Piat penetration and tigers

[Pupu Mr. Panda]

Is it normal that piat wasn't able to penetrate tiger with 3 direct hits from building next to tiger? I thought that piat with their trajectory would be easily able to penetrate tiger from above, but it just bounce 3-4 shoots...
Also its made really low supression on enemy tank, it wasn't even 50% of bar. I would rather be scared when AT rocket hit me 4 times from close range.
Current meta for some axis tank division is to wait till B phase and roll out enemy with armored push into cities or on one point, so there is even no chance of defence in town if you can't even stop tanks from driving trought city, as you won't supress them and penetrate them.

[acur1231]

Messaggio originale di Andariel:

Messaggio originale di Aodhgan:

The PIAT should be able to penetrate fairly readily from the sides and rear. However, the Tiger I's front and turret armor are right at the theoretical limit for the PIAT. The big problems with the PIAT were accuracy and reliability (something like 1 in 4 dud rate).

The problem of the PIAT was, that you needed a "perfect" hit so that the charge was able to ignite. Because of the used spring the charge got a irregular flight (little bit like a bumblebee), thats the reason of bad accuracy at higher distances (greater than 30 yards) and inclined hits at the target (no ignite).
The PIAT was in normal cases not able to hit the upper armor of a tank, because it was not flying like a mortarcharge (the starter mechanism was like a mortar). For hitting a tank you had to aim nearly horizontal or some degrees down, the charge had the bad habit to fall out of the startertube and to explode. Because of this, after war training with hot PIAT was restricted.
The PIAT was also used for streetfighting against infantry. Shoot through a window it was able to hit 2 of 10 targets inside the room.
Further use was like a mortar (45 degree up) with a range up to 350 meters against infantry.

I think you are talking about the original PIAT prototype that had serious issues with the bomblet going off. However, this was mostly fixed by D-Day and the push into Germany. The PIAT was a fairly good house clearing and bunker busting weapon, like most HEAT weapons(since they have fairly powerful HE rounds).

The PIATs issues with aiming are already represented in game as they have a much lower chance to hit. However, the PIAT most often hit the top of the tank, as it was a weapon that fired upwards. It would be hard to hit the front with it. As Andreal mentioned above, the PIAT was indeed ment to be fired from a prone position, another advantage over the Bazooka and the Panzerfaust/Panzerschrek, in which the firer must kneel or stand to fire most of the time, due to the flat trajectory of the rocket propelled HEAT weapons. This is a further incentive to give the PIAT a very big stealth buff(maybe it should not get detected unless spotted normally, and fires without giving away its position, like when you see mortar or artillery rounds being fired, so all the German player will see is the bomblet appearing from the bush it was fired from, and must manually target that area). After all, the PIAT has no backblast, very little noise, and can be fired will prone, unlike the Bazooka and Panzershreck. I think it should get the highest penetration of all the HE weapons, be invisible while firing, but remain as inaccurate as it is now(it misses all the time, I have seen my PIATers missing 2 to 3 shots in a row all the time, while ny Bazookas and Panzerschrecks always seem to hit first time). That way, the PIAT will be a unique AT weapon, trading range and accuracy for penetrating power and stealth.

Interestingly enough, the PIAT was the only Hand-Held AT weapon that could be fired indoors without a chance of killing the firer or his squadmates with the backblast. When operated well, the PIAT could kill enemy tanks very well, as seen in Operation Market Garden, when the British airborne managed to knock out a huge number and variety of German vehicles with them, especially in Arnhem itself.

[meanderthal]

For a historical example of what the PIAT, in the hands of a courageous (or crazy) individual, could achieve, read about the exploits of Major Robert Cain.

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/articles/major-cain-the-one-man-tank-destroyer-who-received-a-vc-at-arnhem.html

[acur1231]

Or the Canadian who took out 3 Panthers with a PIAT, then took his SMG and killed a bunch of German infantry. He won a VC for that.

