Jump to content


Crusader Anti-aircraft gun?tank?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
11 replies to this topic

Killed_chicken96_the_2nd #1 Posted 27 May 2013 - 06:59 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 9244 battles
  • 47
  • Member since:
    09-05-2011
I was thinking that since at tier5 you have the lepard with the fast firing gun why could we not get the anti-aircraft version/versions of the crusader. I know of three versions, one with a single 40mm bofors aone with two  oerlikon 20mm guns and one with 3 20mm orelikon guns.
I know that there is currently no allowence for vehicles with more than one gun and that such fast-firing weapons are genrally consigned in-game to scouts and a Crusader is not a pure scout.

typhaon #2 Posted 27 May 2013 - 07:19 PM

    Major General

  • Beta Tester
  • 14201 battles
  • 5,441
  • Member since:
    08-22-2010

View PostKilled_chicken96_the_2nd, on 27 May 2013 - 06:59 PM, said:

I know that there is currently no allowence for vehicles with more than one gun

There is a US premium light tank with a twin cal .50 .44 gun... don't remember the name though...

Edit: found it: MTLS-1G14

Edited by typhaon, 27 May 2013 - 08:09 PM.


notbarrackobama #3 Posted 28 May 2013 - 01:31 PM

  • Player
  • 4560 battles
  • -3
  • Member since:
    03-25-2011
The 6pdr is more than adequate for this tank, reliably pens KV-1 frontally

xCaptainObviousx #4 Posted 28 May 2013 - 02:44 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 23222 battles
  • 2,219
  • [4077] 4077
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

View Posttyphaon, on 27 May 2013 - 07:19 PM, said:

There is a US premium light tank with a twin cal .50 .44 gun... don't remember the name though...

Edit: found it: MTLS-1G14

more like 44 mm, .44 calibres is like 12 mm which is smaller than what the Renault FT-17's autocannon.

typhaon #5 Posted 28 May 2013 - 03:13 PM

    Major General

  • Beta Tester
  • 14201 battles
  • 5,441
  • Member since:
    08-22-2010

View PostxCaptainObviousx, on 28 May 2013 - 02:44 PM, said:

more like 44 mm, .44 calibres is like 12 mm which is smaller than what the Renault FT-17's autocannon.

Well it's named caliber-44 automatic canon, but according to google, it's a twin 37mm gun with 2x5 round clips.

Anyway the smallest gun in the game has only 7.62mm...

Eruantien_Aduialdraug #6 Posted 23 July 2013 - 07:25 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 12102 battles
  • 370
  • [SNOO] SNOO
  • Member since:
    02-02-2012

View Posttyphaon, on 28 May 2013 - 03:13 PM, said:

Anyway the smallest gun in the game has only 7.62mm...
7.92mm. It's a Mauser, hence funny German bullet size.

Kyphe #7 Posted 24 July 2013 - 03:19 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 16253 battles
  • 2,115
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011
the 40mm bofors is already a dubious choice of weopon for the covanater, yeah it can be a lot of fun when shooting T3 and bellow but it can also be useless against T4 and above, the 2pdr is the better choice of gun overall so having the bofors on the crusader is pointless

Tigger3 #8 Posted 24 July 2013 - 07:06 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13608 battles
  • 1,779
  • Member since:
    02-01-2012

View PostKyphe, on 24 July 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

the 40mm bofors is already a dubious choice of weopon for the covanater, yeah it can be a lot of fun when shooting T3 and bellow but it can also be useless against T4 and above, the 2pdr is the better choice of gun overall so having the bofors on the crusader is pointless

Which is a bit odd as in reality its AP round (from the 40mm Bofors L60) was almost as good as the 2pdr at 500m (few mm difference).

Kyphe #9 Posted 26 July 2013 - 04:17 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 16253 battles
  • 2,115
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011

View PostTigger3, on 24 July 2013 - 07:06 PM, said:

Which is a bit odd as in reality its AP round (from the 40mm Bofors L60) was almost as good as the 2pdr at 500m (few mm difference).

yes very true the US version of the L60 with AP could pen about the same as AP fired by the 2pdr, and in game that is true of the bofors and 2pdr mk-IX, The in game 2pdr mk-X has a superior penetration but this is fiction when firing AP, there was no real performance difference between the two marks of gun, the only way the 2pdr improved its penetration over the bofors was by firing APCBC which gave it about 8mm better pen at 2000yds.

ofc there are a few problems with the in game bofors

1st is that the British never used AP on their bofors at all

2nd problem is that it is bigger than a 6pdr gun in dimensions, for example the 57mmM1 version of the 6pndr was 3m long but the version of the L60 they used with AP was 3.78m long with a much greater amount of that length being breach.

the British guns were of similar dimensions

This means that in game no turret which can not fit a 6pdr should be able to fit an L60.

Tigger3 #10 Posted 26 July 2013 - 08:24 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13608 battles
  • 1,779
  • Member since:
    02-01-2012

View PostKyphe, on 26 July 2013 - 04:17 AM, said:

yes very true the US version of the L60 with AP could pen about the same as AP fired by the 2pdr, and in game that is true of the bofors and 2pdr mk-IX, The in game 2pdr mk-X has a superior penetration but this is fiction when firing AP, there was no real performance difference between the two marks of gun, the only way the 2pdr improved its penetration over the bofors was by firing APCBC which gave it about 8mm better pen at 2000yds.
ofc there are a few problems with the in game bofors
1st is that the British never used AP on their bofors at all
2nd problem is that it is bigger than a 6pdr gun in dimensions, for example the 57mmM1 version of the 6pndr was 3m long but the version of the L60 they used with AP was 3.78m long with a much greater amount of that length being breach.
the British guns were of similar dimensions
This means that in game no turret which can not fit a 6pdr should be able to fit an L60.
The British did use AP on their Bofors and during the dark days in North Africa the bofors was supposed to be always sited for both AA and AT/ground work

