About 10.5cm Tiger II

[Doctor Rexarius]

I've been wondering for a while now. Why is the 10.5cm L/68 cannon's stock performance poorer than the 88mm KwK 43? With the Panzergranate 39/43, the long 88 can penetrate 232mm of steel at 100 meters and 204mm at 1000 meters. It releases 5,000,000 joules of kinetic energy, which translates into 5 megajoules, upon impact against any kind of armor. (10 kilograms of weight with a flight speed of 1000 meters per second)

By comparison, the stock Panzergranate of the 10.5 centimeter L/68 cannon can penetrate 210mm at 100 meters and 166mm at 1000 meters. In addition to suffering a greater loss of penetration than the long 88 (28mm for the long 88 versus 44mm for the 10.5), why is its penetration value considerably lower? The stock Panzergranate for the L/68 weighs 14 kilograms and flies at a speed of 900 meters per second. Upon impact, it releases 5,670,000 joules of kinetic energy, or 5.67 megajoules. That's a considerably higher amount of energy and should translate into higher penetration values, even if the tip of the Panzergranate is "softer" than that of the Panzergranate 39/43.

Now, let's compare the Panzergranate 39/43 to the Panzergranate 39 of the L/68. The values for the long 88 are given, but we can now discuss the values of the Panzergranate 39. 244mm of armor penetration at 100 meters and 217mm of armor penetration at 1000 meters. It does not suffer "as much" from penetration loss over distance as the long 88, but it seems to have "roughly similar" penetration values to the long 88. Why is that? The Panzergranate 39 is a 16 kilogram shell flying at 1005 meters per second and hitting against armor with 8,080,200 joules, or 8.08 megajoules, of kinetic energy. That is 62.5% more energy released against a target by the Panzergranate 39 in comparison to the Panzergranate 39/43. Why does it perform similar to the long 88 when we have such a tremendous increase of kinetic energy? It does not make sense.

Where did they get these penetration values for the 10.5cm L/68 from anyway? I'm genuinely interested, I'm not trying to turn this into an overpowered tank.

TL;DR - why does the 10.5 centimeter perform similarly to the 88mm KwK 43 found on Tiger II (P), Tiger II (H), Panther II and several other tanks when the 10.5 centimeter gun's shells release more kinetic energy by a considerable margin? What's Gaijin's reason for this?

[Eftwyrd]

not 100% certain here because the 105 tiger is made up but i assume its 105mm gun is based on the 105mm flak 38 which was a competitor to the 88mm flak 18 to which it had similar performance so id guess thats gaijins baseline

as to its performance against armour im just going to go out on a limb here and guess its something to do with the shell distributing its energy over a greater area of the targets armour on impact (~60% more energy spread over a ~40% larger cross section)

[My longest ree ever]

i guess it has to do something with the 7cm never was made, while the h and p was and saw combat, but just a guess

[Doctor Rexarius]

Originally posted by Eftwyrd:

not 100% certain here because the 105 tiger is made up but i assume its 105mm gun is based on the 105mm flak 38 which was a competitor to the 88mm flak 18 to which it had similar performance

as to its performance against armour im just going to go out on a limb here and guess its something to do with the shell distributing its energy over a greater area of the targets armour on impact

I don't think so, because the cannon itself has no relation to the 10.5 cm FlaK 38. The 10.5 cm FlaK 38 was only 63 calibers long, the proposed upgrade to the Tiger II had a 68 caliber long barrel. The cannon itself was never accepted due to its lack of use by the Heer itself. The 10.5 centimeter L/68 cannon was certainly a real gun, just that its actual performance is unknown for the most part.

Doubtful. There is only so much energy you can achieve from a certain caliber shell, so eventually you move on to a larger shell just to get that additional mass and powder to propel the shell forward. Case in point, modern attempts to recreate main battle tank turrets to accomodate larger guns for greater anti-armor capabilities. In addition, armor piercing shells have sharp tips to direct all of their kinetic energy to a single point. This helps concentrate the energy to a single point as opposed to a large area. All of that culminated in APDS and APFSDS shells - ultra-dense needles, basically.

[Doctor Rexarius]

Originally posted by My longest ree ever:

i guess it has to do something with the 7cm never was made, while the h and p was and saw combat, but just a guess

You're not wrong, but the thing is: why is the 10.5 centimeter gun underperforming when it should be performing better [than the long 88] given the shell details that they've provided to us in the game?

