User:LeuCeaMia

=Tables extracted from a Wa Pruef 1 report dated 5 October 1944=
 * These are estimates with targets at a 30 degree sidewards angle.
 * The IS-122 is also known as the IS-2 model 1943.
 * The British Ordnance QF 75 mm is listed as and is assumed to perform exactly like the 75 mm M3.
 * The Sherman A4 is listed as mounting the 76 mm, which it never did.
 * The Sherman A4 and A2 are both welded hull Shermans but it is not apparent whether they are the small( 56 deg glacis) or large hatch (47 degree glacis) variety.

Stug III
From a Wa Pruef 1 report dated 5 October 1944
 * Estimates with Targets at a 30 degree sidewards angle

Panzer IV
From a Wa Pruef 1 report dated 5 October 1944
 * Estimates with Targets at a 30 degree sidewards angle
 * Wa Pruef 1 made an error when calculating the front mantlet and turret of the Panzer IV by using 80 mm rather than 50 mm. The 75 mm M3 could penetrate the turret front and gun mantlet at 1500 m.

Jagdpanzer 38(t)
From a Wa Pruef 1 report dated 5 October 1944
 * Estimates with Targets at a 30 degree sidewards angle

Panther
From a Wa Pruef 1 report dated 5 October 1944
 * Estimates with Targets at a 30 degree sidewards angle

Tiger
From a Wa Pruef 1 report dated 5 October 1944
 * Estimates with Targets at a 30 degree sidewards angle

Tiger Ausf B
From a Wa Pruef 1 report dated 5 October 1944
 * Estimates with Targets at a 30 degree sidewards angle

Variants

 * M1928
 * T3(M1931)

=M4= "Confirmation has been received by reports from the Western Desert, indicating great satisfaction with the M4 Medium Tank (Sherman).

The position of the main gun in the turret has made possible the advantage of maximum cover in “hull down” position in addition to good observation by the tank commander. There is concrete evidence that the enemy tanks, including the special PzKw IV (with the long-barrelled higher velocity 75mm gun) has been destroyed up to ranges of 2,000 yards. All troops are indicating that there should be more Shermans sent out at the earliest opportunity.

At the present moment there is no information regarding the use of the stabilizer, and it is not expected that this will be available early as it is still the policy to fire from stationary ‘hull down’ position whenever the opportunity permits."

=Kwk 40= On 18 November 1941, Wa Pruf 4 ordered development of a new gun for the Pz.Kpfw.IV with the same capabilities as the Rheinmetall 7.5 cm Pak 44 L/46 (later renamed Pak 40). Originally known as the 7.5 cm Kw.K.44, the gun was developed jointly by Krupp in cooperation with Rheinmetall. Rheinmetall dealt with the interior ballistics and Krupp was responsible for the design. When firing a normal 6.8 kg APCBC-HE shell, it was to be capable of penetrating 80 mm of armour plate at 30 degrees at a range of 1,000 metres.

The recoil length of the 7.5 cm Pak 40 (900 mm) was too long for a Pz.Kpfw.IV turret, and at 969 mm the complete round was also too long. The new gun had to be designed with a shorter recoil and shorter rounds. The unaltered rifled gun tube (2,470.5 mm long) was retained from the 7.5 cm Pak 44 L/46, but a shorter loading chamber was added with a larger diameter, resulting in the 7.5 cm Kw.K.44 L/43. Shorter, thicker shell casings made loading the gun in the restricted confines of a closed turret far easier, and also allowed a greater number of rounds to be stowed in ammunition bins inside the tank.

Plans had been made to complete the first 30 7.5 cm Kw.K.40 L/43 in March, followed by 70 in April and 90 in May 1942. In actual fact, 18 were completed in March, 104 in April, and 56 in May 1942. Initially, a single-chamber, ball-shaped muzzle brake with two large side ports was fitted, which provided about 49 per cent of the braking ability of the recoil system.

