Jump to content


Archer firing at Tiger I / Rare Video


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
15 replies to this topic

Tiger_23 #1 Posted Mar 31 2012 - 00:37

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 7263 battles
  • 7,861
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010


Montykoro #2 Posted Mar 31 2012 - 03:03

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18212 battles
  • 1,140
  • Member since:
    05-03-2011
Side pen to the tiger? TOO EASY ;) show me the same test...In front armor from 2KM away ;)

Lert #3 Posted Mar 31 2012 - 18:01

    Major

  • Community Contributor
  • 21669 battles
  • 15,628
  • Member since:
    09-02-2010
Such a pity. Destroying such a rare and important piece of history. Oh I know why they did it and the when they did it matters too, but still.

TREEBARK3 #4 Posted Apr 08 2012 - 17:13

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 13 battles
  • 235
  • Member since:
    03-16-2012
Coll find.

Mini_Bolo #5 Posted Apr 08 2012 - 22:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 8609 battles
  • 3,098
  • Member since:
    03-27-2011

View PostMontykoro, on Mar 31 2012 - 03:03, said:

Side pen to the tiger? TOO EASY ;) show me the same test...In front armor from 2KM away ;)

Two things.

1: They clearly show two penetrations on the front glacis.

2: 2km?  On a 17 pounder?  Lol.  The APDS on the 17 pounder had a 25% probability of hitting at 600 yards.  2 km.  That's funny.

Gneisenau_43 #6 Posted Apr 08 2012 - 22:55

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 3381 battles
  • 439
  • Member since:
    09-28-2010

View PostMini_Bolo, on Apr 08 2012 - 22:49, said:

Two things.

1: They clearly show two penetrations on the front glacis.

2: 2km?  On a 17 pounder?  Lol.  The APDS on the 17 pounder had a 25% probability of hitting at 600 yards.  2 km.  That's funny.

The 17 pounder more commonly used APCBC rounds, anyways. Because of an obnoxiously enormous powder charge (9 pounds!) and heavy shell for a 76mm, it had similar penetration to the 75mm on the Panther. I'd choose more accurate shells that do more damage and are more expendable than innacurate APDS shot that has excellent penetration but low damage and dismal accuracy at long range. Though, with regular APCBC, the 17 pounder was unable to penetrate the front of the tiger from 2 kilometers- if I can remember properly, the maximum range that it could pen the front of a Tiger I was 1000 meters.

Montykoro #7 Posted Apr 09 2012 - 05:46

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18212 battles
  • 1,140
  • Member since:
    05-03-2011

View PostMini_Bolo, on Apr 08 2012 - 22:49, said:

Two things.

1: They clearly show two penetrations on the front glacis.


So? they can shoot the glacis with another gun...

View PostMini_Bolo, on Apr 08 2012 - 22:49, said:

2: 2km?  On a 17 pounder?  Lol.  The APDS on the 17 pounder had a 25% probability of hitting at 600 yards.  2 km.  That's funny.

Its no my problem... they "show" the POWERFULLLLLLLLL gun... I show my POWERFULLLLLLL armor at 2 km.... see the irony?

_Freddy_ #8 Posted Apr 09 2012 - 19:12

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 412 battles
  • 565
  • Member since:
    12-12-2011

View PostMini_Bolo, on Apr 08 2012 - 22:49, said:

Two things.

1: They clearly show two penetrations on the front glacis.

2: 2km?  On a 17 pounder?  Lol.  The APDS on the 17 pounder had a 25% probability of hitting at 600 yards.  2 km.  That's funny.

In US tests at 700m the APDS from a 17pdr had a 56% chance of hitting a target, the UK tests were 60% chance of hitting. Standard British target size is 6 foot by 6 foot, you may notice that a Tiger and a Panther are a teeny bit larger than that at the front.

At 1000m it dropped to 16% to 20% which roughly equals 25% chance of hitting a Panther with APDS directly at the front.

17pdr APCBC had slightly better penetration than the US HVAP and was very accurate. Neither could be relied on to penetrate a Panthers glacis plate every time but could penetrate the mantlet. In one penetration test of three Panthers armour two were found to have substandard armour the third had good armour and was used for recording the results.

The two frontal hits on the Tiger look like APDS as does the turret side penetration. The lower hull penetration that took the armour off from the other side as well looks like a APCBC.

razielkaine #9 Posted Apr 09 2012 - 21:24

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 6024 battles
  • 771
  • Member since:
    07-14-2010
British believed that the accuracy issues were trumped by it's ability to penetrate which in the real world of tank warfare is what matters.  They compensated with high rate of fire and multiple guns, it was a great gun and served them well.

CaptainMan997 #10 Posted Apr 30 2012 - 19:06

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 2029 battles
  • 228
  • Member since:
    11-24-2011
Yep, the Tiger I wasn't as awesome as it was thought to be. But it's still a great tank.

aPyro_ #11 Posted May 20 2012 - 15:22

    Captain

  • Players
  • 11519 battles
  • 1,208
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View PostLert, on Mar 31 2012 - 18:01, said:

Such a pity. Destroying such a rare and important piece of history. Oh I know why they did it and the when they did it matters too, but still.

If I had a tiger I IRL in perfect condition with working ammo and all, I would sell it or blow it up. Such a sucky tank lol

Posting to incite unrest in forums.
warning issued, no R/O.
~SgtGrunt

Edited by SgtGrunt, May 21 2012 - 11:52.


dr_fruitloop #12 Posted Jun 09 2012 - 22:13

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 6388 battles
  • 450
  • Member since:
    09-09-2010
Nice find, hope the in-game 17pdr sounds like that.

KnightFandragon #13 Posted Jun 24 2012 - 03:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 4573 battles
  • 5,897
  • Member since:
    05-06-2011

View PostMontykoro, on Mar 31 2012 - 03:03, said:

Side pen to the tiger? TOO EASY :Smile_blinky: show me the same test...In front armor from 2KM away :Smile_blinky:

Yeah really...so the 17lber can penetrate 80mm of flat armor from like 100yards hahha...not impressive lol...

razielkaine #14 Posted Jun 24 2012 - 03:26

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 6024 battles
  • 771
  • Member since:
    07-14-2010

View PostKnightFandragon, on Jun 24 2012 - 03:10, said:

Yeah really...so the 17lber can penetrate 80mm of flat armor from like 100yards hahha...not impressive lol...

those stats are completely wrong.... are you high?

btech #15 Posted Jun 24 2012 - 03:29

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 9094 battles
  • 466
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011
so many beautiful tanks left on firing ranges just to be shot up and not put in museums. such a waste to me anyways.

KnightFandragon #16 Posted Jun 24 2012 - 16:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 4573 battles
  • 5,897
  • Member since:
    05-06-2011

View Postrazielkaine, on Jun 24 2012 - 03:26, said:

those stats are completely wrong.... are you high?

Huh? No, the Tiger's side armor is like 80mm, maybe 82 or 85....in that vid they are firing from maybe 100 yards or maybe slightly more.......I know the actual 17lber could do FFFFFFAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRR Greater then that...im just saying, what they are showing in that vid is an unimpressive display of the 17lber's capabilties.  Turn the Tiger forward and put that thing at 1km or more +D Or get a Panther on a ridge and fire up at it's increased slope lol.

Edited by KnightFandragon, Jun 24 2012 - 16:07.