tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post3424865965847707767..comments2024-03-20T11:41:56.776-04:00Comments on Tank Archives: Heavy TrophyPeterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comBlogger38125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-21004791229815112612023-08-03T09:47:05.558-04:002023-08-03T09:47:05.558-04:00Good morning across the Atlantic!
Does anyone have...Good morning across the Atlantic!<br />Does anyone have or have seen any pictures of the top of this Tiger?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03400238945304862030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-91530721230102056202022-02-14T13:06:31.922-05:002022-02-14T13:06:31.922-05:00The original writer seems to have missed the fact ...The original writer seems to have missed the fact that in this trial the ZiS-2 gun was fired with (or rather distances computed from striking velocities) muzzle velocity of 900m/s instead of the usual 990m/s for AP shell. For instance, the shots at "1000m" would be equivalent to about 1600m with service propellant charge.Peasanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00548023869907629898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-47550982142460142962018-04-02T16:17:28.742-04:002018-04-02T16:17:28.742-04:00Right, the spam filter excuse again. I like how yo...Right, the spam filter excuse again. I like how you can brew up conspiracy theories but you can't answer a simple question of why the curves look the same if one of them is supposedly made through inferior Russian math and the other through superior Teutonic math.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-18463482318583298192018-04-02T13:05:00.550-04:002018-04-02T13:05:00.550-04:00I suppose You don´t let my post of the soviet and ...I suppose You don´t let my post of the soviet and US proving ground data, and official german penetration data, I prepared in response to Mr.Millen´s comments pass?critical masshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02366274198749901618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-42367957827878752142018-04-02T09:13:08.581-04:002018-04-02T09:13:08.581-04:00Again, you prove that you are either unable or unw...Again, you prove that you are either unable or unwilling to read. What's important isn't that the 17-pounder penetrates more. What's important is that the difference is about the same in both Soviet and British tests. You claim that Soviet tests do not reflect reality, yet somehow the British come up with the same curves. Why is that, in your opinion?Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-77700329242356329792018-04-02T07:46:24.396-04:002018-04-02T07:46:24.396-04:00"Critical mass doesn't believe in documen..."Critical mass doesn't believe in documents that disagree with him. According to him, that document is propaganda. However, British documents must also be propaganda, since according to them 88 mm APCBC penetrates 86 mm at 2000 yards at 30 degrees, while 17-pounder APCBC penetrates 107 mm. Soviet tests credit the KwK 36 with 96 mm at 1500 meters and 88 at 2000 (I don't have a figure for 1800 meters), but the 17-pounder with 100 mm at 1800 meters. In both trials, the 17-pounder is found to be more powerful by more or less the same amount."<br /><br />Peter, You lied again. I never said that. Official german penetration for KWK36 at 2000m is 84mm at 30°. That´s fairly close to 86mm in british data for the same obliquity. And yes, the 17pdr penetrates more, that is to be expected.critical masshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02366274198749901618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-19331055754930165992018-03-30T16:08:16.535-04:002018-03-30T16:08:16.535-04:00Yup, when you put them in a graph then the curves ...Yup, when you put them in a graph then the curves look pretty damn similar.<br /><br />https://i.imgur.com/xvJ6O3z.png<br /><br />https://i.imgur.com/RIuoKRN.pngPeterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-56379458686070700732018-03-30T15:24:58.841-04:002018-03-30T15:24:58.841-04:00I found this tidbit (if you ever run across the re...I found this tidbit (if you ever run across the report)..it's a postwar British publication called "German Tank Weapons" (1946) that stated that normal production German antitank rounds (i.e, the ones actually used by German antitank and tank crews) underperformed against the rounds used in German tank testing by 5 - 10 %. <br /><br />The Soviet figure for the Pak40 you cite on your page, by contrast, when normalized for the differences in the definition of 'penetration', agrees pretty well with the mean of other tests that was done by John Salt.Stewart Millenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01261690405884935161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-37241342037493662072018-03-30T12:10:01.513-04:002018-03-30T12:10:01.513-04:00Critical mass doesn't believe in documents tha...Critical mass doesn't believe in documents that disagree with him. According to him, that document is propaganda. However, British documents must also be propaganda, since according to them 88 mm APCBC penetrates 86 mm at 2000 yards at 30 degrees, while 17-pounder APCBC penetrates 107 mm. Soviet tests credit the KwK 36 with 96 mm at 1500 meters and 88 at 2000 (I don't have a figure for 1800 meters), but the 17-pounder with 100 mm at 1800 meters. In both trials, the 17-pounder is found to be more powerful by more or less the same amount.