Allied air superiority was almost total and they could roam about the battle areas pretty much at will. German armoured vehicles could be, and often were, subjected to air attacks at a level and frequency they had rarely experience before. Whilst a single strafing run from a lone aircraft was most unlikely to cause much damage, it was a different matter when there were repeated runs from groups of aircraft. And this could happen several times in the course of a day! What the above extracts (together with other evidence) do show beyond dispute is that, in the closing stages of the war, the Germans were becoming much more concerned than they had previously been, about the possibility of bullets from strafing aircraft entering these openings. I don't have to penetrate much armor when I can get a few rounds into the vents on the top and rear of the tank. 8 .50's firing API at 500+ rpm should get some in there if your determined. And remember, there's ample evidence of an M1 being disabled and having to be abandoned for the same reason after being hit from the rear by a Bradley's 25mm cannon. It had started a fire that disabled the engine and the M1 had to be abandoned, a mobility kill, but for all intents and purposes a kill nonetheless. Big ventilation areas: The upgrade looked something like this: 3
TimeKilla Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 While the risk from artillery, mortars, shell splinters etc was much the same for most of the war, the risk from strafing aircraft was not. By 1944/45, Allied air superiority was almost total and they could roam about the battle areas pretty much at will. German armoured vehicles could be, and often were, subjected to air attacks at a level and frequency they had rarely experience before. Whilst a single strafing run from a lone aircraft was most unlikely to cause much damage, it was a different matter when there were repeated runs from groups of aircraft. And this could happen several times in the course of a day! True great post. :joystick: YouTube :pilotfly: TimeKilla on Flight Sims over at YouTube.
oniellnz Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 In Otto Carius's book 'Tigers in the Mud', he had two of is four tigers immobilised by artillery. The radiators were vunerable from the top, so yes, 50 cals could do a mobility kill on a tiger. As for the two Carius tigers, they were towed back to the German lines by the remaining tigers. As for towing fuel behind, he could have mistaken the remote tracked demolition device (Borgward BIV) that PZ-Abt 504 and 508 used in Italy. They would be towed behind the tigers, and would explode good if hit by 50s from a P-47. (REF: Tiger I on the western front, Jean Restayn). [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Shaken, stirred, snap frozen - twice, turned into a snowman and shaken some more.
Weta43 Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 I've seen these vids before. AFAIK they are remastered with colour from the original B&W. Are you guys suggesting that the vids are completely fake? :huh: I wasn't, I was joking about the endless threads about the size of tracers & number of ricochets rendering in-sim... I took it as either actual colour film (which is rare, but does exist from WWII), or as you suggested, colourised B&W stock. Cheers.
Irregular programming Posted April 29, 2013 Posted April 29, 2013 The Tiger tank had the same armour thickness on the bottom as on the top (around 25 mm), as said you will never penetrate that with a 50 .cal ball round, not even if you "bounce it on the ground first". :)
hegykc Posted April 29, 2013 Posted April 29, 2013 The Tiger tank had the same armour thickness on the bottom as on the top (around 25 mm), as said you will never penetrate that with a 50 .cal ball round, not even if you "bounce it on the ground first". :) They were talking about bouncing the bullets underneath the trailer tank (tank not as in 'armored vehicle', but tank as in 'trailer fuel reservoir'). www.replikagear.com
dumgrunt Posted April 30, 2013 Posted April 30, 2013 I heard it as aiming for the tank to ricc rounds into the belly. go to any direct fire support weapons range and you will see a lot of funny shaped holes in rolled plate. that is from ricochets. the rounds do lose energy, but dont tumble normally (youll know if they do). still id be skeptical that the 12.7mm API ammunition of the day would penetrate 25mm of armour in the manner stated. as mentioned before, you would be better off aiming for the engine shroud/grill. the 4 20mm cannons on the typhoon would be a different story but.... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
zaelu Posted April 30, 2013 Posted April 30, 2013 I wouldn't fire a 120mm antitank round into the ground hoping for a lucky bunny hop in the belly of the tank. A 12.7 (heavy machine gun fcs) burst fired from at least half a mile into the ground with the scatter effect that is seen on those tracers?... Good luck and don't stop praying. :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] I5 4670k, 32GB, GTX 1070, Thrustmaster TFRP, G940 Throttle extremely modded with Bodnar 0836X and Bu0836A, Warthog Joystick with F-18 grip, Oculus Rift S - Almost all is made from gifts from friends, the most expensive parts at least
marcos Posted April 30, 2013 Author Posted April 30, 2013 I heard it as aiming for the tank to ricc rounds into the belly. go to any direct fire support weapons range and you will see a lot of funny shaped holes in rolled plate. that is from ricochets. the rounds do lose energy, but dont tumble normally (youll know if they do). still id be skeptical that the 12.7mm API ammunition of the day would penetrate 25mm of armour in the manner stated. as mentioned before, you would be better off aiming for the engine shroud/grill. the 4 20mm cannons on the typhoon would be a different story but.... As would the 23mm cannons on an IL-2 Sturmovik.
Recommended Posts