[Flying Fish]

It might be a higher amount of energy but the shell is bigger right? So doesnt the energy spread out more resulting in less pen?

[Eftwyrd]

Originally posted by Shadow Hunter:

Originally posted by Eftwyrd:

not 100% certain here because the 105 tiger is made up but i assume its 105mm gun is based on the 105mm flak 38 which was a competitor to the 88mm flak 18 to which it had similar performance

as to its performance against armour im just going to go out on a limb here and guess its something to do with the shell distributing its energy over a greater area of the targets armour on impact

I don't think so, because the cannon itself has no relation to the 10.5 cm FlaK 38. The 10.5 cm FlaK 38 was only 63 calibers long, the proposed upgrade to the Tiger II had a 68 caliber long barrel. The cannon itself was never accepted due to its lack of use by the Heer itself. The 10.5 centimeter L/68 cannon was certainly a real gun, just that its actual performance is unknown for the most part.

Doubtful. There is only so much energy you can achieve from a certain caliber shell, so eventually you move on to a larger shell just to get that additional mass and powder to propel the shell forward. Case in point, modern attempts to recreate main battle tank turrets to accomodate larger guns for greater anti-armor capabilities. In addition, armor piercing shells have sharp tips to direct all of their kinetic energy to a single point. This helps concentrate the energy to a single point as opposed to a large area. All of that culminated in APDS and APFSDS shells - ultra-dense needles, basically.

but thats exactly the point, the impact area of the projectile scales with the square of the radius and those modern 120mm apfsds are subcalibur projectiles, they concentrate the greater energy of the gun and extremely dense round in a projectile with only a 30mm cross section, as oposed to the 105mm cross section of the tigers rounds. the ~60% extra energy the 105mm generates over the 88 is spread over a ~40% larger cross section

as to the 'sharp tip' that is only the actual penetrator, the shells are actually tipped with a cap to normalize the shell against the armour first. with just a simple AP shell they are liable to deflect otherwise. and even after that the wholewidth of the round still has to force its way through the armour after its sharp tip. going back to your 'needle' apfsds they get around the problem because aparently with the forces and extremely high densities involved they act more like a fluid collision

[Doctor Rexarius]

Originally posted by Eftwyrd:

Originally posted by Shadow Hunter:

I don't think so, because the cannon itself has no relation to the 10.5 cm FlaK 38. The 10.5 cm FlaK 38 was only 63 calibers long, the proposed upgrade to the Tiger II had a 68 caliber long barrel. The cannon itself was never accepted due to its lack of use by the Heer itself. The 10.5 centimeter L/68 cannon was certainly a real gun, just that its actual performance is unknown for the most part.

Doubtful. There is only so much energy you can achieve from a certain caliber shell, so eventually you move on to a larger shell just to get that additional mass and powder to propel the shell forward. Case in point, modern attempts to recreate main battle tank turrets to accomodate larger guns for greater anti-armor capabilities. In addition, armor piercing shells have sharp tips to direct all of their kinetic energy to a single point. This helps concentrate the energy to a single point as opposed to a large area. All of that culminated in APDS and APFSDS shells - ultra-dense needles, basically.

but thats exactly the point, the impact area of the projectile scales with the square of the radius and those modern 120mm apfsds are subcalibur projectiles, they concentrate the greater energy of the gun and extremely dense round in a projectile with only a 30mm cross section, as oposed to the 105mm cross section of the tigers rounds. the ~60% extra energy the 105mm generates over the 88 is spread over a ~40% larger cross section

as to the 'sharp tip' that is only the actual penetrator, the shells are actually tipped with a cap to normalize the shell against the armour first. with just a simple AP shell they are liable to deflect otherwise. and even after that the wholewidth of the round still has to force its way through the armour after its sharp tip. going back to your 'needle' apfsds they get around the problem because aparently with the forces and extremely high densities involved they act more like a fluid collision

The diameter of a 105mm shell is only 16.19% larger at its widest point in comparison to the 88mm shell. While the shell itself, including the casing which contains the propellant, may be larger in general, it is not a dramatic increase. This 62.5% increase of kinetic energy released upon impact is not diminished sharply simply because the ballistic cap is bigger in size. The fact that this shell has greater kinetic energy to begin with is the implication itself that it should be able to penetrate thicker armor than it already can in the game.

As for sabot rounds: my bad, I completely forgot that APDS and APFSDS rounds were subcaliber rounds and that their shells detach after they're fired. But still, APCBC rounds like the Panzergranate 39 still feature a somewhat sharp tip that directs the impact force into that area.

