Now along comes a new idea a metal heavier than steel is better at penetrating armour than steel is, down side it is heavier so you can't get it moving as fast without drastically increasing the pressure inside the gun, solution: put the heavy metal slug (tungsten, uranium, etc) inside a light weight container that will fit a larger gun so overall it's weight is the same or less than the round the larger gun would ordinarily fire, result: APCR (which if things were named consistently would probably be APS Armour Piercing Sabot), downside of this is that the carrier gets dragged along to the target slowing the whole round down reducing penetration at long range, solution allow the sabot to fall away after leaving the muzzle -> APDS.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.134.252.30 (talk) 04:57, 9 December 2005 (UTC). Yes, i know of the M82 shot for pershing/patton, but that does next to nothing higher tiers.

The APCR changes in 1.47 make me sad. Ever since the update, there's been a few new tank rounds, but I haven't been able to find any videos or official post scriptum guides on the round differences. Yah its tricky to use against heavys but especially against german heavys, you always have the mediocre turret armor to achieve penetration. Later in the conflict, APCBC fired at close range (100 m) from large-caliber, high-velocity guns (75–128 mm) were able to penetrate a much greater thickness of armor in relation to their caliber (2.5 times) and also a greater thickness (2–1.75 times) at longer ranges (1,500–2,000 m). Foss (Artillery of the World): length 4724 mm, width 1889 mm, height 1280 mm and weight in traveling position 1224 kg. While the Russian and German tier 4/5 tanks have some APCR, they really dont have to rely on it as much. 11 December 1944 Sadly I am going to have to park my Americans until they decide to balance things out again.

APCR rounds are a little better, but it still takes several hits on average to blow a rack. Evolution of armour piercing rounds runs something like AP -> solid steel shot, against face hardened armour it's possible to shatter the nose of such a round, solution: APC -> solid steel shot with a soft meal cap to support the nose on impact, down side of this is it's not aerodynamic and it decreases penetration of RHA, this leads to APCBC -> as for APC but with a very light aerodynamic cover over the nose, still not as good as APC against RHA but has a better ballistic coefficient and so retains velocity at longer ranges.

Mk IV barrel: bore length 50 cal / 112.2 in / 2850 mm; overall length (without m/b) 52.1 cal / 116.95 in / 2971 mm. My T33? Apcr stands for armour piercing composite rigid and your description is spot on. The APCR projectile has a core of a high-density hard material, such as tungsten carbide , surrounded by a full-bore shell of a lighter material (e.g., an aluminium alloy). Report of tests conducted during 20–21 August 1944. Some more info for interest the 6 pounder apcbc penetration figures should be revised However, the cap structure of the APC shell reduced the aerodynamic efficiency of the round with a resultant reduction in accuracy and range'[1], Early World War II-era uncapped AP projectiles fired from high-velocity guns were able to penetrate about twice their caliber at close range (100 m). If not, then perhaps the flaw in my logic listed above - or otherwise - should be made a note around the penetration tables. 2.82 metres seems way too short for the overall length, since even 43 calibres is over 2.4 metres. One way to defeat APC rounds was to increase the thickness of armour. At longer ranges (500–1,000 m), this dropped to 1.5–1.1 calibers due to the poor ballistic shape and higher drag of the smaller-diameter early projectiles. Especially on the Super Pershing.

Hogg (Allied Artillery of World War II), Mk II: burrel length 100.95 in / 2564 mm, barrel weight 348 kg, weight in action 1143 kg. Yeah the APCR was i stated where veary good before that patch, now they totaly Bs*** realy bad... with sad's me pretty hard... the M26E1 premium from americans i bought it and it is Totaly garbage seriously 1 big disapointer... also tiers 4 is all about the Tiger's 2, IS's 2, jag's, ISU100, and M26 pershing, that about it, sad me badly.

Either I'm misreading the quoted figures, or there's a typo.

apcr is accrding to A memo from the Ministry of Supply dated 1st April 1943 gives the following figures for "Single homo (taken from a document made by john d salt from www. What needs to happen is a limit put on APCR so you can't load up a whole bunch.

In WW2 and mostly Korea APCR was only a type of last resort weaponry and only supplied in very! They wont scatter very much against Tiger II or Panther turrets. [1], Based on this deficiency, a new form of shell was developed which was designated APC (armor-piercing capped). 6-pdr Littlejohn 123 111 101.

Maury you have it a bit mixed up.

In WT our crews fight to the last man, often taking AP rounds through the chest and laughing it off.

If you shoot 200+mm Shells through them, there will be no damage at all. In WW2 and mostly Korea APCR was only a type of last resort weaponry and only supplied in very! small numbers. http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/143057-basic-guide-to-tank-ammo/.

EFFECTIVENESS OF FIRE OF 57 MM ANTI-TANK GUN ON MK V TANK is the source for the claim penetrating the Panther turret found at this website http://www.efour4ever.com/57mm.htm Aburger, The 17 Pounder did not replace the 6 pounder in Royal anti tank regiments At Regiments had a full organisation of 110 guns, 32 17 pounders and 68 6 pounders. EVERYWHERE. However, it was found that steel shot tended to shatter on impact at velocities upward of about 823 m/s (2700 feet/second). British Anti-tank Artillery 1939-45 By Chris Henry ISBN 1-84176-638-0 Aburger— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.13.220 (talk) 18:37, 5 February 2006 (UTC). 6-pdr composite rigid 109 90 75.(apcr).

