tanks/vehicles Jagdtiger 8.8cm

[Marty_Mcfly28 56]

Good day to anyone who is reading this. Today I have a rather simple suggestion for the German Tank destroyer line, the Jagdtiger 8.8

 

What is it??

During 1945, orders were given out to produce more Jagdtigers. However there simply wasn't enough 128mm PaK 44 L/55 for all of the tanks. As a result about 20 were re-equipped with 8,8 cm Pak 43 L/71.

 

Differences between the 8,8 Jagdtiger and normal Jagdtiger

The Jagdtiger 8,8 uses the exact same chassis,engine, and suspension system that the regular jagdtiger uses, making speed and armour identical in both versions. The big difference here is the gun. With the 8,8, the tank will have a bigger fire rate than the normal version, however it will sacrifice damage and penetration for fire rate.

 

Gun penetration stats(APBC)

Range             Armour penetration 

100m               202mm

 

500m              185mm

 

1000m            165mm

 

1500m            148mm

 

2000m            132mm

 

Shells used

Pzgr. 39/43(APBC-HE) Weight=22.92 pounds muzzle velocity=1000m/s

Pzgr. 40/43(APCR)       weight=16 pounds   muzzle velocity=1,130m/s

Gr. 39/3 HL(HEAT)       weight=17 pounds    muzzle velocity=600m/s

 

Penetration stats(APCR)

range         armour penetration

100m          238mm

500m          217mm

1000m        193mm

1500m        171mm

2000m        153mm

 

 

 

Where it can go in the tech tree.

I do think that this vehicle should be added into a folder with the jagdtiger. Sitting at a slightly lower BR(BR 7.0 or 6.7)

 

Pictures

 

 

 

 

 

Sources

gun stats-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8.8_cm_Pak_43

 

 

 

In conclusion I think this would make a great addition to the tech tree. Please feel free to ask any question for more info. I hope to see this on the battlefield soon (:

Edited November 27, 2016 by blakeob
prefix

[blakeob 8,086]

Open for discussion. 

 

Please add more sources as you are required to have one primary source (like an actual test) or two secondary sources (books, websites etc). I will allow you 48 hours to add the extra sources, then if nothing has been done, I will close the thread. 

Edited December 12, 2016 by blakeob
Sneaky Sauber :D

[Marty_Mcfly28 56]

Here are some more sources

http://www.wikiwand.com/en/8.8_cm_Pak_43

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdtiger

https://books.google.ca/books?id=82nJBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=sd.kfz.185&source=bl&ots=YLUUsMk4Tw&sig=CP9ysHCwx9rTKv13sGhighOX7es&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi33bLH-MfQAhVMLo8KHTmnAx84ChDoAQggMAE#v=onepage&q=sd.kfz.185&f=false

[HerrSektor 3,840]

2 hours ago, Marty_Mcfly28 said:

Here are some more sources

http://www.wikiwand.com/en/8.8_cm_Pak_43

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdtiger

https://books.google.ca/books?id=82nJBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=sd.kfz.185&source=bl&ots=YLUUsMk4Tw&sig=CP9ysHCwx9rTKv13sGhighOX7es&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi33bLH-MfQAhVMLo8KHTmnAx84ChDoAQggMAE#v=onepage&q=sd.kfz.185&f=false

add them to the main post... at the end of it...

 

Also... the JagdT 88 can be a good allied tear collector...

Edited November 27, 2016 by zSektor92

[Nope 10,634]

7 hours ago, Marty_Mcfly28 said:

Here are some more sources

http://www.wikiwand.com/en/8.8_cm_Pak_43

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdtiger

https://books.google.ca/books?id=82nJBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=sd.kfz.185&source=bl&ots=YLUUsMk4Tw&sig=CP9ysHCwx9rTKv13sGhighOX7es&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi33bLH-MfQAhVMLo8KHTmnAx84ChDoAQggMAE#v=onepage&q=sd.kfz.185&f=false

 

Wikipedia is not accepted.

[Sirchby 3,711]

If you have the source gathered from Wikipedia, I can assure you that:

 

Quote

Aside from the 11 early vehicles with a Porsche suspension, the only variant developed was the Sd.Kfz.185. The difference was that the gun used was the 8.8 cm PaK 43 rather than the 12.8 cm PaK 44. This was due to shortages of the latter weapon. The variant did not enter service.