[Andariel]

Messaggio originale di acur1231:

I think you are talking about the original PIAT prototype that had serious issues with the bomblet going off. However, this was mostly fixed by D-Day and the push into Germany.

No, I am talking from the regular PIAT, the serious issues were going on after war, so the training with hot PIAT was restricted (in the original paper they mentioned it was forbitten).

Messaggio originale di acur1231:

However, the PIAT most often hit the top of the tank, as it was a weapon that fired upwards. It would be hard to hit the front with it.

No, that is wrong, it was not able to hit the top of the tank beside it was fired from above of a tank. Look this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJPZX9QtXAQ

Messaggio originale di acur1231:

As Andreal mentioned above, the PIAT was indeed ment to be fired from a prone position, another advantage over the Bazooka and the Panzerfaust/Panzerschrek, in which the firer must kneel or stand to fire most of the time, due to the flat trajectory of the rocket propelled HEAT weapons.

Thats also wrong, all Infantry AT-weapons were able to be fired in lying position. I know this from my experience in the army. But have a look at this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVNE2RUZTms

Bazooka minute 0:02
Panzerschreck minute 2:32
Panzerfaust minute 5:30

Messaggio originale di acur1231:

After all, the PIAT has no backblast, very little noise, and can be fired will prone, unlike the Bazooka and Panzershreck.

Thats true. But when hitting (or not) the tank you will got a lot of smoke. Look first video at 0:38. So the position of the AT infantry will be revealed. In the case of the PIAT more reasonable because the crew must be very near to the tank because of the bad accuracy.

Messaggio originale di acur1231:

I think it should get the highest penetration of all the HE weapons, be invisible while firing, but remain as inaccurate as it is now(it misses all the time,

Why the highest HE? The PIAT had a warhead with 1,3 kg, Panzerschreck 2,4 -3,3 kg, Bazooka 1,5 kg, Panzerfaust 3,3 kg. Lowest mass and highest HE?

[acur1231]

Why, because it hits top armour. I know you are one of those strange Wehrboos who believe that the Germans should have won, but you do not need to rubbish every piece of allied kit, especially one that managed to kill King Tigers.

[Ulater]

Messaggio originale di author:

Why, because it hits top armour.

No, it does not.

With its muzzle velocity, effective range and the overall complete ineffectivity of HEAT ammo striking at angles you suggest, I doubt very much it was typically used as indirect fire weapon.

And considering that direct impact weapon like Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck have significantly lower muzzle velocity, I doubt PIAT was ever used in a typical situation in any other way than aiming and firing directly at visible armor of the enemy.

[acur1231]

Messaggio originale di Ulater:

Messaggio originale di author:

Why, because it hits top armour.

No, it does not.

With its muzzle velocity, effective range and the overall complete ineffectivity of HEAT ammo striking at angles you suggest, I doubt very much it was typically used as indirect fire weapon.

And considering that direct impact weapon like Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck have significantly lower muzzle velocity, I doubt PIAT was ever used in a typical situation in any other way than aiming and firing directly at visible armor of the enemy.

It works like a mortar. Even when you see the target and fire at it, the bomblet still goes on an extremely high trajectory and lands on the roof.

[Andariel]

Messaggio originale di acur1231:

Why, because it hits top armour. I know you are one of those strange Wehrboos who believe that the Germans should have won, but you do not need to rubbish every piece of allied kit, especially one that managed to kill King Tigers.

Sure, next time you will tell me that I am writing from the dark side of the moon. I am very fine with the outcome of the war otherwise I would have a cerviobrachialsyndrom because of running around with a stiff arm.

For killing a Kingtiger from 20 yards you will not need a PIAT, you also can use a bottle Glenfiddich Gran Reserva. Ok thats a waste, you also can use a bottle Wyborowa, and dont forget the Ronson.

