Why is a Sherman a +1 target but a Jagdpanther is not?

Gordon

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
1,471
Reaction score
1,552
Country
llUnited States
According to my sources a Sherman was 9 feet tall (or 2.7432 meters) and a Jagdpanther was 2.72 meters. Was the cutoff 2.73 meters?
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
According to my sources a Sherman was 9 feet tall (or 2.7432 meters) and a Jagdpanther was 2.72 meters. Was the cutoff 2.73 meters?
What height is the gun at? Jagdpanther was all superstructure.
 

The Purist

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
1,349
Location
In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
First name
Gerry
Country
llCanada
According to my sources a Sherman was 9 feet tall (or 2.7432 meters) and a Jagdpanther was 2.72 meters. Was the cutoff 2.73 meters?
It probably had to do more with the Sherman's reputation back in the early game days. It is only recently that a lot of myths about the Sherman have been overturned.

Arguably, it should not be a 'large' target.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
14894

I suspect the Sherman is fine, and the developers presumed the Jagdpanther was as small as the Jagdpanzer (Hetzer) based on its basic shape and function. Jagdpanther was actually wider than the Sherman. The gun did sit a bit lower and they probably wanted to emphasize the relative difficulty of getting a Sherman in hull down.
 

Gordon

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
1,471
Reaction score
1,552
Country
llUnited States
I thought the more important issue with respect to hull down was the distance from the gun to the top of the vehicle, which looks to be about the same in your illustration.
 

The Purist

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
1,349
Location
In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
First name
Gerry
Country
llCanada
View attachment 14894

I suspect the Sherman is fine, and the developers presumed the Jagdpanther was as small as the Jagdpanzer (Hetzer) based on its basic shape and function. Jagdpanther was actually wider than the Sherman. The gun did sit a bit lower and they probably wanted to emphasize the relative difficulty of getting a Sherman in hull down.
A tank's ability to get into a hull down position is not determined by its height. A hull down position is gained by simply backing away from the crest of the rise (hill crest, ridge top, even minor folds in the terrain) such that only the gun and gunsight see the terrain to be brought under fire. Properly placed a tank will actually be "turret down" where the entire vehicle is out of sight just below the LOS from the lower gound, only the crew commander (crew exposed) having eyes on the target area and then he should be looking through the tops of the grass with his binoculars.

When a target approaches, the commander would use his turret override to point the gun in the direction of the target whereupon the gunner takes over:

"Driver advance, slow."

Tanks creeps forward while the gunner lays on target. Once he 'sees' the target and knows the gun is clear of the crest line he simply states:

"Driver halt"

Two,.... maybe three (maybe),... rounds later, with the crew commander calling out corrections, hit or no hits, the tank will back away at best speed, jink to the left or right and then trundle forward again to a new firing position. The process is repeated, albeit more quickly now that there is an engagement, until one or the other side is dead or retreats.

When done correctly, the enemy would not see more than the top half of the turret (from the gun up).

This is why gun depression is so important to have and a problem faced by Soviet tanks from the T34 to the T-72. Low profiles made for more difficulty with maintaining a hull down position while shooting.

Jagdpanzer V had -8 deg of depression which is not bad but the gun's breach does have a problem with the superstructure roof much like the Red Army's tanks (around -5 to -6 deg). Most western and German 'tanks' had -12, maybe -15 deg of depression (varied by model), a definite advantage.
 
Last edited:

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
A tank's ability to get into a hull down position is not determined by its height.
Right, but the room inside the tank is what determines the angle of depression. The only way to get more room inside the turret/superstructure is to make it taller.

14908

A hull down position is gained by simply backing away from the crest of the rise (hill crest, ridge top, even minor folds in the terrain) such that only the gun and gunsight see the terrain to be brought under fire. Properly placed a tank will actually be "turret down" where the entire vehicle is out of sight just below the LOS from the lower gound, only the crew commander (crew exposed) having eyes on the target area and then he should be looking through the tops of the grass with his binoculars.

When a target approaches, the commander would use his turret override to point the gun in the direction of the target whereupon the gunner takes over:

"Driver advance, slow."

Tanks creeps forward while the gunner lays on target. Once he 'sees" the target and know the gun is clear of the crest line he simply states:

"Driver halt"

Two,.... maybe three (maybe),... rounds later, with the crew commander calling out corrections, hit or no hits, the tank will back away at best speed jink to the left or right and then trundle forward again to a new firing position. The process is repeated, albeit more quickly now that there is an engagement, until one or the other side is dead or retreats.

When done correctly, the enemy would not see more than the top half of the turret (from the gun up).