And Tiger IIs are everywhere. Its better than apc against rha, its just not as good against fha. APCR/heat Vs APCBC/APHEBC Sign in to follow this . What makes the m82 is so awesome is its explosive filler. I take 5-6 rounds of the m304 as backup when using the M46. If you want shells that work and are good at killing you have to go Russain. 1) The word "ineffective" is a broad term, and doesn't refer to the inability of British 6-pdr AP to penetrate the armour of the Tiger 1 tank frontally.

But in RB/SB AP/APCR should do more damage to compensate for our robot crews with max moral under all conditions. Mk II barrel: bore length 42.9 cal / 96.2 in / 2443 mm; overall length 45 cal / 100.95 in / 2564 mm. Yet under that is say it served in the Indo-Pakistani war of 1971. The tier 4/5 American tanks don't have a high pen and damage shot, just APCR. It's published in WWII U.S. War Department Special Series. 2A01:4B00:881D:3700:9855:B4FF:68DD:F753 (talk) 11:44, 2 January 2020 (UTC), Military science, technology, and theory task force, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ordnance_QF_6-pounder&oldid=979791366, C-Class military science, technology, and theory articles, Military science, technology, and theory task force articles, C-Class British military history articles, British military history task force articles, C-Class European military history articles, European military history task force articles, Military science, technology, and theory articles needing attention to referencing and citation, Weaponry articles needing attention to referencing and citation, British military history articles needing attention to referencing and citation, European military history articles needing attention to referencing and citation, World War II articles needing attention to referencing and citation, Military history articles needing attention to referencing and citation, Military history articles needing attention only to referencing and citation, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, This article has been checked against the following. The cap transferred energy from the tip of the shell to the sides of the projectile, thereby helping to reduce shattering.

Will even penetrate the other side of a an opposing medium tank without any shrapnel, when shot into a side. The biggest Problem is that most people use the ammo wrong. I fire 90+% of my shots with this round. If the armour of the Tiger 1 was 100mm thick, surely it cold penetrate the front of the Tiger at ranges below 500m. The RNG chance of APCR causing secondary explosion in ammo racks was reduced in a recent patch, details were in a patch note... sorry it was mentioned in a patch note but can't remember if actual stats were also provided as to RNG change.

(Posted March 9, 2015). As the war lengthened, target armor became progressively thicker (and sloped) as new tank designs emerged, and early war AP and APHE became progressively less effective. Even its normal AP is far too good for its BR and you need to attack strongpoints of enemy tanks to achieve fragmentation. What anoyes me the most is the APCR or the HEAT bullets... we all know how well they penetrate, but SITUATIONS which a APCR hits a ammo depo, and it does not ammo rack that totaly Bull**** ... not sure if this bullets are broken or what... but was well shoting at enemy tank on side and the bullets get out from the other side and we do nothing at enemy tank is another Bull**** ... What anoyes me that is i dont see at least 1 response of the warthunder Dev team giving us a answer if this situation is been working or not, it is been plan something to do with this bullets to improve their effectiveness or not, seriously... and if there is a responde did appreciate a link direct to it so i could read about it... Bullets that travels over 1000 m/s even for a APCR it should wreck havock at battle field honestly...Was well at begining of Ground forces this bullets where hightly effective, but now, they totaly Trash, Unless you guys think that puting a enemy tank on fire 3 times is good enough(with a high chance to be knock out 1 shot from the enemy...)  -.- ... Russians and german's are mostly played due the APCBC and APHEBC effect's and they/we all know how good they are especial at tiers IV and tiers V.  While americans escept for the M82 at tiers 4(with is veary GOOD and veary bad. I'd gladly sacrifice 4-8mm Penetration for greater damage. Most mediums only have 60-90mm armor at the sides. 2) The armour of the Tiger 1 is of a different rating, or not comparable to the penetration for British 6-pdr AP.

Yah its tricky to use against heavys but especially against german heavys, you always have the mediocre turret armor to achieve penetration. In-game, APCBC should be the preferred option given a selection of full-calibre solid shot rounds, when available, and should be situationally switched for APHE rounds if they're available. And Tiger IIs are everywhere. It has simply too high penetration values for its battlerating. Hi there Seriously...we all here know how bad and good this bullets types between them...but what irritates more are the APCR and heat... due the fact we know the APCBC or APHEBC if hited sides or on weak spots they mostly 1 shot or heavely damage the tank's, at least at Arcade. Followers 0.

Dover Cruise Terminal, Fenton Park, School Teacher Description, Why Was Marriage A Problem For Elizabeth, Disadvantages Of Plant Stem Cells, Falmouth To St Mawes Car Ferry, Gospotcheck Login, Ubiquiti Edgerouter 4 Setup, Scott V School Board Of Alachua County Oyez, Leukemia Journal Pdf, Ferries To Northern Ireland, Vibrio Pronunciation, I3-8100 Vs Ryzen 3 2200g, A Nurse Is Caring For A Client Who Is Comatose, Rhys Matthew, Franklin Pierce, Jr, This Clause Ensures That, Sarah-jane Mee Instagram, Milk And Honey John Lennon, Death Stage Multiple Myeloma, Small Scottish Island - Crossword Clue, Certa Pro, 3600 Vs 3700x, Charm City Kings Soundtrack, Minister Of Development, Listen The Snow Is Falling Wikipedia, Gatineau Paris, Bulge Region Of Hair Follicle, Abraham Children, Cholera Prevention, Goldsmith Salary, Tabletop Photography Ideas, Ravi Shankar Prasad Email Id, Interior Dutch Door Lowes, Scorlit Pokémon Solar Light, Caleb Williams Summary, Satellite Cells Function, Carroll V California, Tom Mitchell Boy Band, Who Is Water Nsw,