5. PRODUCTION
{Also, per http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/panzerbuchsen-R.htm}
{Panzerbüchsen-Fertigung (production) in WW2:
1939 1940 1941 1942 1943
Panzerbüchse 38
703 705 -- -- --
Panzerbüchse 39
-- <1,000 9,645 29,587 -- --
Gr.B.39 (grenade launcher ver)
-- -- -- 1,416 26,607
schwere Panzerbüchse 41 (sPzB 41)
-- 90 339 1,029 1,324
Die Munitionsfertigung für die Panzer-Büchsen 38 und 39 sowie für die schwere Panzerbüchse 41
(in 1.000 Schuß)
Ammunition production for ATR PzB 38/39 and for sPzB 41 Squeeze-bore gun (in 1,000 shots):
1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944
Patrone 318:
780,0 1,864,1 4,726,9 2,046,4 -- --
s.Pz.B. 41 Sprenggranate(HE):
-- -- 9,2 373,3 130,1 --
s.Pz.B. 41 Panzergranate(Sabot):
-- 156,2 889,5 270,0 287,1 -- }
An approx 1 : 3.12 sPZB 41 ratio of HE vs Sabot.
Also,
**Modify Wpn #10 to probable 8 HE Kill Value to allow for sPzB 41 Sprenggranate HE, and more correct Wpn name 2.8cm sPzB41/61 to reflect wheeled / mounted usage.**
All in all, a fairly convincing argument to use the WH=1 Value for ATRs,
**with the modifications/corrections as noted above,**
as ATRs should not be big tank killers.
Beyond their effective range, relatively short for most rifles, as shown on P47 of PANZERFAUST and excerpted above,
ATRs were only usefull for harrassing during their interim lifespan until more effective AT wpns came along.
I think this helps demonstrate my point,
and shows I only talk about something after ensuring extensive research.
VIP Note: Minor Name Revisions will make more sense once I submit the revised German OOB, for which I also base my revisions using detailed data from Jentz, Speilberger, KSTNs, etc.
I have already revised the Pzkw IV units, Armd Car units and PzAufkl units as to proper Armour and Ammo loadouts, Armor and dates, and minor re-sorting classes and will submit revised German OOB once Pzkw III, Panther and HT revisions are complete, and of course, fully documented per forum instructions.
I have even added in many missing AC Fu(4,6,8), Pzkw Befhls III & IV and Pzkw Beob III & IV units
- plus, 2 prototype Pzkw IIGvk903 and Panther Beob.
This of course includes new Aufkl formations to reflect those missing or incorrect,
and any revised formations affected by any Wpn or unit changes or reorganization due to KSTN or availability.
ie. As an example, I give you the Schuerzen (steel or mesh skirting on tanks) ratings that are way off.
How is the Pzkw IV with Schuerzen any better or equally armoured on the Hull Side than the thicker Panther II with same Schuerzen??
Meanwhile, the Pzkw IVF Vorpanzer is not even represented in the game??
Will Explain fully when I submit
- still having to compare unit by unit and formation by formation with the revised OOB that you guys snuck in during the middle of revising. Grumble, Grumble, Grumble.
Although, I really like the new #200 - Sfl. Sturer Emil addition!
and the T-70 is ok.
Regards,
AXISWARLORD