You are not logged in.


Friday, January 16th 2009, 3:47pm

APCR or HVAP question

Anyone here know how to calculate armor penetration for this ammunition?

I was thinking of issuing subcaliber ammunition to my artillery instead of acquiring new expensive AT guns


Friday, January 16th 2009, 3:53pm

At this point, they really shouldn't be invented yet, except for the squeeze-bore stuff used by Gehrlich guns. Those rounds were reactions to thicker armor appearing than AT weapons could handle.

Also, field artillery pieces are a lot bigger and easier to see (in general) than AT guns, making them less useful in the role. Unless you're using relatively small artillery pieces, like the Russian 76.2mm guns, anyway, those weren't much bigger than a 76mm AT gun.


Friday, January 16th 2009, 4:18pm

You now that they were to be issued to the French 75mm mle 1897? Any way the reasoning is that Persia has a lot of surplus artillery and no AT guns larger than 20mm so it makes more sense equip the artillery with a AT round rather than equipping the Gendarmerie (which is a heavily armed Security force anyway) or Guard with a new AT gun (which we has seen in Hammer 36 they were lacking in).
I could of course use the "theory is known" excuse used by some players to introduce the HEAT round way to soon but that seems odd to introduce a technology that is only tinkered with by the Swiss at this time.


Friday, January 16th 2009, 4:27pm

Maybe 35-40% better at 100m, 20-25% at 500m and 0-10% at 1000m, less after that.

Its not really subcalibre ammunition. Its a full calibre light alloy shell with hardened steel or tungsten penetrating core.

Got to train your artillery guys to shoot at things they can see and are probably moving.


Friday, January 16th 2009, 4:47pm

At this period, if you're using the French 75 (wasn't sure which gun you were wanting to do this with, could have been your 130mm Skodas), you could use the Polish AP rounds: they're rated here at a 6.8 kg projectile at 570 m/s, or something like the US M72 AP and M61 APC rounds for the same gun (haven't found weights and velocities for them), which were capable of penetrating 2.8-3.2" of armor at 500 yards. Going to a lighter-weight shell will help up close penetration, but it will drop off pretty fast, given the short tube on the 1897 you're probably not going to gain much by doing that (not to mention that 2.8"-3.2" will punch most 1937 WW tanks without a problem).


Friday, January 16th 2009, 4:56pm

I was thinking of using the 75mm Mountain gun and possible the 100mm Howitzer, the Skodas can if forced to take out most tanks with HE


Friday, January 16th 2009, 5:06pm

Noticed that its actually a 76mm gun with even lower muzzle velocity than mle.97 so its probably a non starter.

Time to go shopping for a replacement...


Friday, January 16th 2009, 5:10pm

Well, if it's a mountain gun, it's probably not going to be called on to fight tanks very often, and when it does it will either be at VERY short range, or it could likely use an altitude advantage to fire on weak deck armor. Have to admit, anti-tank capability isn't something I'm overly concerned about in the mountain artillery.


Friday, January 16th 2009, 5:15pm

Well unless I want to use the Bofors AA guns its the only ~75mm guns I got, not necessarily used as Mountain artillery.

The 8 cm kanon vz. 30 looks like a suitable candidate being Czech and 76mm and available...


Friday, January 16th 2009, 5:24pm

It should be solid enough. If you give it an AP round, the US M72 for the M4A1 Sherman should give you an idea of the capability, they look pretty similar.


Friday, January 16th 2009, 5:28pm

Dont ya occupy the Czechs before they are delivered :D


Saturday, January 17th 2009, 5:53pm

Funny I'm thinking about an AT version of the French 75mm mle 1897 for Argentina. At least the improved 50cal version I'm now using. I'll just use a 75mm round, no fancy stuff just large holes!


Saturday, January 17th 2009, 6:47pm

Thats likely what I'll use as well, seeing as most Atlantean guns are based off of French designs.


Saturday, January 17th 2009, 7:20pm


Originally posted by Hood
Funny I'm thinking about an AT version of the French 75mm mle 1897 for Argentina. At least the improved 50cal version I'm now using. I'll just use a 75mm round, no fancy stuff just large holes!

In my it will be a fieldgun with AT capacity another thing that I was thinking of was having Skoda modernize the 18lb guns with something like the OTL British Mk.5 carriage and APCR and APHE munitions ( perhaps contacting arms dealers for more guns)

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Vukovlad" (Jan 17th 2009, 7:21pm)


Sunday, January 18th 2009, 8:01am

I'll be going with the French 75 as field gun/AT gun/Tank weapon as well, development on the last two is just beginning this year in Poland and Romania, and ive thought of planning deliveries for 1939.


Sunday, January 18th 2009, 12:00pm

Basically I'm going to use the longer 50 cal barrel Argentina is now fitting to its 75mm guns allied to a new carriage. Really a field gun mount is too high for proper concealment. Might need a tad more traverse too but not so much elevation. Also weight is an issue if you need your troops to move the thing by hand rapidly.
I guess a muzzle brake is also needed.


Sunday, January 18th 2009, 12:15pm

Heh, if you put a 50 caliber barrel on the old 1897 and expect to actually use it to it's full potential, you'll probably have to replace the breach along with the carriage. Essentially you're looking at the Russian F-22USV with the barrel of the ZIS-3 or the ZIS-3 by the time you're done.


Sunday, January 18th 2009, 1:38pm

Germany, for now, will stick with the new 50mm/60 AT gun (the historical PaK 38 ). If it looks to be ineffective in the future, then a 75mm gun of some stripe will be adopted, to be followed by the historical progression (88mm, 128mm) if necessary.. The 50mm is expected to be sufficient for most tanks, the gun is only 65% of the weight of a ZIS-3, and only 3.4 feet tall (compared to the ZIS-2's 4.5 feet).

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Hrolf Hakonson" (Jan 18th 2009, 1:38pm)