This is why gun depression is so important to have and a problem faced by Soviet tanks from the T34 to the T-72. Low profiles made for more difficulty with maintaining a hull down position while shooting.

Jagdpanzer V had -8 deg of depression which is not bad but the gun's breach does have a problem with the superstructure roof much like the Red Army's tanks (around -5 to -6 deg). Most western and German 'tanks' had -12, maybe -15 deg of depression (varied by model), a definite advantage.
14909
 
Last edited:

The Purist

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
1,349
Location
In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
First name
Gerry
Country
llCanada
Right, but the room inside the tank is what determines the angle of depression. The only way to get more room inside the turret/superstructure is to make it taller.

View attachment 14908
Indeed, that is why Sherman's height is not really an issue. Target size should actually be based more than on the height.

A gunner is trained to "shoot for the center of the visible mass" regardless of how big the overall target is. So a broad Pz V or Pz VI, even though it might have a lower profile, would not gain much advantage. This avoids guessing where the rest of the tank may be. You shoot at what you can see. A Sherman could adopt a very good turret/hull down position,... A Jagdpanzer V is not as good but then again, its sloped armour gave it additional protection, at least for the first six months or so of its use.

If you want to hide behind a wall then height may matter but then walls are only of a uniform height in ASL ;) ,.... not the real world.
 

Ric of The LBC

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
1,372
Reaction score
1,063
Location
Peoples Republic of California
Country
llUnited States
A tank's ability to get into a hull down position is not determined by its height. A hull down position is gained by simply backing away from the crest of the rise (hill crest, ridge top, even minor folds in the terrain) such that only the gun and gunsight see the terrain to be brought under fire. Properly placed a tank will actually be "turret down" where the entire vehicle is out of sight just below the LOS from the lower gound, only the crew commander (crew exposed) having eyes on the target area and then he should be looking through the tops of the grass with his binoculars.

When a target approaches, the commander would use his turret override to point the gun in the direction of the target whereupon the gunner takes over:

"Driver advance, slow."

Tanks creeps forward while the gunner lays on target. Once he 'sees' the target and knows the gun is clear of the crest line he simply states:

"Driver halt"

Two,.... maybe three (maybe),... rounds later, with the crew commander calling out corrections, hit or no hits, the tank will back away at best speed, jink to the left or right and then trundle forward again to a new firing position. The process is repeated, albeit more quickly now that there is an engagement, until one or the other side is dead or retreats.

When done correctly, the enemy would not see more than the top half of the turret (from the gun up).

This is why gun depression is so important to have and a problem faced by Soviet tanks from the T34 to the T-72. Low profiles made for more difficulty with maintaining a hull down position while shooting.

Jagdpanzer V had -8 deg of depression which is not bad but the gun's breach does have a problem with the superstructure roof much like the Red Army's tanks (around -5 to -6 deg). Most western and German 'tanks' had -12, maybe -15 deg of depression (varied by model), a definite advantage.
World of Tanks is very good at illustrating this.
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
12,378
Reaction score
6,607
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
This is why gun depression is so important to have and a problem faced by Soviet tanks from the T34 to the T-72. Low profiles made for more difficulty with maintaining a hull down position while shooting.
Which is nicely represented by the +1 DRM for HD attempts by CT BU Russian AFV in ASL.

von Marwitz
 

Chas

Elder Member
Joined
May 2, 2004
Messages
2,177
Reaction score
801
Country
llUnited States
Having designed a good number of vehicles and such, the system is not perfect. Even in the official system there are MPs, MFs, etc, that make absolutely no sense based on the data of the vehicle, especially in comparison to other vehicles. This makes it even more difficult to figure out how new vehicles fit in.

With that, this makes sense:
-The PzIV is a normal target, and its derivative TDs are small.
-The PsV is a large target, and its derivative TD is normal.
In the Design for Effect this is on point.

I do think the Sherman should be a large target, but that is of course arguable.
There are other vehicle comparisons where one is a certain target size, while a different vehicle is either smaller or larger based on a foot or so of technical difference. The Design for Effect has to work somewhere.
 

Gordon

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
1,471
Reaction score
1,552
Country
llUnited States
I get that, I was just hoping that there was some more mathematically precise definition of target sizes. You know, less than X cubic meters of frontal aspect is small, greater than Y cubic meters is large, etc. There clearly isn't something quite so precise.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
I get that, I was just hoping that there was some more mathematically precise definition of target sizes. You know, less than X cubic meters of frontal aspect is small, greater than Y cubic meters is large, etc. There clearly isn't something quite so precise.
Yep. Designed as an anti-tank gun, best used in ambush situations, it 'feels' like it should be harder to hit.
 
Top