Question for a friend, tank ammo

Alan Hume

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2013
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
157
Location
EDINBURGH
Country
llUnited Kingdom
A friend asked me today if I knew what kind of ammunition the North Koreans used in their T34's and SU76's
specifically did they use APCR rounds.

I had to be honest and admit I hadn't got a clue (and I've had no luck finding out) so I just wondered if anyone here would know at all?

thanks guys
 

Honosbinda

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
489
Reaction score
82
Location
Eastbourne Sussex UK
Country
ll
on the back of the counter, included with the Korean Module, the T34/85 has APCR 6 from 1945 on. I assume this includes the Korean war.

The SU 76 has APCR 7 from 1945.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,327
Reaction score
3,302
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
The next question is how much APCR, given that when the KPA kicked off the KW it didn't expect to meet much armoured opposition. First we must understand that with the exception of the early-mid war British, most WW2 armour went into battle with about 1/3 AP and 2/3 HE. This was simply because most firing was against soft targets, not other AFV. I have read a comment that the initial KPA loadout was lower in AP than normal. If that was true then expect APCR to be even less. That would likely have changed once they met heavier opposition than M24s.

Having said all that, I have yet to see a detailed documented loadout table or even references to same for the KPA, so loadouts are speculation. What I would guess is below '45 levels early on, rising to same or higher than '45 afterwards, especially for 76mm weapons which would have had difficulty in dealing with anything but the lightest armour anyway.

I must again emphasise that all the above is totally speculative.
 
Last edited:

Alan Hume

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2013
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
157
Location
EDINBURGH
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Thanks Paul, I passed on your comments to my friend (and invited him to come along to this thread)
very good points you make there
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,327
Reaction score
3,302
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
In terms of ASL, there is another telling thing. With US vehicles MMP gave them unlimited (A∞) APCR, with no changes from Soviet '45 figures for the KPA. That implies that MMP and developers couldn't find enough solid data to justify change the KPA allocations, unlike the US's.

Talking about T-34 ammo types, a standard loadout for a T-34 included 5 Shrapnel rounds. The various T-34 76mm guns had real WW1 style shrapnel rounds, the 85mm didn't, so I believe the 85mm were timed air burst rounds as would be used by the 85mm in it's AA version. For long range fire, I would treat them as standard HE. You could do special rules for shrapnel, I suppose, but I wouldn't really bother. One feature of Soviet (possibly others) shrapnel fusing was a "К" minimum time setting, which caused the shell to burst at about 40m from muzzle. The tactical effect was akin to having a canister round.
 

Alan Hume

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2013
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
157
Location
EDINBURGH
Country
llUnited Kingdom
In terms of ASL, there is another telling thing. With US vehicles MMP gave them unlimited (A∞) APCR, with no changes from Soviet '45 figures for the KPA. That implies that MMP and developers couldn't find enough solid data to justify change the KPA allocations, unlike the US's.

Talking about T-34 ammo types, a standard loadout for a T-34 included 5 Shrapnel rounds. The various T-34 76mm guns had real WW1 style shrapnel rounds, the 85mm didn't, so I believe the 85mm were timed air burst rounds as would be used by the 85mm in it's AA version. For long range fire, I would treat them as standard HE. You could do special rules for shrapnel, I suppose, but I wouldn't really bother. One feature of Soviet (possibly others) shrapnel fusing was a "К" minimum time setting, which caused the shell to burst at about 40m from muzzle. The tactical effect was akin to having a canister round.
Thanks Paul,
interesting point, it may well be that the developers couldn't find enough solid data, can't fault them for that though it must be very hard to find what is really some pretty obscure data to be sure.

Those shrapnel rounds do sound a lot like canister right enough, nasty.
 

Eagle4ty

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
3,910
Reaction score
1,519
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Even APDS is somewhat akin to a (albeit) small canister round as when the outer shell casing (the bits that stabilize the inner projectile) for the SABOT is torn away in flight they act as small shrapnel pieces traveling forward for up to several hundred meters. In our training we were taught to never fire SABOT over friendly troops unless we were well aware they were dug-in with overhead protection of at least 18" (get out them tape measures boys).
 

Alan Hume

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2013
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
157
Location
EDINBURGH
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Even APDS is somewhat akin to a (albeit) small canister round as when the outer shell casing (the bits that stabilize the inner projectile) for the SABOT is torn away in flight they act as small shrapnel pieces traveling forward for up to several hundred meters. In our training we were taught to never fire SABOT over friendly troops unless we were well aware they were dug-in with overhead protection of at least 18" (get out them tape measures boys).
WOAH'o_O that's pretty scary stuff
 

Bad Dice

Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2008
Messages
284
Reaction score
36
Location
Chico
Country
llUnited States
Official loadouts and actual loadouts can vary considerably, for period vehicles anyway. Modern tanks that store ammo in compartmentalized areas that are designed to be isolated from the crew in case of a penetrating hit are perhaps an exception, but expect to find the enterprising soldier of any army, if he or she can find a way, to store ammo in one's vehicle to one's desires. Some games (AH's Patton's Best comes to mind) even allow you as the commander to attempt to collect more ammo for your tank than might be authorized. I suspect strongly that something similar did and/or still does persist in any military of any nation.


BD
 

Alan Hume

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2013
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
157
Location
EDINBURGH
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Official loadouts and actual loadouts can vary considerably, for period vehicles anyway. Modern tanks that store ammo in compartmentalized areas that are designed to be isolated from the crew in case of a penetrating hit are perhaps an exception, but expect to find the enterprising soldier of any army, if he or she can find a way, to store ammo in one's vehicle to one's desires. Some games (AH's Patton's Best comes to mind) even allow you as the commander to attempt to collect more ammo for your tank than might be authorized. I suspect strongly that something similar did and/or still does persist in any military of any nation.


BD
Very good point. So essentially there is no real way to pin it down, it could vary from tank to tank. I'll have to let my friend know.
 

Bad Dice

Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2008
Messages
284
Reaction score
36
Location
Chico
Country
llUnited States
You'll find a lot of folks who will tell you that I'm flat wrong, and 'that's not how we did it', and so on. That's as may be, if you're going strictly by official policy. I'm not, and let's all remember that we're playing a combat simulation. Things change in combat. You become a lot more creative. You have to; and along with the truth the first casualty of war is 'official policy'. For that matter, even in peacetime there are individuals looking for a way to get it done that can either ignore official policy, or circumvent it, or use it to their advantage, or something.

But yeah, for my money there's no way to pin it down definitively. If you find a good reason to give your tanks unlimited APCR (or whatever), go for it.

BD
 

Alan Hume

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2013
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
157
Location
EDINBURGH
Country
llUnited Kingdom
You'll find a lot of folks who will tell you that I'm flat wrong, and 'that's not how we did it', and so on. That's as may be, if you're going strictly by official policy. I'm not, and let's all remember that we're playing a combat simulation. Things change in combat. You become a lot more creative. You have to; and along with the truth the first casualty of war is 'official policy'. For that matter, even in peacetime there are individuals looking for a way to get it done that can either ignore official policy, or circumvent it, or use it to their advantage, or something.

But yeah, for my money there's no way to pin it down definitively. If you find a good reason to give your tanks unlimited APCR (or whatever), go for it.

BD
My friend John is an ex Royal Engineers Tankie and the first thing he said when I passed over your comment was 'that's absolutely right'
so yep, you were spot on there. I think you're right that there's no conclusive way to pin it down.
 
Top