Jadgtiger ammunition help

[Steve_farrier]

I’m trying to find some ammunition in scale for my 1/35 jadgtiger. I know they came with a 12.8 however the Tamiya kit comes with no ammunition for it. And finding it online I’m struggling. 

Would the Emil ammunition be the same? As it’s also 12.8 but for a different gun 

 

[JackG]

Try Alliance Modelworks.  They look like they could be the same, but I can't say for sure.

 

http://www.am-works.com/lw35071-german-wwii-12-8cm-pzgr-43-ammunition-pack-5pcs/

 

 

 

regards,

Jack

[Steve_farrier]

Thanks very much @JackG :-) they do look incredibly similar to each other 

[Kingsman]

The Sturer Emil's PaK40 was a development of the 12.8cm FlaK by Rheinmetall.  The Jagd Tiger's PaK44 was an entirely new gun by Krupp, derived from their field-mounted 12.8cm PaK44.  The key question is whether they used the same ammunition.  It is likely that the cartridge case was the same.  But the Pak44's PzGr43 AP projectile is somewhat different from that for the PaK40.  It has a much sharper nose profile and seems to have one less driving band. 

 

So the vote must go to AMW.  But on the other hand they don't give you any HE rounds.  Jagd Tiger's secondary role was as SP artillery, and the charge in the cartridge was designed to be able to be reduced for firing HE shells - so these are likely to have been carried.

 

If you want spent cases, then the cheaper and more readily available RB product is fine: you can paint a primer cap and no-one will ever read the AMW etched headstamps amyway.  If you want to fill internal racks then the difference in shell shape and driving bands is unlikely to be noticed.  If you want to show a reloading diorama or similar, you might need both RB and AMW.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

I found some ammo from Attack, allegedly for the PAK-44, but didn't post a link as it was out of stock.....Again it looks almost identical (and it lists the 'Sturer Emil' as a potential user):

 

http://www.germanmilitarymodelling.com/ourshop/prod_3690241-135-Attack-Hobby-128mm.html

 

FWIW

 

[Steve_farrier]

Last night I bought the RB product so will see what’s I’ve got and even if why can be altered slightly with a Dremel to acquire the correct idea. Also the other option is to alter one of each and cast the new heads. 

 

So to make the RB correct the AP round will

need 1 driving band removing and sharpening up of the tip? Trying to find good reference photos online is proving a pain 😳 as most photos seem to get them mixed up or labeled incorrectly 

Edited January 31, 2018 by Steve_farrier

[Kingsman]

Armorscale do Sturer ammo too.  Same shape problem.

 

This photo is unquestionably a PzGr43 for a Pak44.  I've just this minute photographed it in the Tiger display at Bovington museum.  Note 2 driving bands and 2 cartridge case crimp rings.  But AFAIK the ammunition was separate-loading.  Looking at the design, this round has a ballistic cap: see the join.  That's what gives the pointed shape.  I wouldn't mind betting that underneath the projectile is actually the same as the Sturer's.  Not that this helps.  Bearing in mind that there is a join, if you were clever and accurate could you mate the nose of the HE shell with the body of the stubbier AP?  Either by a cut and shut of the 2 or by grinding out the inside of the HE nose to make a real cap, possibly grinding down the old AP nose too.

[Seahawk]

In any case the number of contributors to this thread suggests to me that, as long as you steer clear of Das Abteilung, your chances of being called out for getting it wrong are around the zero mark.

[Steve_farrier]

1 hour ago, Seahawk said:

In any case the number of contributors to this thread suggests to me that, as long as you steer clear of Das Abteilung, your chances of being called out for getting it wrong are around the zero mark.

Actually that was my exact thoughts 😂😂 sorry @Das Abteilung 😀😀 

but it’s good to know that the differences are so subtle that the majority of viewers of my kit wouldn’t know otherwise :-) 

 

thanks so muchfor all the help!!! 

(I love this place lol) 

[Kingsman]

Sorry, had to rush off. 

 

In the picture of the Attack set the middle round is an Armour Piercing High Explosive, Capped (APHEC).  All German AP rounds of 75mm and above were APHE, which is one reason for their greater effectiveness than most Allied AP: they detonated inside.  As armour improved, particularly the rise of face-hardened armour over rolled homogeneous, the blunter hardened cap was added to improve penetration.  That's what you have in the Attack set.  I believe the AP rounds in the RB set are the original uncapped ones, but I believe the Armourscale set includes capped rounds.  However, the cap messed up the aerodynamics and both range and accuracy suffered.  Allies had the same problem.  So the light ballistic cap was added to restore the aerodynamic performance: APHECBC(!!).

 

Now, whether the Jagdtiger would have ever carried and fired the uncapped round is an open question.  The ballistically capped shell has a 1943 designation, whereas both the 12.8cm PaKs have 1944 designations - implying that the shell pre-dates the guns.  In which case the shell can only have been designed with the Sturer and FlaK in mind, which were developed into the Rheinmetall version PaK44.  So it is possible, even probable, that the Jagdtiger used the same basic shell as the Sturer but with the addition of the ballistic cap.  But from the modelling perspective that still leaves you needing the sharp-nosed AP shell.

[Kingsman]

Hey guys, only trying to help.  The strict answer to the question is "no, not the same AP shell".  I tried to explain why.

 

But in the late days of the war who knows whether old ammunition could have been found and used.  I'm sure it would have been used if found.  So, not impossible.  I suspect no-one really knows any better.

[Seahawk]

21 minutes ago, Das Abteilung said:

Hey guys, only trying to help.  The strict answer to the question is "no, not the same AP shell".  I tried to explain why.

And I wasn't getting at you either: only impressed by your knowledge.  I can't stand those people who, in answer to an earnestly-meant question, say, "Who cares/'ll know the difference?" either!

[Steve_farrier]

I’m absolutely amazed by your knowledge! I just wish more people had that type of knowledge and willingness to put it forward! All that you’ve written and provided has not fallen on deaf ears or been scoffed at. I’m jealous!! :-) :-) 

[Kingsman]

Other than 32 years of procurement and supply chain management, it's about the only thing I do know anything about!  But the more I discover, the more I realise I don't know - which is a vast amount!  But what we do know, we should share.

 

Much of what goes above is readily available info, just not necessarily in the same place.  Being at Bovington at just the right time to photo a known genuine round was just sheer dumb luck.

 

Anyway, I wasn't offended.  If I was then I would have said something like "why ask a question when you don't want to know the answer or have already pre-determined the answer?" and stomped off in a huff.  But I wasn't, so I didn't. 

 

A lot of what we do has a degree of licence within the bounds of realistic and reasonable possibility, which sometimes warrants constructive discussion and knowledge sharing leading to a reasoned conclusion.

[Steve_farrier]

Much appreciated.

 

Was there a reason for your visit to the tank museum? I’m hooing to pop along for their model show next weekend if I can :-) 

love that place! 

[stevehnz]

Looking at this chart on Tony Williams ammo website, it appears as though the Pak 40 shell is different to the Pak 44 shells which are different again to the Flak 44 shells. Rationalisation doesn't seem to have been a big thing in Germany even at the end.

Steve.

Edited February 1, 2018 by stevehnz
insert link