Quote

".. the Bofors has an excellent anti-tank performance, all reconnaissances of A.A. sites must take into consideration the possibility of a secondary anti-tank role. In certain special circumstances a proportion of light A.A. guns may be given a primary anti-tank role.
A single gun position will rarely satisfy both needs, since the field of fire and concealment requirements are so widely different. The troop commander must first ensure that he can carry out his primary anti-aircraft role, and then select alternative anti-tank positions - sufficiently close, if possible, for guns to be manhandled to them to get a field of fire. If no such close positions exist, more distant ones will have to be reconnoitred, and some or all of the tractors kept nearby to move the guns.
The troop commander must be certain that he is not caught by tanks when on the move from one position to another. In the heat and excitement of battle it is obvious that only the troop commander can judge the moment to abandon the primary in favour of the secondary role. He must therefore:-
i. Have a good system of local observation.
ii. Keep close touch with the nearest infantry or field artillery unit.
As a guide it may be assumed that light A.A. guns will invariably engage enemy tanks that come within 800 yards range. Troop commanders must therefore be thinking ahead once they have information that tanks have penetrated the forward defences.
On occasions heavy A.A. guns may also have an opportunity of assuming an anti-tank role."
From the Army Training Memorandum No. 43 of May '42 but use of Bofors in A/T role was SOP long before.
Appendix XXIII
Some Problems and Achievements of Anti-Aircraft Gunnery during the Battle of Britain

Quote

8. GROUND DEFENCE
Preparations were made by all A.A. defences to assume a secondary ground-defence role; Bofors were provided with anti-tank ammunition, and sited to cover approaches to aerodromes, V.P.'s etc. Certain 3.7-inch guns suitably sited were given an anti-ship role, and preparations were made for barrages to be put on certain beaches. Under the immediate threat of invasion in May 1940, mobile columns of A.A. troops were formed, but these troops reverted to their A.A. role before the Battle of Britain began.
http://www.ibiblio.o...OfUK-XXIII.html

Quote

British Bofors guns were issued with AP rounds in late 1941, at least, and that both Hy. A.A. and L.A.A. units were expected to take part in the ground battle if tanks came within effective range is found in the following extract from
"Standing Operational Orders for Hy. and L.A.A. defences of L.G 75 and 76" issued on 9 December 1941 by 88th Hy. A.A. Regt:
Hostile Tanks.
24 rounds A.P. ammunition will be kept at all L.A.A. gun sites in a separate box distinctively marked.
When within effective range, both Hy. And L.A.A guns will engage enemy tanks in preference to E/A.
The effective range for 3.7” A.A. guns against tanks is 1,000 yards and of Bofors guns 400 yards.

Edited by Tigger3, 26 July 2013 - 08:33 AM.


Kyphe #11 Posted 26 July 2013 - 01:34 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 16253 battles
  • 2,115
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011
Strange that I have never been able to find any Penetration data, not even the navy, who tend towards multi role in most systems.
I have also read reports of the Anti tank role of the bofors being hampered by a lack of AP though HE rounds proved exceptional against infantry and lighter vehicles.
Though the simple explanation would be acquiring US AP ammunition in limited amounts I suppose.
I have found statements referring to documentation for semi armor piercing round made by the British with 25mm of pen 30 degrees, 1300 yards
Ofc its easy to see how the penetration capability of the 40mm and the 2pdr soon became obsolete against German tanks and the bofors gun would only be useful against light armor for much of the war anyway.
The 3.7in in the AA configuration also had a theoretical AT role but in practice it just did not happen with a couple of exceptions.
Mostly I believe due to the cumbersome nature of the mountings of both guns.
though self propelled bofors had an active ground fire role

Edited by Kyphe, 26 July 2013 - 01:52 PM.


Tigger3 #12 Posted 26 July 2013 - 04:08 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13608 battles
  • 1,779
  • Member since:
    02-01-2012

View PostKyphe, on 26 July 2013 - 01:34 PM, said:

Strange that I have never been able to find any Penetration data, not even the navy, who tend towards multi role in most systems.
I have also read reports of the Anti tank role of the bofors being hampered by a lack of AP though HE rounds proved exceptional against infantry and lighter vehicles.
Though the simple explanation would be acquiring US AP ammunition in limited amounts I suppose.
I have found statements referring to documentation for semi armor piercing round made by the British with 25mm of pen 30 degrees, 1300 yards
Ofc its easy to see how the penetration capability of the 40mm and the 2pdr soon became obsolete against German tanks and the bofors gun would only be useful against light armor for much of the war anyway.
The 3.7in in the AA configuration also had a theoretical AT role but in practice it just did not happen with a couple of exceptions.
Mostly I believe due to the cumbersome nature of the mountings of both guns.
though self propelled bofors had an active ground fire role

Officially it would seem that Britain developed the SAP round in early 41 and the AP later, but AP rounds were issued in 1940 during the invasion scares, Bofors themselves manufactured and marketed an AP round from 1937 so maybe some of those stocks were bought.

Most penetration data for the 40mm AP fired from the L60 I have seen are around the 50mm @600 m mark which tallies with US testing against the Panther with Bofors penetrating the Panthers 50mm side and turret side armour at 600m

Quote

"Artillery of the World" (first edition), Christopher Foss, Ian Allan, 1974
Claims the 40mm M1 (US L56 version, the UK version was L/60) could pentrate 50mm at 30deg at 900yds.

"British & American Artillery of World War 2", Ian V. Hogg, A&AP, 1978.
Claims the US M18A1 AP ammo could penetrate homogenous armour at 0deg: 52mm at 500yds, 42mm at 1000yds





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users