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-40430945377152584362018-03-30T11:29:47.653-04:002018-03-30T11:29:47.653-04:00"-if the soviets ever were smart enough to pr..."-if the soviets ever were smart enough to produce a high quality AP ammunition"<br /><br />You keep telling us about the superiority of Germany metallurgy,despite the fact that everyone who tested German armor mentioned how it underperformed its theoretical thickness AND the fact that tests using captured German AT weapons which used the same ammunition actually used by German AT likewise underpeformed to what German tests claim, often by like 20-30 mm when normalized to the same standard. The 88 Kwk36 is like only 2 mm better than the Soviet 85 mm, the Pak40 achieves only like 130 mm at best at 100 meters (essentially like the US 76 mm), and the 88 Kwk is more like 220 mm at 100 meters instead of like 240 or 250. They achieve the same penetration as do comparable Allied weapons firing similar mass shells at similar velocities; there is no German ammo exceptionalism displayed in foreign tests.<br /><br />For instance, take Soviet testing, courtesy of Peter:<br /><br />http://tankarchives.blogspot.ca/2013/03/penetration.html<br /><br />So what, did the Germans save all this world-class ammo for testing trials only?Stewart Millenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01261690405884935161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-1881031485171380842018-03-30T08:58:50.776-04:002018-03-30T08:58:50.776-04:00Edge effect is a valid point, but keep in mind tha...Edge effect is a valid point, but keep in mind that as the phenomenom was little if at all understood at the time tank noses were positively *riddled* with exactly such edges. Vision blocks, bow MG assemblies, sometimes entire entry hatches, maintenance openings with plates bolted on... et multiple cetera nevermind now that in only too many cases the whole thing was built out of multiple parts. The corner joints between the horizontal and vertical plates would be a case in point relevant to Tigey here (doubly so for the one in the photo) and par for the course for all tanks with similar armour design.<br /><br />That's a lot of weakness zones introduced to the part supposed to withstand the most fire.Kellomieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04915110653443066212noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-37833060279356422812018-03-30T07:26:14.105-04:002018-03-30T07:26:14.105-04:00Nice self-contradiction there. You start the first...Nice self-contradiction there. You start the first paragraph by claiming the gun doesn't penetrate, then the second one by accepting it does.<br /><br />Decide already willya.<br /><br />And the Soviets knew perfectly well their shell design could use some work, why do you think their testers routinely noted on the high quality of the Lend-Lease ones? Whether they had the means to pursue such improvements during the war is a different matter entirely; that's just one more item in the long list of things they knew needed serious revising but simply couldn't spare the time and resources for under wartime demands.<br /><br />Redoing production lines and industrial processes doesn't happen overnight you know; there's a REASON the Soviets were loath to compromise output with major modifications unless there were serious reasons to. And I'm reasonably sure you're aware of the ad-hoc emergency circumstances most of their heavy industry operated under...<br /><br />That the 76mm might have cut it with better shells is irrelevant because they weren't in the position to start making such shells in the first place (unless they liked the idea of interrupting the flow of direly needed supplies to the frontline); conversely the 85mm was already available and in production - if it could do the job as-is then *good enough for now*. They got a bigger HE payload in the bargain anyway.<br /><br />Wars are waged with what you actually have, not what you'd like to have. (Something it took the Germans two lost World Wars to learn.)Kellomieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04915110653443066212noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-17857040606883810162018-03-29T22:55:53.593-04:002018-03-29T22:55:53.593-04:00Yup, and Grabin's design team was also trolls,...Yup, and Grabin's design team was also trolls, and the GABTU was full of trolls, and the GANIOP was staffed entirely by trolls, trolling all the way to Berlin.