±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: cgsimpson
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6645

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 592
Total: 592
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Photo Gallery
02: Community Forums
03: Community Forums
04: Community Forums
05: Community Forums
06: Community Forums
07: Community Forums
08: Community Forums
09: Statistics
10: Community Forums
11: Community Forums
12: Community Forums
13: Photo Gallery
14: Community Forums
15: Community Forums
16: Community Forums
17: Community Forums
18: Community Forums
19: Community Forums
20: Home
21: Statistics
22: Community Forums
23: Photo Gallery
24: Home
25: Community Forums
26: Photo Gallery
27: Downloads
28: Community Forums
29: Community Forums
30: Home
31: Community Forums
32: Photo Gallery
33: Home
34: Home
35: Home
36: Community Forums
37: CPGlang
38: Photo Gallery
39: Home
40: Community Forums
41: Community Forums
42: Community Forums
43: Your Account
44: Home
45: Downloads
46: Community Forums
47: Photo Gallery
48: Member Screenshots
49: Community Forums
50: Community Forums
51: Community Forums
52: Photo Gallery
53: Community Forums
54: Community Forums
55: Community Forums
56: Community Forums
57: Community Forums
58: Photo Gallery
59: Photo Gallery
60: Community Forums
61: Photo Gallery
62: Community Forums
63: Community Forums
64: Community Forums
65: Photo Gallery
66: Community Forums
67: Community Forums
68: Community Forums
69: CPGlang
70: Community Forums
71: Community Forums
72: Community Forums
73: Community Forums
74: Community Forums
75: Community Forums
76: Downloads
77: Home
78: Community Forums
79: Community Forums
80: Community Forums
81: Community Forums
82: Community Forums
83: Home
84: Your Account
85: Community Forums
86: Community Forums
87: Community Forums
88: Community Forums
89: Home
90: Community Forums
91: Community Forums
92: Downloads
93: Downloads
94: Photo Gallery
95: CPGlang
96: Photo Gallery
97: Community Forums
98: News Archive
99: Community Forums
100: Community Forums
101: Home
102: Photo Gallery
103: Photo Gallery
104: Community Forums
105: Community Forums
106: Community Forums
107: Community Forums
108: Community Forums
109: Community Forums
110: Home
111: News Archive
112: Community Forums
113: Community Forums
114: Community Forums
115: Community Forums
116: Home
117: Photo Gallery
118: Community Forums
119: Community Forums
120: Community Forums
121: Community Forums
122: Home
123: Downloads
124: Community Forums
125: Home
126: Community Forums
127: Photo Gallery
128: Community Forums
129: Downloads
130: Photo Gallery
131: Community Forums
132: Community Forums
133: Community Forums
134: Community Forums
135: Community Forums
136: Community Forums
137: Downloads
138: Community Forums
139: Community Forums
140: Community Forums
141: Community Forums
142: Community Forums
143: Community Forums
144: Community Forums
145: Community Forums
146: Community Forums
147: Downloads
148: Home
149: Community Forums
150: Community Forums
151: Community Forums
152: Community Forums
153: Community Forums
154: Community Forums
155: Community Forums
156: Photo Gallery
157: Community Forums
158: Community Forums
159: Community Forums
160: Photo Gallery
161: Community Forums
162: Home
163: Photo Gallery
164: Home
165: Community Forums
166: Community Forums
167: Photo Gallery
168: Downloads
169: Photo Gallery
170: Community Forums
171: Community Forums
172: Community Forums
173: CPGlang
174: Downloads
175: Photo Gallery
176: Community Forums
177: Community Forums
178: Community Forums
179: Community Forums
180: Community Forums
181: Community Forums
182: Downloads
183: Photo Gallery
184: Photo Gallery
185: Community Forums
186: Community Forums
187: Downloads
188: Community Forums
189: Community Forums
190: CPGlang
