8.8 KwK 36 too much penetration?

[ProrokC2_ChatBAN 819]

I got interested in this subject after i read that :

"German antitank guns could not penetrate their frontal armor"

And that was in '44

From my personal experience, even russian 85mm penetrates hull armor of jumbo (When not additionally sloped by some uphill)

And wikipedia says :

 

Other wikis :

 

 

Sheets :

 

 

In game :

Shell has a lot more penetration than according to these 3 wikis

I couldn't find anywhere any data sheets sadly

REMEMBER : That is 30Deg angle, not 0

What do you think about it?

Edited August 16, 2015 by ProrokC2

[COMSUBLANT 2,055]

Already been established that picture is incorrect.

Russians used low quality shells and the testing criteria was different. 

 

So no the KwK 36 doesn't have too much penetration.

[DieGans 679]

I think the kwk36 should be nerfed

[ProrokC2_ChatBAN 819]

I got interested in this subject after i read that :

"German antitank guns could not penetrate their frontal armor"

And that was in '44

From my personal experience, even russian 85mm penetrates hull armor of jumbo (When not additionally sloped by some uphill)

What about that part?

Jumbo gets penetrated by SU-152's, not even mentioning tigers

[COMSUBLANT 2,055]

What about that part?

Jumbo gets penetrated by SU-152's, not even mentioning tigers

 

That's an extremely ambiguous text, it could be referring to German 50mm AT guns. Or are you telling me because of that you expect a Sherman jumbo to shrug off 128cm shells? And long 88 APCR?

[ProrokC2_ChatBAN 819]

long 88 APCR?

Ofc not APCR, i mean APCBC

And i dont think they were using 50MM AT guns in '44

Edited August 16, 2015 by ProrokC2

[RohmMohc 11,494]

What about that part?

Jumbo gets penetrated by SU-152's, not even mentioning tigers

well take a look to the description of the Ju 87 D-5 (claims: no D-5 with divebreaks ever existed... wrong) or the Panther II: repeats the old mistake Spielberger did commit in the first version of his Panther-book... or the Russian FW 190 D-9 description (omitting the use of worse fuel, the lower performance of the russian D-9 isn't given ingame, it's performing exactly like the german one... and the end: Glorious La-7! Glorious Soviet union!)

 

 

And i dont think they were using 50MM AT guns in '44

they were... e.g they also had been used in the atlantic wall... throwing away so many AT-Guns would've been a  waste of ressources

Edited August 16, 2015 by RohmMohc

[nessiima 15]

[BPNZ 373]

It depends exactly what "German antitank guns could not penetrate their frontal armor" means.

 

Standard army anti tank gun at the time was the Pak 40 75mm L46.

At that time it was firing derated ammo (only 750m/s) giving max. penetration of 135mm @ 0 deg @ 100m, using the in US Naval criteria we use in WT.

 

This was also the most common gun mounted in tanks, SP / assault gun at that time.

[Sunleader 5,877]

Tiger ingame cannot Penetrate the UFP of the Jumbo.
But not all parts are as well armored as the upper front plate.

Also the ingame values for ALL Guns have higher than reality Penetration on 30 degree angle and for whatever reason lower penetration than reality against 0 degree angle.
Interestengly the 60 degree values are mostly aligning with official sources.

I dont know how Gaijin came up with these values.
But since the pattern is the same for pretty much all guns. I assume its due to different testing criteria.

[AlanHR 5,261]

As far as I know they got these values from WWII Ballistics: Armor & Gunnery book.

[*UrbanBushwookie 388]

I think the kwk36 should be nerfed

Ummm no...If gaijin nerfed it that would be the end of that gun. Just look at the 76mm "cannon" the hellcat is armed with.

[Simovski 3,929]

Whoever still wants a nerf to underperforming german/US guns and sports a russian related profile pic/signature is stupid.

