What height is the gun at? Jagdpanther was all superstructure.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.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?
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.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.
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.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 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.
Indeed, that is why Sherman's height is not really an issue. Target size should actually be based more than on the 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.
View attachment 14908
World of Tanks is very good at illustrating this.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.
Being in an "iron horse" is better (and a LOT more fun-especially if ya get to fire; Steel on target!).World of Tanks is very good at illustrating this.
Which is nicely represented by the +1 DRM for HD attempts by CT BU Russian AFV in ASL.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.
Obsequious American Brashness.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?
Yep. Designed as an anti-tank gun, best used in ambush situations, it 'feels' like it should be harder to hit.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.