191: Photo Gallery
192: Community Forums
193: CPGlang
194: Community Forums
195: Community Forums
196: Community Forums
197: Photo Gallery
198: CPGlang
199: Downloads
200: Community Forums
201: Community Forums
202: Home
203: Community Forums
204: Community Forums
205: Community Forums
206: Community Forums
207: Community Forums
208: Community Forums
209: Community Forums
210: Photo Gallery
211: Community Forums
212: Downloads
213: Community Forums
214: Community Forums
215: CPGlang
216: Community Forums
217: Community Forums
218: Community Forums
219: Community Forums
220: Home
221: LinkToUs
222: Home
223: CPGlang
224: Community Forums
225: Member Screenshots
226: Community Forums
227: Community Forums
228: Photo Gallery
229: Community Forums
230: Your Account
231: Photo Gallery
232: Home
233: Downloads
234: Home
235: Community Forums
236: Community Forums
237: Member Screenshots
238: Community Forums
239: Community Forums
240: Photo Gallery
241: Community Forums
242: Community Forums
243: Photo Gallery
244: Photo Gallery
245: Photo Gallery
246: Photo Gallery
247: Home
248: Photo Gallery
249: Home
250: Community Forums
251: Photo Gallery
252: Home
253: CPGlang
254: Photo Gallery
255: Community Forums
256: Home
257: Community Forums
258: CPGlang
259: Community Forums
260: Photo Gallery
261: Downloads
262: Photo Gallery
263: Community Forums
264: Photo Gallery
265: Community Forums
266: Community Forums
267: Community Forums
268: Home
269: Community Forums
270: Community Forums
271: News
272: Community Forums
273: Home
274: Statistics
275: Community Forums
276: Home
277: Community Forums
278: Home
279: Community Forums
280: Home
281: Community Forums
282: Community Forums
283: Downloads
284: Community Forums
285: Community Forums
286: Photo Gallery
287: Photo Gallery
288: Community Forums
289: Photo Gallery
290: Community Forums
291: Community Forums
292: Downloads
293: Community Forums
294: Home
295: Community Forums
296: Community Forums
297: Community Forums
298: Community Forums
299: Community Forums
300: Downloads
301: Community Forums
302: Community Forums
303: Community Forums
304: Community Forums
305: Community Forums
306: Home
307: Community Forums
308: Community Forums
309: Community Forums
310: Community Forums
311: Home
312: Community Forums
313: Community Forums
314: Photo Gallery
315: Community Forums
316: Community Forums
317: Photo Gallery
318: Community Forums
319: Photo Gallery
320: Photo Gallery
321: Community Forums
322: Home
323: Community Forums
324: Photo Gallery
325: Community Forums
326: Home
327: Community Forums
328: Photo Gallery
329: Community Forums
330: Photo Gallery
331: Statistics
332: Community Forums
333: Photo Gallery
334: Community Forums
335: Community Forums
336: Your Account
337: Home
338: Community Forums
339: Community Forums
340: Home
341: Photo Gallery
342: Photo Gallery
343: Community Forums
344: Community Forums
345: Home
346: News
347: Community Forums
348: Community Forums
349: Community Forums
350: Home
351: Community Forums
352: Community Forums
353: Community Forums
354: Community Forums
355: Community Forums
356: Community Forums
357: Community Forums
358: Community Forums
359: Community Forums
360: Community Forums
361: Community Forums
362: Downloads
363: Community Forums
364: Community Forums
365: Community Forums
366: Community Forums
367: CPGlang
368: Community Forums
369: Home
370: Community Forums
371: Community Forums
372: Photo Gallery
373: Community Forums
374: Downloads
375: Community Forums
376: CPGlang
377: Community Forums
378: Community Forums
379: CPGlang
380: Community Forums
381: Photo Gallery
382: Home
383: Home
384: Home
385: Home
386: Community Forums
387: Downloads
388: Community Forums
389: Community Forums
390: Photo Gallery
391: Community Forums
392: Community Forums
393: Downloads
394: Community Forums