[ConcretePanda 447]

If you take a look at the values the Jumbo armor is underperforming it seems. If you take 0.7 modifier for laminated armor and take angle into consideration even with the ingame values for 88 the tank should defeat all shots if angled at 20-30 degrees. I did calculation in another thread once. I think 88 was commonly used as antitank gun in 1944 already and any breakthrough tank would logically be defended against it.

[RohmMohc 11,494]

 

. I think 88 was commonly used as antitank gun

the 88mm AT Gun was the Pak43... mounted on the Tiger II and Ferdinand/Elefant, Jagdpanther... and that would afaik cut through the Jumbo like a hot knife throug butter

[ProrokC2_ChatBAN 819]

If you take a look at the values the Jumbo armor is underperforming it seems. If you take 0.7 modifier for laminated armor and take angle into consideration even with the ingame values for 88 the tank should defeat all shots if angled at 20-30 degrees. I did calculation in another thread once

I realized that too, im waiting till somebody will make a bug report on it

[ConcretePanda 447]

the 88mm AT Gun was the Pak43... mounted on the Tiger II and Ferdinand/Elefant, Jagdpanther... and that would afaik cut through the Jumbo like a hot knife throug butter

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8.8_cm_Flak_18/36/37/41#Support_of_ground_troops
Edit, sorry, I thought it was clear in the context. :( Edited August 16, 2015 by ConcretePanda

[RohmMohc 11,494]

then please specify "88" before with saying "Flak 88"

[skyshot 1,117]

The tiger can penetrate the front of a jumbo in 3 spots

 

1)  The MG spot 

2) Slightly bellow the gun mantlet there is 45mm or so tickness wich isnt protected by the plate around the gun

3) Your front upper plate can get penned if the tiger is positioned higher than you so that he neutralizes the angle

 

Probably you get killed by point 1 or 2 

[*UrbanBushwookie 388]

I think the most common anti tank gun was pak 40, a 75mm, which might not pen the jumbo.besides "anti-tank guns" is a very broad term. You are inferring that it is referencing the 88 mm when it could be referencing the 75mm or 50mm which weren't nearly as powerful as the 88mm which even without the fame and rumours from allied tank crews was easily ONE* of the best anti tank guns of the war.

*just in case someone tries to argue

[arczer25 5,202]

just for info all values in game penetration tables are for 0.8T/D ratio

also even basic slope mod for 45 degree at 1.0T/D for APCBC is 1.74x in game so except in some rare possibles its not gonna happen i played jumbo and didn't got penetrated by kwk 36 except for MG ball and flat points of transmission cover

Edited August 16, 2015 by arczer25

[bellezza03 6,007]

Kwk36 perform like it should. The description on WT are not reliable.
Jumbo have many weakspot and in game it can be easly penetrated by Tiger especially the E version that have APCR

[ProrokC2_ChatBAN 819]

The tiger can penetrate the front of a jumbo in 3 spots

 

1)  The MG spot 

2) Slightly bellow the gun mantlet there is 45mm or so tickness wich isnt protected by the plate around the gun

3) Your front upper plate can get penned if the tiger is positioned higher than you so that he neutralizes the angle

 

Probably you get killed by point 1 or 2 

Im getting killed by modified 3 ALL the tim, never because of 1 and 2 :

He doesnt need to neutralize the angle, it just goes throught, even russian 85mm!

 

Kwk36 perform like it should. The description on WT are not reliable.
Jumbo have many weakspot and in game it can be easly penetrated by Tiger especially the E version that have APCR

They just use APCBC, always works, if i'm not additionally angling my armor by driving into uphill, then it's unpenetrable

Edited August 16, 2015 by ProrokC2

[skyshot 1,117]

Im getting killed by modified 3 ALL the tim, never because of 1 and 2 :

He doesnt need to neutralize the angle, it just goes throught, even russian 85mm!

 

 

They just use APCBC, always works, if i'm not additionally angling my armor by driving into uphill, then it's unpenetrable

Lol im shooting what i can at jumbos and still cant pen their front plate, i want to see a video 

[TT33a 5,404]