Talk:8.8 cm KwK 43
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 8.8 cm KwK 43 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v0 of Pzgr 39 vs 40
editThe values given here can't be correct:
| Gun | Ammo | m/kG | v0/m/s | Ekin/MJ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kwk36 | Pzgr39 | 10.2 | 773 | 3.05 |
| Kwk36 | Pzgr40 | 7.3 | 930 | 3.16 |
| Kwk43 | Pzgr39 | 10.2 | 1000 | 5.10 |
| Kwk43 | Pzgr40 | 7.3 | 1030 | 3.87 |
| Kwk43 | Pzgr40 | 7.3 | (1200) | (5.26) |
See? Shot with the KwK36 the APCR round has a slightly (3%) higher KE than than the AP round, but not so with the KwK43. This can't be since the propellant charges are the same. I've added a more likely 1200m/s I found on the net (http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/guns/88-mm.asp ) which also gives 3% more KE. 84.73.129.190 (talk) 23:02, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
The La Gleize Tiger II picture
editThe picture of the Tiger II (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tiger-II-La_Gleize.jpg) does not show a 8,8cm kwk43. The barrel of the original 8,8cm was cut off shortly after the tank was left by the germans. After the war a 7,5cm L70 canon of a Panther was bonded onto the remaining part ofthe 8,8cm kwk43.
http://www.ss501panzer.com/213_restoration.htm
I edited in the Tiger II picture of the german Tiger II articel with shows a real KwK43.
79.207.199.59 (talk) 12:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
How about adding some pictures of the ammunition? What about pictures of maintenance crews working on the weapon or in-action shots of the KwK43, especially through the sights or from a crewman's / gunner's perspective?
```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.130.117.104 (talk) 08:27, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
"Most powerful gun"
editRegarding the following reverted addition:
- "and was the most powerful anti-tank gun deployed on any wartime fighting vehicle thus more powerful than the 12.8 cm Pak 44 on the JagdTiger.[1]
- ^ Tucker-Jones, Anthony. Tiger I and Tiger II. Kindle Edition. p. 56.
Firstly; this shouldn't be in the lead, per WP:LEAD. Second; "powerful" is a meaningless WP:PEACOCK term and shouldn't be used. Third; the wording is clumsy and illogical. Please follow WP:BRD - you have made your Bold edit, it has been Reverted - now you need to Discuss and gain consensus. (Hohum @) 13:14, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
- Page 56 of the Google preview version of Tiger I and Tiger II is talking about the 12.8 cm Pak 44 and it is that which the author describes as the most powerful anti-tank gun on an AFV, not the 8.8. I checked the pages either side just to be sure the ebook version was differently numbered. GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:04, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Accuracy details
editAs discussed in Talk:8.8 cm KwK 36, the second column cannot be real combat accuracy. Also, JENTZ's book is more reliable than fprado.com, which in turn actually quotes JENTZ making the whole citation irrelevant. Why cite the site when you can cite JENTZ directly? --MaxRavenclaw (talk) 10:19, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
- As discussed in Talk:8.8 cm KwK 36, I'll change the misleading Practice/Combat table column names with 1 and 2 for the Kwk 43 as well. --MaxRavenclaw (talk) 08:43, 25 September 2015 (UTC)