395: Member Screenshots
396: Home
397: Community Forums
398: Community Forums
399: Community Forums
400: Photo Gallery
401: Your Account
402: Community Forums
403: Community Forums
404: Community Forums
405: Community Forums
406: Community Forums
407: Home
408: Home
409: Community Forums
410: Downloads
411: Community Forums
412: Community Forums
413: Community Forums
414: Downloads
415: Photo Gallery
416: Community Forums
417: Photo Gallery
418: Home
419: Community Forums
420: Community Forums
421: Community Forums
422: Member Screenshots
423: Community Forums
424: Your Account
425: Community Forums
426: Community Forums
427: Member Screenshots
428: Home
429: Community Forums
430: Community Forums
431: Community Forums
432: CPGlang
433: Home
434: Photo Gallery
435: Community Forums
436: Community Forums
437: Community Forums
438: Community Forums
439: Community Forums
440: Home
441: Photo Gallery
442: Community Forums
443: Home
444: Photo Gallery
445: Downloads
446: Community Forums
447: Photo Gallery
448: Community Forums
449: Community Forums
450: Home
451: Photo Gallery
452: Member Screenshots
453: Community Forums
454: Community Forums
455: Photo Gallery
456: Community Forums
457: Community Forums
458: Photo Gallery
459: Community Forums
460: Community Forums
461: Community Forums
462: Photo Gallery
463: Community Forums
464: Photo Gallery
465: Photo Gallery
466: Community Forums
467: Community Forums
468: Community Forums
469: Community Forums
470: Downloads
471: Community Forums
472: Community Forums
473: Your Account
474: Community Forums
475: Community Forums
476: Home
477: Community Forums
478: Home
479: Member Screenshots
480: Community Forums
481: Photo Gallery
482: Community Forums
483: Community Forums
484: Community Forums
485: Community Forums
486: Community Forums
487: Community Forums
488: Home
489: Community Forums
490: Photo Gallery
491: Community Forums
492: Community Forums
493: Member Screenshots
494: Community Forums
495: News Archive
496: Home
497: Home
498: Community Forums
499: Community Forums
500: Community Forums
501: Community Forums
502: Community Forums
503: Community Forums
504: Community Forums
505: Community Forums
506: Community Forums
507: Photo Gallery
508: Community Forums
509: Community Forums
510: Community Forums
511: Home
512: CPGlang
513: Home
514: Community Forums
515: Community Forums
516: Home
517: Community Forums
518: Community Forums
519: Community Forums
520: Community Forums
521: Home
522: Community Forums
523: Home
524: Community Forums
525: Community Forums
526: Community Forums
527: Downloads
528: Community Forums
529: Community Forums
530: Home
531: Community Forums
532: Photo Gallery
533: Community Forums
534: Photo Gallery
535: Community Forums
536: Community Forums
537: Community Forums
538: Community Forums
539: Photo Gallery
540: Home
541: Photo Gallery
542: Downloads
543: Community Forums
544: Home
545: Home
546: Photo Gallery
547: Community Forums
548: Your Account
549: CPGlang
550: Community Forums
551: Community Forums
552: Photo Gallery
553: Community Forums
554: Community Forums
555: Community Forums
556: Community Forums
557: Home
558: Photo Gallery
559: Community Forums
560: Community Forums
561: Community Forums
562: Community Forums
563: Community Forums
564: Community Forums
565: Community Forums
566: Home
567: Community Forums
568: Community Forums
569: Community Forums
570: Photo Gallery
571: Home
572: Community Forums
573: Downloads
574: Community Forums
575: Photo Gallery
576: Community Forums
577: Home
578: Photo Gallery
579: Community Forums
580: Photo Gallery
581: Community Forums
582: Community Forums
583: Community Forums
584: Community Forums
585: Your Account
586: Community Forums
587: Community Forums
588: Community Forums
589: Community Forums
590: Community Forums
591: Community Forums
592: Photo Gallery

