Jump to content


8,8 cm Pak L/130, hidden german gun


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

DarkLegacy03 #1 Posted 19 October 2016 - 02:37 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 10043 battles
  • 1,482
  • [-RE-]
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

Hi,

 

After a long time research on after extraordinary I am pushed on this cannon.

 

 

88mm L/130 AT gun (not a Flak gun, a PaK) proposal from January 1943 – this plan was found by a Russian named Yuri Pasholok.

 

Rohrgewicht = Pipe weight (translated)

 

Just the barrel of the gun weighs 5300 kilograms, almost as much as a T-60 tank (5.8 tons). To compare, an entire Pak 37 weighs 327 kg in combat. If this thing was built, it would not work like a traditional AT gun.

 

 

1330 m / s.  DeMarre (with the KwK 43 as reference, by German penetration standards) gives this gun 304 mm of penetration.
 
 
And now the big comparison of all 8.8 guns.
 
Spoiler

 

Even if the gun for the Tiger and Tiger 2 were planned you would be in the game on Tier 7-8 very op, however not at Tier 10 and fact is the plans were genuine.

 

What do you think about it?


signature.png

korbendallas-01 #2 Posted 19 October 2016 - 02:50 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 18211 battles
  • 3,579
  • [M-O-D]
  • Member since:
    05-15-2016

Maybe they would've used some kind of bullpup design to get exposed barrel length to managable levels.

 

Slightly more likely, it was never meant to be placed in tank turrets.

 

[edited]

 

Moderated by Volier_Zcit


Edited by Volier_Zcit, 20 October 2016 - 01:58 AM.


Uranprojekt #3 Posted 19 October 2016 - 04:18 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 7757 battles
  • 3,435
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013
There's no way that gun would be feasible in a Tiger, not without some weight added to the rear of the tank to counterbalance the weight of the gun. Not only that, the gun would no doubt buckle under its own weight after firing if it wasn't properly supported. It would possibly work in an SPG, similar to the Jagdtiger, but certainly not a turreted vehicle without some serious modifications made to the turret, or indeed a whole new turret being built to better accommodate such a long barrelled gun.

War does not determine who is right, only who is left - Bertrand Russell

 

I write things, things which can be found in Historical Discussions. Things like this article on the Soviet invasion of Manchuria in 1945 and this article on the Spanish Civil War.

 

To those of you who don't molest the English language, I salute you. For everyone else, there's this handy link; http://www.reverso.n...elling-grammar/


DarkLegacy03 #4 Posted 19 October 2016 - 05:54 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 10043 battles
  • 1,482
  • [-RE-]
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

View Postkorbendallas-01, on 19 October 2016 - 02:50 PM, said:

Maybe they would've used some kind of bullpup design to get exposed barrel length to managable levels.

 

Slightly more likely, it was never meant to be placed in tank turrets.

 

Most likely: Just another stupid German megalomaniac idea, like the Maus or the Ratte. Germans of the time must have had really small penises. Maybe some aftereffect of WWI poison gas.

 

For the German .., it was actually Hitler who has commissioned the whole plans. He thought the bigger the better.

 

 

View PostUranprojekt, on 19 October 2016 - 04:18 PM, said:

There's no way that gun would be feasible in a Tiger, not without some weight added to the rear of the tank to counterbalance the weight of the gun. Not only that, the gun would no doubt buckle under its own weight after firing if it wasn't properly supported. It would possibly work in an SPG, similar to the Jagdtiger, but certainly not a turreted vehicle without some serious modifications made to the turret, or indeed a whole new turret being built to better accommodate such a long barrelled gun.

 

That is why size comparison is also called for. The image with the several tigers with different 8.8 guns is also photoshopped and serves only as it would theoretically look. The long 8.8 would have to fit the Jagdpz E100 or WT auf E100 loosely, just the driving style with the gun would be completely different.


signature.png

Trumps W2 Form #5 Posted 19 October 2016 - 08:10 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 8768 battles
  • 589
  • [1005]
  • Member since:
    11-08-2013

I want this on my T-34-88 as a upgrade lol it would make dealing with the new Japanese heavies a cake walk .

Can you draw the 88L130 up on the T-34-88 just so i can see how that would look haha ?


Han shot first 

RagingxMarmoset #6 Posted 28 October 2016 - 03:45 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 9557 battles
  • 5,400
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostUranprojekt, on 19 October 2016 - 10:18 AM, said:

There's no way that gun would be feasible in a Tiger, not without some weight added to the rear of the tank to counterbalance the weight of the gun. Not only that, the gun would no doubt buckle under its own weight after firing if it wasn't properly supported. It would possibly work in an SPG, similar to the Jagdtiger, but certainly not a turreted vehicle without some serious modifications made to the turret, or indeed a whole new turret being built to better accommodate such a long barrelled gun.

The E-100 or possibly the Maus could have accommodated the L/130 version. It's too bad there aren't more details available, as it seems like quite a weapon.



fat vs thin #7 Posted 06 December 2016 - 11:59 AM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 12524 battles
  • 1,282
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

This 88mm L/130 by calculations, would be 11.44m Long, I won't be surprised if you would have to design a completely new turret to accommodate a gun of this size. But as RagingxMarmoset said above, the Maus or E-100 turret could possibly accommodate this gun, or possibly the superstructure of the Jagdtiger, Possibly

 

I would imagine the 304mm of penetration would be an estimate as there is no indication of one ever being constructed. Even so, if say if AP rounds can do 304mm of penetration, then what would APCR do? 