That aside, I find it hard to believe that the difference between the long 88 and the 105mm L/68 is a negligible ~12 millimeters, especially since the mass of the shells is considerably different and the speed varies, resulting in greater kinetic energy for the 105mm shell, not the 88mm shell.

[Doctor Rexarius]

I can accept that the stock Panzergranate (APHE) has lower penetration, it's not really that good for penetrating armor due to it not featuring a ballistic cap, but it's absurd about the Panzergranate 39 (APCBC) having a mere ~12 millimeter advantage.

[A Toaster]

all that dont matter now they said maybe its get removed form game

[Doctor Rexarius]

Originally posted by vipper998:

all that dont matter now they said maybe its get removed form game

Sadly, I think you're probably right. Once it's removed from the game's tech tree, they won't have to care about how it performs.

[Voryn Dagoth Ur]

Originally posted by vipper998:

all that dont matter now they said maybe its get removed form game

they better not remove it. If they are gonna remove project tanks they're gonna ahve to remove alotta tanks.

[Edelweiß-Krapfen]

Originally posted by Shadow Hunter:

Originally posted by Eftwyrd:

not 100% certain here because the 105 tiger is made up but i assume its 105mm gun is based on the 105mm flak 38 which was a competitor to the 88mm flak 18 to which it had similar performance

as to its performance against armour im just going to go out on a limb here and guess its something to do with the shell distributing its energy over a greater area of the targets armour on impact

I don't think so, because the cannon itself has no relation to the 10.5 cm FlaK 38. The 10.5 cm FlaK 38 was only 63 calibers long, the proposed upgrade to the Tiger II had a 68 caliber long barrel. The cannon itself was never accepted due to its lack of use by the Heer itself. The 10.5 centimeter L/68 cannon was certainly a real gun, just that its actual performance is unknown for the most part.

Doubtful. There is only so much energy you can achieve from a certain caliber shell, so eventually you move on to a larger shell just to get that additional mass and powder to propel the shell forward. Case in point, modern attempts to recreate main battle tank turrets to accomodate larger guns for greater anti-armor capabilities. In addition, armor piercing shells have sharp tips to direct all of their kinetic energy to a single point. This helps concentrate the energy to a single point as opposed to a large area. All of that culminated in APDS and APFSDS shells - ultra-dense needles, basically.

So they are removing a tank, that existed, with a gun that existed, just because it was never put together, and it was planned nice logic xD

[7ux0n0]

Originally posted by Dagoth Ur:

Originally posted by vipper998:

all that dont matter now they said maybe its get removed form game

they better not remove it. If they are gonna remove project tanks they're gonna ahve to remove alotta tanks.

well, its was pretty much only a filler tan kthat they made up so they could squeeze in some content - though it is going to be still there for players whove got it unlocked - its jsut not goign to be available for purchase anymore

[A Toaster]

Originally posted by Dagoth Ur:

Originally posted by vipper998:

all that dont matter now they said maybe its get removed form game

they better not remove it. If they are gonna remove project tanks they're gonna ahve to remove alotta tanks.

the panther 2 too is get removed

[Doctor Rexarius]

Originally posted by ☆ ILuxx ツ © ☆:

Originally posted by Shadow Hunter:

I don't think so, because the cannon itself has no relation to the 10.5 cm FlaK 38. The 10.5 cm FlaK 38 was only 63 calibers long, the proposed upgrade to the Tiger II had a 68 caliber long barrel. The cannon itself was never accepted due to its lack of use by the Heer itself. The 10.5 centimeter L/68 cannon was certainly a real gun, just that its actual performance is unknown for the most part.

Doubtful. There is only so much energy you can achieve from a certain caliber shell, so eventually you move on to a larger shell just to get that additional mass and powder to propel the shell forward. Case in point, modern attempts to recreate main battle tank turrets to accomodate larger guns for greater anti-armor capabilities. In addition, armor piercing shells have sharp tips to direct all of their kinetic energy to a single point. This helps concentrate the energy to a single point as opposed to a large area. All of that culminated in APDS and APFSDS shells - ultra-dense needles, basically.

So they are removing a tank, that existed, with a gun that existed, just because it was never put together, and it was planned nice logic xD

Germany needs to be nerfed into the ground, that's why. They are raising German repair costs into the ceiling, and they want to leave a gap in 7.0. A massive gap.