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
Armor penetration formula
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Go to page 1, 2  Next
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
blair
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 87

PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 4:05 am
Post subject: Armor penetration formula

A long time ago I had cme across an article that described a formula regarding the increased resistance of armor depending on the degree of angle. I'm sure I have my numbers mixed up but basically the formula stated that If you took a a plate of armor 2 inches thick and then angled it by 25 degrees the armor would then have the same penetration resistance depth of 4 inches of vertical armor.

The higher the angle then the higher the resistence depth.

Does anyone know any more about this principle/theory?
Back to top
View user's profile
JimWeb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1439
Location: The back of beyond
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 9:29 am
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

Blimey this is really basic geometry!!!

Pick up a book which will represent our armour plate - measure its width then angle it at 45 degrees and measure it from corner to corner - That how thick the armour becomes along the horizontal....

Rolling Eyes

_________________
TTFN
Jim

If your not a member of JED then your
not serious about anything military..

***********************
www.jedsite.info
JED Military Equipment
***********************
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website ICQ Number
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:55 am
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

Where is Lorrin (from the old board) when you need him Rolling Eyes

If I understand your question Jim has the basics laid out pretty well. When I explain this on tours at Aberdeen I use my hand spaced about3" apart first vertically then at an angle. A 45 degree angle gives you about 1.707 times the thickness that vertical plate will, a 60 degree angle doubles the thickness. This is all geometry , Sines & Cosines (depending on if you are measuring the angle from the horizontal or vertical)

There would be a higher chance of the round 'glancing off' as the angle increases but I'm not sure this would be easy to calculate especially since the shape of the nose and the relative hardness probably play into the factoring.

And if you hit an angled plate (say the 47 degree nose of a Sherman) at an angle off of dead ahead (say 45 degrees off to the side) the angle effect is compunded. ( you get thickness * 1.7 (approx factor for 47 degree armor * 1.7 factor for the angle shot) or a total increase in thickness of 2.89.

_________________
Bob Smart (bsmart@xecu.net)
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
JWB2
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 199

PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:29 pm
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

IIRC ricochet or "skip" starts when the slope is 45* or greater. Firing tests have shown that resistance can actually degrade when the slope exceeds about 56*. I imagine these facts heavily influenced the slope of both the Sherman and the Panther glacis plates.
Back to top
View user's profile
JimWeb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1439
Location: The back of beyond
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 9:30 am
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

- JWB2
IIRC ricochet or "skip" starts when the slope is 45* or greater. Firing tests have shown that resistance can actually degrade when the slope exceeds about 56*. I imagine these facts heavily influenced the slope of both the Sherman and the Panther glacis plates.


Yes but rounds have been designed to overcome this by having flat angled fronts under ballistic caps to enable them to dig in.

Cool

_________________
TTFN
Jim

If your not a member of JED then your
not serious about anything military..

***********************
www.jedsite.info
JED Military Equipment
***********************
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website ICQ Number
clausb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 10:08 am
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

- blair
A long time ago I had cme across an article that described a formula regarding the increased resistance of armor depending on the degree of angle. I'm sure I have my numbers mixed up but basically the formula stated that If you took a a plate of armor 2 inches thick and then angled it by 25 degrees the armor would then have the same penetration resistance depth of 4 inches of vertical armor.

The higher the angle then the higher the resistence depth.

Does anyone know any more about this principle/theory?


Goes like this:

Y/cos(Z)=X

where Y is the thickness of the armour plate
where Z is the angle of the armour, with vertical=0
and X is the effective thickness of the armour.

As an example using the frontal hull armour of the Soviet T34 , you get

Y=45mm
Z=60 degrees

and thus:

45/cos(60)=90

meaning that the distance the projectile has to travel through the armour plate is doubled when the plate is sloped at 60 degrees.

However......

That is not by any means equal to the actual resistance of the armour plate in any condition. Far from it. To even begin to approach that issue, you need to take into account a large number of factors including armour quality and hardness, projectile type (AP, APC, sub-caliber, HEAT etc.), projectile design, projectile caliber, projectile hardness and a lot of other elements.
The problem is mainly that while a perpendicular hit on the armour plate will spend most of its energy on going through the armour plate, once the projectile hits a sloped surface, it will have a tendency to move away from the plate and under the right conditions simply bounce off. Whether it bounces or not depends among other things on the shape of the projectiles nose: a pointed nose will tend to bounce, a flat nose will tend to dig in. It also depends on the relationship between the diameter of the projectile (d) and the thickness of the armour (t): if the so-called t/d ratio is more than 1 (say, 45mm of armour hit by a 37mm round) hitting, the projectile will be more likely to bounce off. If the t/d ratio is less than 1 (say, 45mm of armour hit by 75mm projectile) then the projectile will be less likely to bounce off.

