Why did the Jagdpanther have a muzzle brake? I thought the casemate

>>34371434
It's just for show lol

>>34371434
The Kwk43 was a really powerful gun
Like, REALLY powerful, especially for its time

>>34371434
because of leverage
here is why:
gun was mount rather high and to the front
it was a powerful gun = lots of recoil compared to the vehicleweight
it had a 10x optic
it had great suspension
now fire it without muzzle break
>recoil goes back to the vehicle
>gun mount creates leverage which goes on the suspension
>vehicle jerks forth and back
>you lose visual contact in your 10x optic

jagdtiger was a fat (70t), that thing just cant get puched around by the recoil
jagdpanzer4 was flat, closer to the ground, a weaker gun, a lot less leverage

>>34371434
That's a sexy tank

It's not THAT big, it's just a regular Panther chasis. The Jagdtiger was much bigger and didn't use a muzzle brake, despite having a massive gun.

>>34371434
looks cooler so that fat americans on an italian CNC enthusiast board could fetishize them easier in the future

>>34371842
It couldn't even pen a t-54 frontally.

It was garbo.

>>34375549
did it even see combat against t-54's? im seriously asking

>>34375611
>in service 1949

you guess

>>34375611
Think of it this way
ww2 ended in 45. The t-54 is a 50's tank.

>>34375629
Well, close enough to 50's.
I'm also kinda dumb

>>34375611
no.

>>34375549
WoT pls go.

>>34371434
Just fyi, the Jagdpanther followed the Jagdpanzer designation, not panzerjager. The easiest way to differentiate is whether or not the vehicle is fully armored (jagdpanzer) or open-topped/lightly armored (panzerjager). The exception here is the Ferdinand/Elephant, which was a Panzerjager for some reason. The Jagdpanther is also the only jagdpanzer to carry a derivative of the PaK 43 standard.

>>34375629
To be fair, the Jagdpanther seems to have seen limited French post-war service, and StuGs and Jagdpanzer IVs served in Syria and Israel, so the question isn't THAT far fetched.

File: Jagdpanzer V Jagdpanther(1).jpg (204KB, 960x709px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 960x709px

>>34375712
I think the issue here isn't the prospect of a Jagdpanther potentially fighting a T-54; it's the idea that this hypothetical battle is somehow relevant to whether or not the Jagdpanther was a good tank destroyer (hint; it fucking was)

File: 1497374645524.jpg (42KB, 380x326px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 380x326px

>>34371434
If a vehicle isn't designed to be supporting advancing infantry, Why wouldn't it have a muzzle break? There is no other downside except danger to own infantry.

Tank guns used cordite charges back then right?

I can imagine it would throw up a lot of smoke into your line of site unless you directed the blast sideways.

Also eases the load on the recoil mechanism I bet.

>>34375722
Muzzle breaks significantly increase the amount of dust and debris kicked up upon firing, as the escaping gasses are channeled out over a larger area. Also (and this is totally irrelevant to the vehicle in question) they can really fuck up and kind of discarding sabot rounds.

>>34375726
the point of muzzle brakes then was to ease the load on the recoil mec-.

>>34375549
>It couldn't even pen a t-54 frontally.
Nothing could. First western gun able to do it was L7 appeared only in 1959. T-54 was too good.

P.S. Well Germans had 128mm but just shows how hopeless would be attempts to deal with based T-54.

>tfw it broke down at Tankfest
I see not much has changed in 70 years.

why is the jagdpanther considered one of the best vehicles of the war, but the panther one of the worst?

the problem stemmed from the transmission which I assume is the same?

File: Panther (3).jpg (162KB, 1024x1001px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 1024x1001px

>>34377509
afaik the jagdpanther was built on a newer version of the panther chassis which had most problems fixed

>>34375116
The jagdtiger weighed 70t you mong, no need for a muzzle brake when your tonk destronker weighs enough to crumble most bridges

>>34377509
>Panther
>Worst vehicles of the war
Dude, the Panther was considered an excellent tank, other than the transmission troubles. The allies and the Russians considered the Panther to be a superior design to the superheavies based on battlefield experience and captured examples.

>>34376052
How can 100mm at 60 degrees be that damn good?

>>34379113
At 60 degrees thats 200 millimeters of effective armor plus a pretty good chance of ricochet.

>>34379113
My guess is the almost 10 years worth of technological advancement and better metallurgy. It's also possible the guns where adequate but there just wasn't the right projectile around.

File: Auréole concept.jpg (957KB, 2000x727px) Image search: [Google]

957KB, 2000x727px

>>34377813

The Jagdpanther was based on the Panther Ausf G chassis which did not suffer too many mechanical problems. It also had an upgraded transmission, the ZF AK 7-400 "heavy duty" instead of the ZF AK 7-200 which had weak final drives.

>>34379316
WoT WE SAID LEAVE

>>34376052
M348 not real.

>>34371434
One of the points is to blow the smoke to the sides so it doesn't obscure the view from sighs

File: mwf I see the confederate navy.jpg (85KB, 334x250px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 334x250px

>>34379316
WOT fags I thought your game died like two years ago

File: 1497553851255.jpg (90KB, 607x960px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 607x960px

>>34371434

https://youtu.be/P5x0Jlxl9uU

>>34380564
lindybeige is a dipshit