 

Anyway +1 to the OP on an interesting find :medal:

 

 


Edited by fat vs thin, 06 December 2016 - 11:59 AM.

 


Big Yeash #8 Posted 15 March 2017 - 03:08 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 18376 battles
  • 2,449
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    08-25-2015

With the moniker "PaK", I imagine it would be either a towed anti-tank gun, or mounted on an open-top Tiger chassis, rather than fitted as a "tank gun" (which usually went by the moniker "KwK").

 

I don't think we can really extrapolate the penetration of this gun as easily as you suspect. This concept would probably utilise APDS ammunition, and at 1330m/s? I suspect a steel or largely-steel construction of the penetrator might not be possible.

 

It is often claimed of the 12.8cm PaK 44 that its armour penetration was "similar to the 8.8 L/71", which is not how it is presented in the game for various reasons. The main benefit of the 12.8cm was that it achieved this penetration out to significant range, potentially up to four kilometres, and delivered sufficient kinetic energy to the target that in firing tests, it would pop the turret completely off the Churchill series tank (not even ammo racking, the sheer force of impact would knock the turret off the tank).

 

I suspect this would be the main purpose of such a ridiculously long gun; tank guns significantly beyond 7 metres tend to not offer significant performance increases and more critically, provide significant ground clearance issues with overhang. This is why modern tank guns have pretty much topped out at the L/55 120mm gun (approx 6600mm length). Rheinmetall did trial an L/60 120mm gun, but deemed it offered no notably performance increase and too much turret/ground clearance instability.


Favourite marks earned: Centurion 7/1**, Conqueror** - T-44**, ISU-152** - E-75**, Ferdinand**, Champion/M10 **, WT auf PZ. IV** AMX ELC bis***, AMX 13 75***, AMX 13 90**

If you see me performing really badly on the EU server, it's because I've got three kittens fighting for my attention. I'm really sorry.


TWISTED METAL V #9 Posted 20 March 2017 - 01:26 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 14960 battles
  • 2,867
  • [ASYLM]
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013
Such a wonder weapon would only work on a E-100 or Maus, Pak? Interesting... So if it's an anti tank gun how does it offer anymore stomping power than that of the famous 12.8cm? it looks as if it would be stressed under how long it is & possibly the weight if not fitted properly in a tank that could fit the long gun, It's as thick as the normal 8,8cm's which were skinny looking compared to the 12.8cm, but if you ask any Russians, they'll tell you "She likes it fatter not longer!" but who knows what capabilities this 8,8cm L/130 would provide.

Edited by TWISTED METAL V, 20 March 2017 - 01:29 AM.

GamerTag: TWISTED METAL V:harp:

"They say the mind Twist-N-Turns in order to deal with the Horrors of Life...

...I think My mind bent so much it Snaped in Two"


Big Yeash #10 Posted 20 March 2017 - 09:04 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 18376 battles
  • 2,449
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    08-25-2015

Well, barrel thickness does convey some aspects of rigidity (bull barrels in rifle shooting are extra-thick construction that damp vibrations, improving long-range performance of guns), but it only really needs to be as thick as to contain the pressure curve.

Though I'm no metallurgist.

 

As I said, the performance of the 12.8cm was supposedly comparable to the L/71 gun, but the heavier projectile meant it maintained this performance at much greater ranges. A hypothetical L/130 88mm gun would, in theory, have enormous close-range penetration, but its purpose would probably be long-range anti-tank fire.

The Jagdtiger 88 in game is supposedly a late-model Jagdtiger, as some were fitted with 88s when 128mm guns could not be sourced. We also don't know if the 88/130 would have used special ammunition or not; it is likely, regardless, that its ammunition would have been easier to handle, and offer increased stowage, over the 128.


Favourite marks earned: Centurion 7/1**, Conqueror** - T-44**, ISU-152** - E-75**, Ferdinand**, Champion/M10 **, WT auf PZ. IV** AMX ELC bis***, AMX 13 75***, AMX 13 90**

If you see me performing really badly on the EU server, it's because I've got three kittens fighting for my attention. I'm really sorry.


RagingxMarmoset #11 Posted 21 March 2017 - 03:07 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 9557 battles
  • 5,400
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014
Even with a heavier barrel, the wear would have been tremendous. The Germans couldn't afford to build the gun and then keep supplying replacements when they were shot out after 80 to 100 rounds. I'm sure that, along with numerous other issues kept this gun on the drawing board.

PLgeneral #12 Posted 22 March 2017 - 10:20 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 8759 battles
  • 281
  • Member since:
    02-14-2016

View PostRagingxMarmoset, on 21 March 2017 - 03:07 AM, said:

Even with a heavier barrel, the wear would have been tremendous. The Germans couldn't afford to build the gun and then keep supplying replacements when they were shot out after 80 to 100 rounds. I'm sure that, along with numerous other issues kept this gun on the drawing board.

That was just the "prototype" checked in action, if it wasn't factored i assume it didn't work out as they wish :D


Najlepsza internetowa gra rpg

BSNJ 3 vs 3 PS4 CHAMPION
CGC "LEAGUE" SEASON I WINNER

GLOBAL MAP EVENT PS4 >>HERE<<

 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users