 

So, yeah.

 

It's a Tier 5 tank destroyer, & it comes with Tier 4 gun.

 

Should be a good event / Warbond Tier 5 tank instead.

 

Edit:

Also, for a documented reference as a book:

Chamberlain, Peter; Doyle, Hilary L (1999). Encyclopedia of German tanks of World War Two. London: Arms & Armour.

 

Good luck finding one & save the .pdf to send the image scans here.

Edited November 27, 2016 by BravoBigBooms

[KorEEnium 2,533]

Sources:

 

1) Panzer Tracts Nr.9 Jagdpanzer - Jagdpanzer 38 to Jagdtiger, Thomas L. Jentz, Hillary Louis Doyle, 1997, ISBN 0-9648793-3-6

 

Only mentions that there were 4 Jagdtigers mounted with the 88mm Pak 43 L/71.

(page 50)

 

 

2) Heavy Jagdpanzer - Development, Production, Operations, Walter J. Spielberger, Hilary L. Doyle, Thomas L. Jentz, 2007, ISBN 978-0-7643-2625-7

 

(Page 171)

 

Edited November 27, 2016 by KorEEnium

[Querulous1 3,276]

Yes, this would be good to have

[Tantor57 10,318]

would be good to have as a 6.7 tank destroyer with Ferdinand going to 6.3

[DavidXD 1,355]

Yes !

+1

[Nightstar_NSR 875]

On 11/29/2016 at 6:37 AM, Tantor57 said:

would be good to have as a 6.7 tank destroyer with Ferdinand going to 6.3

no just no if anything the Jagdtiger would be raised to 7.3 and this would be 7.0 or they both would be 7.0 the JT armor is way to much for most 6.7 tanks

[Tantor57 10,318]

14 hours ago, SchokoladeDonner said:

no just no if anything the Jagdtiger would be raised to 7.3 and this would be 7.0 or they both would be 7.0 the JT armor is way to much for most 6.7 tanks

Sure what about T95 ? BR 8.0 cause too strong armor ? Jagditiger with 128 mm is perfectly fine at 7.0, Jagdtiger with 8.8 cm Pak 43 should come at 6.7 because Ferdinand is not a 6.7 TD, it's comparable to the tortoise which is at 6.3

[Sirchby 3,711]

16 hours ago, Tantor57 said:

Sure what about T95 ? BR 8.0 cause too strong armor ? Jagditiger with 128 mm is perfectly fine at 7.0, Jagdtiger with 8.8 cm Pak 43 should come at 6.7 because Ferdinand is not a 6.7 TD, it's comparable to the tortoise which is at 6.3

 

Except:

-T95 has virtually no armor because of 2 cupolas which cover about 360° perspective weakspot.

-T95 is much 2x slower than a Jagdtiger & is easier to destroy by air raids.

-T95 does not fare enough with Jagdtiger in mano el mano combat from standard combat range, given both players have dynamic equal skill.

 

Your argument is invalid.

 

The T95 does deserve 6.7 at all.

[Sirchby 3,711]

But I do agree if Jagdtiger's armor is sufficient enough as 7.0 tank destroyer.

 

Not to mention it has stronger superstructure but lighter hull than a Maus, which is affordable as King Tiger's hull is still rather "easy" to be destroyed through flank & lower plate as 7.0.

[Tantor57 10,318]

18 minutes ago, BravoBigBooms said:

 

Except:

-T95 has virtually no armor because of 2 cupolas which cover about 360° perspective weakspot.

-T95 is much 2x slower than a Jagdtiger & is easier to destroy by air raids.

-T95 does not fare enough with Jagdtiger in mano el mano combat from standard combat range, given both players have dynamic equal skill.

 

Your argument is invalid.

 

The T95 does deserve 6.7 at all.

- Yes and Pz III vs IS4 would be a balanced fight because it can get penned through the optic hole so IS4 BR 3.0 yolo asap ?