[Andariel]

Messaggio originale di acur1231:

Messaggio originale di Ulater:

No, it does not.

With its muzzle velocity, effective range and the overall complete ineffectivity of HEAT ammo striking at angles you suggest, I doubt very much it was typically used as indirect fire weapon.

And considering that direct impact weapon like Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck have significantly lower muzzle velocity, I doubt PIAT was ever used in a typical situation in any other way than aiming and firing directly at visible armor of the enemy.

It works like a mortar. Even when you see the target and fire at it, the bomblet still goes on an extremely high trajectory and lands on the roof.

They didnt had Swingfire in WW2. The inducement was like a mortar but that doesnt mean the trajectory is like this. Btw. nothing mentioned about that behavior in "Small Arms Training, Volume 1, Pamphlet No.24, Infantry, Anti-Tank (PIAT), 1943"

[Sev]

Dont forget the sights of the PIAT even dont allow to use it like a mortat, you would shoot guessimating, which is a contradiction to your cited manual: point IV of the 5 points to consider for the PIAT operator: iv: The number of bombs carried will be limited; it is important, therefore, to get the enemy vehicle well within range to make certain of a `kill`.
Ammo is limited but yeah lets shoot blindly in a high arc without sights.....

Or if it strikes from above why is it according to point iii:
"The desirability of shooting enemy AFV from the flank or rear."
so important, if i hit the topdeck the angle of the enemy AFV is totaly unimportant.

In short its rubbish.

also on a side note it will be interesting to see how 75mm of penetration are sufficient against the armor on the KT:

Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf.B Armor
(slope in degrees from the vertical)
Turret
Gun mantlet: 150 mm @ 13°
Front: 110 mm @ 10°
After 51st Turret: 180 mm @ 10°
Side: 80 mm @ 21°
Rear: 80 mm @ 20°
Roof: 25/40/25 mm @ 50°
After 51st Turret: 40 mm
Hull and Superstructure
Driver's Front Plate (Glacis): 150 mm @ 50°
Lower Hull Front: 100 mm @ 50°
Side: 80 mm @ 25°
Rear: 80 mm @ 30°
Roof: 40 mm
Belly; Forward: 40 mm
Belly, Aft: 25 mm
Source: JENTZ, Thomas L.; Germany's Tiger Tanks - VK 45.02 to Tiger II
ISBN 0-7643-0224-8

Further topkek about you have to kneel or stand with Bazooka and Panzerschreck:
http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/bazooka/bazooka-operation-m1a1.html
http://www.bergflak.com/psuse.html
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kIm7nOe_Sag/0.jpg
https://fjm44.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/panzerfaust-manual_9.jpg

Guess we have to re-write history because it was clearly not possible to shoot those weapons from a prone position and the soldiers were at that time too dumb to angle away from the weapons end in a 30° angle like they nowadays do to avoid the backblast while the successors of the PIAT rule supreme as the best anti tank weapon today....oh wait....

[Ulater]

Messaggio originale di author:

It works like a mortar. Even when you see the target and fire at it, the bomblet still goes on an extremely high trajectory and lands on the roof.

It fired the projectiles on mortar principle.

Bomblet will not go on an extremely high trajectory, when:

- you are firing it with 130m/s velocity from 100 yards, and according to you, at something that is higher than shooter's eyes (top armor), because most of the time, shooter was bracing the gun at ground level.

- again, bomblet would be impacting at such a sharp angle if targeted at top armor, that fuze will not engage. Modern fuzes would not engage, and if they would, the jet will bounce.

- no, PIAT crews fired directly, and not like some retarded mortar without sights. Which means they fired at vertical or sloped surfaces, not horizontal ones they mostly did not have in line of sight.

[Dogmeat]

Im curious in SD if tanks have a top armour rating - for bombs arty and some piat hits

Also its strange that ap , bazooka panzerfaust and piat rounds cant be used vs inf in buildings and bunkers as they historically were