PzKw IV used in template.

[IV/JG7_Warg]

G'day,

Upon review of the template in SEOW, I noted that the PzKw IVJ's, which I used, were replaced by PzKwF2's. Whilst acknowledging that the template author specified the F2, there was valid reason why I went with the J model. This is based upon armament, frontal armour charcteristics and historical numbers or usage. I'll attach further documentation and provide a brief synopsis to explain my rationale and insistence upon using the PzKw IVJ.

Essentially the PzKw IV series comprised of:

PzKw IVA - not in IL2. (35 built)
PzKw IVB - not in IL2. (42 built)
PzKw IVC - not in IL2. (134 built)
PzKw IVD - not in IL2. (229 built)
PzKw IVE - in IL2. (233 built)
All the above were armed with a short 75mm L/24 gun and fairly thin armour.

PzKw IVF - in IL2
75mm L/24 gun. (short barreled 75 as in earlier versions A to E)
50mm frontal armour.
Produced from April 41 to March 42. (487 built)
Other notes: 25 of the last production batch completed with 75mm L/43 gun. Have seen earlier versions of PzKw IV's with heavier armament and armour used in the 44 Normandy battles.

PzKw IVF2 - in IL2
75mm L/43 gun. (longer barreled 75 to cope with heavier Allied armour)
50mm frontal armour.
Produced from March 42 to May 42. (about 200, inc the 25 above built)
Other notes: Was also known as the "Mark IV Special" or the PzKw IVG early. Often associated with the Stalingrad and El Alamein battles of late 42.


PzKw IVG - not in IL2
75mm L/43 gun.
50mm + 30mm bolted on frontal armour.
Produced from May 42 to April 43. (1,275 built)
Other notes: From March 43, the production run of this model was completed with the 75mm L/48 gun. (412 built)


PzKw IVH - not in IL2
75mm L/48 gun.
80mm frontal armour.
Produced from April 43 to June 44. (3,774 built)
Other notes: Major production version of the PzKw IV series.


PzKw IVJ - in IL2
75mm L/48 gun.
80mm frontal armour.
Produced from June 44 to March 45. (about 3,000 built)
Other notes: Final simplified production version. Virtually the same as the H model, but has the electric turret traverse engine removed and range increased by 30km. Some Panzer crews thought this model, a retrograde step.


Now considering the above and that this scenario takes place in late 1943, which of the PzKw IV versions available would probably be present in the Kiev battle area. I would surmise that the PzKw IVJ is the best fit. Further, schurtzen plates were being fitted to PzKw III & IV hulls from Spring 43. I have also seen pictures of the 7th Panzer, PzKw IV's used in the invasion of Vichy France in late 42. A full year before the Kiev scenario. These were PzKw IVG's, armed with the 75mm L/43 and 50mm plus 30mm bolted frontal armour. Since that time, the 7th Panzer had been fighting in Russia, incurred losses and resupplied with replacements, which apparently included Panthers*. Wouldn't it therefore stand to reason that the replacements would be later model PzKw IV's rather than earlier models?

Now looking at the Technics file (and excellent work by the way, Mr Emil**), I note that these PzKw IV version differences are correctly reflected. Namely, the frontal armour of the PzKw F2 is 50mm down from 80mm of the PzKwIVJ. The effective gun range shy by about 100m as well. I.e. There is a notable difference between the two versions of the PzKw IV in the game. It is in the Axis's best interests to get this right and use the PzKw IVJ as a substitute for the PzKw IVG & H's being used on the Eastern front at the end of 1943.


*The division had re-equipped its 1st Battalion with 79 Panthers by May 44, but the 2nd Battalion was still operating PzKw IV's. Incidentally, the division also had a PzKw IIIK command tank, with a 50mm L/60 gun and schurtzen plates.

**The frontal armour on the Vickers 6 tonne light tank doesn't look right. 62mm seems too thick for a vehicle that the Soviet T-26 was initially based upon. Nor do I think that the Finns (who used them in the Winter War) would have been able to up-armour them to this.

Hopefully the above is enough rationale and reason for the use of the PzKw IVJ in the template. Please change it back.


Regards,
Warg


http://www.achtungpanzer.com/panzerkampfwagen-iv.htm[/url]

http://ww2total.com/WW2/Weapons/Vehicle ... w-IV-G.htm

[IV/JG7_4Shades]

So if we used the IVJ object but called it "Pz.IVH" it would be about right. What do people think?

Cheers,
4S

[IV/JG7_Warg]

That would be close to ideal. It would be perfect if you could make slight adjustments to improve the turret traverse speed in the techniks file, but decrease the operational range by 30 kilometres in Navicat.

Thanks,
Warg

[II/JG54_Emil]

If that was what they had, it would make sense to have it in our campaign too.

... (and excellent work by the way, Mr Emil**) ...

**The frontal armour on the Vickers 6 tonne light tank doesn't look right. 62mm seems too thick for a vehicle that the Soviet T-26 was initially based upon. Nor do I think that the Finns (who used them in the Winter War) would have been able to up-armour them to this.

Thank you for the flowers and the hint on the vickers

I was looking at this photo when calculating th earmour thickness:



Here I was only looking at the upper part of the armour which has a 12° slope(13mm@12°=62.5mm).
I this is not correct and wouldn´t reflect the fact that the armour was pierced by 12.7 mm Vickers MG.


Taking the other slopes into account I get to 26,9mm(((13mm@12°*5)+(13mm@80°x8)+(13mm@45°*8))/21=26,9mm) frontal armour.
I´ll update that in the next version.