- Yes T95 is slow but gets and overly buffed traverse rate making it more efficient in CQC fight (which is always the case in RB) than the Jagditger, also T95 is very difficult to track

- From standard combat range, all the T95 has to do is to spam Jagdtiger lower plate with APHE turning it on fire while the Jagdtiger has to rely on two tiny and trillish cupolas

 

And yes T-95 deserves 6.7 but so would Jagdtiger 8,8 cm trying to argue otherwise is pointless since it wouldnt be in no way a 7.0 given what it'd face regularly. Hell even the 128 MM struggles sometimes vs 7.0/7.3/7.7 vehicle and you'd want a long 88 mm to feel itslef here ? Nice logic

[Sirchby 3,711]

15 hours ago, Tantor57 said:

- Yes and Pz III vs IS4 would be a balanced fight because it can get penned through the optic hole so IS4 BR 3.0 yolo asap ?

- Yes T95 is slow but gets and overly buffed traverse rate making it more efficient in CQC fight (which is always the case in RB) than the Jagditger, also T95 is very difficult to track

- From standard combat range, all the T95 has to do is to spam Jagdtiger lower plate with APHE turning it on fire while the Jagdtiger has to rely on two tiny and trillish cupolas

 

And yes T-95 deserves 6.7 but so would Jagdtiger 8,8 cm trying to argue otherwise is pointless since it wouldnt be in no way a 7.0 given what it'd face regularly. Hell even the 128 MM struggles sometimes vs 7.0/7.3/7.7 vehicle and you'd want a long 88 mm to feel itslef here ? Nice logic

 

Common Sense, anyone?

 

Is your IS-4M a viable target from up to 500 m range? No. Seems fine.

How big is IS-4M optic hole compared to T95 cupola? Smaller? Much smaller? Immensely smaller? It is.

Which one is an easier weakspot to hit by categorize ? Cupola : optic hole? Cupola, always cupola.

 

Sure, CQC fight in its own base is fun with 13 km/h top speed. Then bombed to spark by Arados.

While Jagdtiger can start a CQC fight in the middle of combat area against much weaker tanks.

One track down out of four is enough to immobilize the T95 from stepping further. Not so different from what Jagdtiger receives with two.

 

From standard combat range, Jagdtiger just have to lob its big shell into the T95's cupola with bigger range of impact as emphasized from the gun caliber. A single shot is enough to blast it while the T95 needs more than 3x shots to completely destroy a Jagdtiger through lower plate, which its transmission will stop any shells from going further.

 

As a result:
Cupola is always a reliable weakspot, you're right. It's a common sense. You're right again.

Lower plate is not a very reliable weakspot, I'm right. It's a common sense. I'm right again.

 

 

I never point out a disagreement that the Jagdtiger 8.8 cm should not be a 6.7 tank destroyer. I dont.

Your readiness to argue is very commendable for being cautious when it comes to mind with Jagdtiger 8.8 cm.

 

I'll just have to point out 1 obstacle should it's available as 6.7 tank destroyer:

 

"What will Ferdinand do if a Jagdtiger 8.8 overtakes its performance to the point it can be called a powercreep?"

"What will a regular Ferdinand do if a premium Jagdtiger 8.8 overtakes its performance to the point it can be called a destructive OP premium?"

[Ryan_King 907]

Gib! dont exist already a Further Discussion for the 8.8 JgTiger?

[Beatey 603]

I'm for this variant for a very long time. It would be a good premium. But yeah, it will be really hard to balance this.

And I would also like to see another TD, the Elefant I want this so much for a long time. 

[Z3r0_ 4,128]

Looks like good premium material, considering that only four were ever made.

[seadogpirate@psn 888]

I support it for the general tree  +1

[Rainbowprincess 9,975]

On Samstag, 10. Dezember 2016 at 11:42 PM, SchokoladeDonner said:

no just no if anything the Jagdtiger would be raised to 7.3 and this would be 7.0 or they both would be 7.0 the JT armor is way to much for most 6.7 tanks

 

let me remind you that there are a few british tanks at 6.7 that penetrate the 250mm jagdtiger frontplate.

 

20 hours ago, BravoBigBooms said:

 

Common Sense, anyone?

 

Is your IS-4M a viable target from up to 500 m range? No. Seems fine.

How big is IS-4M optic hole compared to T95 cupola? Smaller? Much smaller? Immensely smaller? It is.

Which one is an easier weakspot to hit by categorize ? Cupola : optic hole? Cupola, always cupola.

 

Sure, CQC fight in its own base is fun with 13 km/h top speed. Then bombed to spark by Arados.

While Jagdtiger can start a CQC fight in the middle of combat area against much weaker tanks.