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-12077099268582515792018-03-29T20:17:49.712-04:002018-03-29T20:17:49.712-04:00As I showed, the german team actually studied and ...As I showed, the german team actually studied and examined shatter effects before ww2 and fully understood and prevented them by mid ww2 in their service AP. So You were wrong AGAIN, Peter, that must hurt. The US and russians did not until after the end of ww2 and after studying german service AP and war research data leading to adoption of german hardness contours and even reverse engeneered Pzgr39 projectiles adopted for soviet Union by 1953. A sensible researcher would not rely on any expectations, or for that matter calculated claims from services who were still in a pre-shatter-age. But then again, You are not a sensible researcher but an ordinary internet troll without any expertise in the field.critical masshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02366274198749901618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-15805876009045791382018-03-29T17:16:37.031-04:002018-03-29T17:16:37.031-04:00Right, well clearly it was three teams of engineer...Right, well clearly it was three teams of engineers that were wrong and only you who is right.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-5185852605525562482018-03-29T16:47:43.986-04:002018-03-29T16:47:43.986-04:00Comprehend this:
The 76mm F34 couldn´t penetrate t...Comprehend this:<br />The 76mm F34 couldn´t penetrate the side of a TIGER which is vertical from 500m in a fair hit with 640-680m/s MV<br />The 76mm 3K couldn´t penetrate the side of a TIGER which is vertical from 500m in a fair hit with 813m/s MV.<br /><br />and now go back to the linked image <br />https://imgur.com/a/rpF7w<br /><br />...and try to synthesize the information. You can put 1000m/s and all You will see is a shattered mark with these bullets due to premature projectile break up.<br /><br />We all know, You try to drag in alternative penetration mechanisms by citing highly oblique-references, but no Peter, 0° impact on a TIGER I side cannot be described as high obliquity, stop using straw arguments which bear no relationship to the question at hand. critical masshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02366274198749901618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-9352553927987057632018-03-29T16:06:25.611-04:002018-03-29T16:06:25.611-04:00That sure is a lot of text that does not address t...That sure is a lot of text that does not address the initial point. You said that performance cannot be improved by increasing velocity. Both the Americans and the Soviets say it can. I don't understand why you consider yourself smarter than the people that actually had the guns and shells in question in their hands, but here we are.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-88143164781846053302018-03-29T15:58:43.504-04:002018-03-29T15:58:43.504-04:00Peter, You mix up different penetration mechanics ...Peter, You mix up different penetration mechanics and You try to mix up obliquities. These tests here are for normal obliquity, not for very acute angles. The velocity exponent for penetration are different for different penetration mechanisms, too. <br />It´s true, the post war report states highly sloped plate. And against highly sloped plate, most full bore, steel projectile fracture. However, this is a criterium developed after the end of ww2. For that matter, at highly oblique impact, the 75mm Pzgr 39 defeated 5.13" US RHA (intact, no breka up) at the velocities dealt with here, -on the USAPG- which were sufficient for barely 3" credited to the domestic 76mm AP. <br /><br />During ww2, the projectiles were judged by their performance on 0° and 30°, not at highly oblique plate. Only Germany also employed 45° proof specifications in autumn 1944 on which it´s 75mm Pzgr39 were acceptance tested. And the document states explicitely that against normal plate, the blunt soviet 76mm shell is inferior and will have a low shatter velocity. <br /><br />The effect of increasing velocity is primarely by increasing the degree of projectile deformation / break up /shatter. Initially, very little difference is found between an intact and a broken projectile but once velocity is increased further, a delta is created between curves for intact and curves for broken projectiles, where increasing the velocity does not result in similarely increased penetration. The penetration plateau´s off. This is true even for german Pzgr 39 at velocities usually exceeding the muzzle velocity (>1270m/s from 1944 trials). <br />That´s why increasing the velocity does not help much in the cases dealt with HERE: AGAINST FLAT PLATE HITTING PERPENDICULARELY AS IN THESE TIGER ARMOR TRIALS.<br /><br />An illustration can be found in Sitz´s article in Lilienthalreport 166 (originally classified SECRET, 1943), p. 109 for 30° impact of two 75mm AP models: The preww2 7.5cm K. Gr. rot Pz and the 1942 introduced Pzgr 39: <br /><br />https://imgur.com/a/rpF7wcritical masshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02366274198749901618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-24444193985644781142018-03-29T15:15:11.081-04:002018-03-29T15:15:11.081-04:00apparently You cannot. There is no calibre sized h...apparently You cannot. There is no calibre sized hole in the picture. I see armor displacement but whether or not the hole is expanded to calibre size is doubtful and cannot be verified from the photo.