American Era (1901–35)
The results of the economy under the Americans were mixed. An initial high growth phase occurred during the 1910s due to the recovery from the wars with Spain and the US, and investment in agriculture. The Philippines would at first briefly outpace its neighbors. This would not last as growth fell behind in the later years. Stagnation in the late 1920s and beyond took place as access to US markets became restricted by protectionist quotas and fiscal restraints forestalled any further development in agriculture.

The growth period can be attributed to the results of a crash program in agricultural modernization undertaken in 1910-1920. This in turn was done in order to address the growing shortfall in the supply of rice. The Philippines once a net exporter became an importer of rice as a result of the wars with the Spanish and later the Americans and by the reallocation of labour to export crops.

The peg between the peso and dollar was enforced by law until 1975. It provided monetary stability for foreign investment inflows, which lead to 40% of all capital invested in manufacturing and commercial enterprises to be owned by foreign entities by 1938. On the other hand, this overvaluation of the peso would have a negative impact with foreign trade with the rest of Asia. Economic policy leading to independence would necessitated loosening trade links with the US. In order to achieve an internationally competitive exchange rate, the peso dollar link would have to be broken. The much belated move to a true floating exchange rate led to uncompetitive exports as such an import substitution strategy remained until significant currency devaluation opened up the opportunity for reorienting towards exports.

In the late 1920s however, the government having been stripped of customs revenues due to the Payne-Aldridge Tariff Act faced fiscal constraints leading to the cancellation and downsizing of further infrastructure projects. The peso being pegged to the dollar at a fixed 2:1 rate became overvalued. As a result of this in addition to a slowdown in productivity, the GDP growth of the Philippines fell behind that of its neighbors such as Japan, Korea, and Taiwan.

The transition to economic independence was hindered by the developments in the latter years of the American colonial period. Infrastructure was in short supply wrought by the destruction of WW2 and a lack of fiscal revenue.

A significant part of growth acceleration in these early years represents initiation of the agricultural modernization program along with recovery from wars with Spain and the U.S. Between 1913 and 1929, the Philippines continued to grow faster and achieve a higher percapita income than other Asian neighbors except Japan. Export volume grew between 4 and 6% annually and export earnings were growing even faster (Tables 1 and 5), thanks to the improvement in commodity prices. Population was increasing at over 2%, but cultivated area was expanding at nearly 3%, and there were significant gains in agricultural productivity as well.

The linking of the peso to the U.S dollar (by law until 1975) provided an environment of monetary stability that was intended to be conducive to substantial inflows of foreign investment (Kemerer, 1916). By 1938 over 40% of capital invested in manufacturing and commercial enterprises was foreign-owned (Statistical Yearbook, 1946, 271 and 314). Philippine consumers benefited from the inflow of cheap Asian manufactures that kept the cost of living low (Doeppers, 1991). However, the effect of peso overvaluation after 1930 proved dysfunctional with regard to its overall impact on foreign trade with Asia. It presented a problem in designing economic policy leading up to independence because loosening trade links with the U.S. required a more internationally competitive exchange rate, which could only be achieved by breaking the peso-dollar link. It was also a factor helping to account for the country’s long delay in shifting from an import substitution to an export promotion development strategy, as peso overvaluation and import substitution were mutually reinforcing policies.

The situation changed after 1930. Public infrastructure expenditures for agricultural modernization were reduced. Tariff-free Philippine sugar exports to the U.S. were capped at 921 thousand tons per year by the Sugar Act of 1934. The subsidy remained but growth was curbed. Another major export, manila hemp, felt the impact of competition with the appearance of nylon. Cultivated area continued to increase but at less than 1% annually.

A number of the causes of retardation in macroeconomic growth that surfaced during the latter years of the American period carried over into the independence period that began in 1946. A shortage of infrastructure, inadequate fiscal revenues and stagnant productivity are just a few of the problems with roots in the colonial era.

Commonwealth Era (1935–45)
===Per capita GDP in 1990 Geary-Khamis dollars ===

===Annual growth rate of GDP per capita in 1990 Geary-Khamis dollars ===