One track down out of four is enough to immobilize the T95 from stepping further. Not so different from what Jagdtiger receives with two.

 

From standard combat range, Jagdtiger just have to lob its big shell into the T95's cupola with bigger range of impact as emphasized from the gun caliber. A single shot is enough to blast it while the T95 needs more than 3x shots to completely destroy a Jagdtiger through lower plate, which its transmission will stop any shells from going further.

 

As a result:
Cupola is always a reliable weakspot, you're right. It's a common sense. You're right again.

Lower plate is not a very reliable weakspot, I'm right. It's a common sense. I'm right again.

 

 

I never point out a disagreement that the Jagdtiger 8.8 cm should not be a 6.7 tank destroyer. I dont.

Your readiness to argue is very commendable for being cautious when it comes to mind with Jagdtiger 8.8 cm.

 

I'll just have to point out 1 obstacle should it's available as 6.7 tank destroyer:

 

"What will Ferdinand do if a Jagdtiger 8.8 overtakes its performance to the point it can be called a powercreep?"

"What will a regular Ferdinand do if a premium Jagdtiger 8.8 overtakes its performance to the point it can be called a destructive OP premium?"

 

oh yes, a stupid small cupola that can be avoided by hitting when just wiggling around a bit during the reload is such a big weakspot that demands a 6.7 BR while the big frontplate of a Jagdtiger can be penetrated by some medium tanks.

 

there's the double standard again

[HerrSektor 3,840]

7 hours ago, Rainbowprincess said:

 

let me remind you that there are a few british tanks at 6.7 that penetrate the 250mm jagdtiger frontplate.

 

 

oh yes, a stupid small cupola that can be avoided by hitting when just wiggling around a bit during the reload is such a big weakspot that demands a 6.7 BR while the big frontplate of a Jagdtiger can be penetrated by some medium tanks.

 

there's the double standard again

i will fix you, and say, triple standard, since the british have Cent Mk10 at 7.0 using Leopard APDS and a bit more powerfull and free HESH, also the Conway firing the 120mm (almost)Chieftain APDS round (by 20mm if i can remember correctly, is the same APDS)... Both cannons going trough almost every tank in every battle rating... 

 

Oh and we dont forget the ASU85 and M56, firing 320mm HEATFS, going again, trough almost every tank ingame in almost every part...

[The_Doctor_084 1,583]

If you AB players would learn to flank there would be less issues in the warthunder world, only from the front is this scary but in my T95 or even T29 I've dealt with the JT just fine (hint use APCR) takes all of three shots.  Or hit the cannon barrel hit a track then profit either way it's a three shot affair.  "His armor is too thick what can I do against that wah wah wah" don't stick with a brain dead frontal engagement.

[Rainbowprincess 9,975]

3 hours ago, zSektor92 said:

i will fix you, and say, triple standard, since the british have Cent Mk10 at 7.0 using Leopard APDS and a bit more powerfull and free HESH, also the Conway firing the 120mm (almost)Chieftain APDS round (by 20mm if i can remember correctly, is the same APDS)... Both cannons going trough almost every tank in every battle rating... 

 

Oh and we dont forget the ASU85 and M56, firing 320mm HEATFS, going again, trough almost every tank ingame in almost every part...

 

that's correct. But even with a scorpion or asu-85 there are still complaints. Funny thing tho that if especially these two vehicle are mentioned it says "but they have no armor, everything can kill it with ease". Well that's true, but same thing goes for the Leopard and here suddenly armor is irrelevant because of mobility....

 

russia has an asu-85 at 6.7

US has an M56 at 6.7

germany has a jagdpanzer 4-5 at guess what.. 7.7

 

Tiger 2's entire armor is already irrelevant with the introduction of postwar HEAT-FS at 6.7, Jagdtigers 250mm frontplate is already irrelevant with the introduction of british APDS at 6.7/7.0.

the whole game becomes more and more about who sees who first (which started to benefit the use of ULQ even more in the recent past) and armor is more and more irrelevant. Especially when it's just thick but not sloped.

 

So saying a Jagdtiger with an 88mm at 6.7 would be overkill is just plain nonsense.

[AtomicPope 3,953]

I would say main tree, as several existed even if they didn't see combat, simply because we need more vehicles in late T4/early T5 so we can end the BR compression and get a higher BR ceiling.