<br />And You fail to understand that already the 76mm F34 was perfectly capable to the task -no 3K needed- the 85mm gun was eventually called for -if the soviets ever were smart enough to produce a high quality AP ammunition for them, as demonstrated by the german 76mm Pzgr rot manufactured for exactly the same gun (they did that- but not before 1953)...<br /><br />Yes the 85mm can penetrate the TIGER under relevant conditions (hit the vertical areas at long to medium range under as close to the normal as possible obliquities). It wasn´t the strength of the TIGER´s armor, rather it was the insuffiance of allied AP ammunition which handed an advantage on the battlefield to the Mk VI.critical masshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02366274198749901618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-65910489910752158352018-03-29T11:38:08.543-04:002018-03-29T11:38:08.543-04:00I can at least tell the difference between a dent ...I can at least tell the difference between a dent in armour and a yawning hole...<br /><br />As well as actually pay attention to the historical record of the armaments involved, namely that the people who actually fought a life and death struggle with it deemed the 85mm to be good enough for the task at hand. You'll have to excuse me if I consider their empirically validated professional judgement to trump your technical hair-splitting here.Kellomieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04915110653443066212noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-73004683974835595072018-03-29T10:01:48.888-04:002018-03-29T10:01:48.888-04:00Right, so what the Americans are saying is that yo...Right, so what the Americans are saying is that you could radically increase the penetration by increasing velocity, which you insist cannot happen. Also it's very convenient how you ignore that the Americans are talking about penetrating 3" of *highly sloped* armour. Where are you getting 7.2" of penetration of 75 mm AP against highly sloped armour?Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-84497649742379427172018-03-29T08:40:01.297-04:002018-03-29T08:40:01.297-04:00You even comprehend what a "shatter gap"...You even comprehend what a "shatter gap" is? <br />Can You tell me what the relevance of a shatter gap would be in this case? I am curious...critical masshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02366274198749901618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-77765852402830954322018-03-29T08:36:44.172-04:002018-03-29T08:36:44.172-04:00WAL762/589 stated in regard to 76mm soviet AP:
&q...WAL762/589 stated in regard to 76mm soviet AP:<br /><br />"3. As a consequence of the above, the shot would probably tend to fracture in a brittle manner upon impact against moderately severe targets."<br /><br />and <br />"(...) at all obliquities of attack, particularly when fired from guns designed for low muzzle velocities, (the <br />subject projectile has a reported muzzle velocity of 1995 ft/sec.)." <br /><br />So here it goes, Your vaunted interpretation. You made it up, AGAIN, Peter. The report states exactly the opposite of what You claimed. It only states that the design of the shot (blunt nosed) is suitable to defeat 3" if fired from 3000-3200 fps. This is to be compared wit 2" penetration the analysists credit the projectile at 600m/s, a pretty dismal performance considering that the lighter 75mm Pzgr39 defeats 3.35" at 600m/s and in between 7.2" and 7.6" at <3100 fps. <br /><br /><br />Thanks for the photo. It only confirmed what I wrote. <br />Edge penetrations on RHA are because of the free edge effect.<br /><br />So actually You confirmed that the 3K 76mm couldn´t penetrate in a fair hit even the sides. Which is what everybody else than a fool would test for.critical masshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02366274198749901618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-55865627910799312802018-03-28T15:25:44.715-04:002018-03-28T15:25:44.715-04:00The huge gaping hole punched from 1450 meters is o...The huge gaping hole punched from 1450 meters is one deep indentation, let me tell you.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-27026599205655884292018-03-28T15:18:54.259-04:002018-03-28T15:18:54.259-04:00The 85mm was good enough for the SU-85 to be a sat...The 85mm was good enough for the SU-85 to be a satisficatory countermeasure for the Tiger, I'll remind you... and seriously how often was *two hundred meters* an actual engagement range out East anyway, esp. if your gun could kill the target from much further away?<br /><br />Also, "It shell could reliably penetrate the front from a kilometer, and the sides from about 1.5 kilometers." Go fight Pasholok over that. But that sure looks like one DEEP 'indentation'; even if that really isn't a full penetration the spall alone ought to create quite enough Emotionally Significant Events for anyone inside to make the distinction largely academic...Kellomieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04915110653443066212noreply@blogger.com