It soon gets very complicated....... Smile

I'm deeply suspicious of the idea that an angle of more than 56 degrees will degrade performance, at least not in general. If that was the case, then tanks would have 55 degree slopes on their front hull and no more, which is clearly not the case. The T34 had 60 degree slope on the front hull and post-war tanks tend to get as much slope as possible, just look at Soviet designs. Also, US tanks like the M48 (60 degree front hull) and the M60 (65 degree front hull) shows an increase in slope over the WWII designs (M4 Sherman 56 and 47 degrees, M26 Pershing 56 degrees).

Claus B
Back to top
View user's profile
LeeW
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 26, 2006
Posts: 61

PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:09 am
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

In addition once a projectile starts to penetrate it will tend to turn toward the orthoganal.

Face hardened vs homogenious can effect this as well.

For naval vessels there some info at:
www.navweaps.com/index...x_tech.htm
and of course:
www.navweaps.com/index...nathan.htm
which has some formulas and programs as well as info.

Unfortuantly I don't know of a simlar site for AFVs some of this will relate but exactly how is not my area of expertise.
Back to top
View user's profile
JWB2
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 199

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:43 am
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

Yes but rounds have been designed to overcome this by having flat angled fronts under ballistic caps to enable them to dig in.

That only happens if the projectile is harder than the armor.

I'm deeply suspicious of the idea that an angle of more than 56 degrees will degrade performance, at least not in general.

That is the result of a firing test conducted by the US Army. IIRC it was 90mm vs Panther type armor so it probably has a lot to do with undermatch. Post war tank armor was desiged to deal with HVAP and early APDS.
Back to top
View user's profile
clausb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:22 am
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

That is the result of a firing test conducted by the US Army. IIRC it was 90mm vs Panther type armor so it probably has a lot to do with undermatch. Post war tank armor was desiged to deal with HVAP and early APDS.


But the T-34s armour wasn't.....

90mm projectile vs 80mm of Panther frontal armour gives a T/D of 0.88 which is not exactly a massive "undermatch", in fact it is in the same ballpark as, say, a German 75mm vs a late-war Sherman hull at 63mm (T/D 0.84). In the latter case, your logic would dictate that hitting the Shermans armour at an angle of 40 degrees from the side would have a better chance of penetring than a hit at 30 degrees from the side. That sounds rather counterintuitive to me.....
I've yet to see an actual test result, official penetration data or an emperically based penetration formula that would result in what you describe - resistance of armour degrading at angles over 56 degrees. So unless you can point to the exact tests, I'd have to say that it is either a fairy tale or at least a misunderstanding.

Claus B
Back to top
View user's profile
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 8:33 am
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

- bsmart
Where is Lorrin (from the old board) when you need him Rolling Eyes


We'll remember you said that, Bob...especially if he actually shows up and registers to post. Wink (Be sure to notify Bushy, he'll need to lay on an extra terabyte or two of bandwidth). Alas, we don't have Russ on hand (owing to other "distractions" at the moment, lucky him) to keep him in check if he does.

...and I'm on my way out of the country for a couple of weeks, so if his apparition appears....handle it! Mr. Green
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:18 am
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

Hey, I never had a problem with Lorrin. I didn't agree with all his theories (Heck I'm not sure I even understood all his theories Rolling Eyes ) but he did bring a passion and dedication to the discussions.

Have a good trip (you gotta arrange for a layover in the Philly/ Baltimore/DC) region on one of them so we can visit Aberdeen) and we'll try to keep everyone under control (or at least keep them from parking the tanks on the zoomies runway)

_________________
Bob Smart (bsmart@xecu.net)
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2066
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:59 am
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

Doug,

Alas, we don't have Russ on hand (owing to other "distractions" at the moment, lucky him)


I was wondering how Russ was doing, good to here he's OK, I miss his posts.

Joe D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
piney
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 2330
Location: Republic of Southern New Jersey
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:08 pm
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

I miss Russ too. no fun not having to warn against spit takes

Jeff Lewis
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:03 pm
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

- Joe_D
Doug,

Alas, we don't have Russ on hand (owing to other "distractions" at the moment, lucky him)


I was wondering how Russ was doing, good to here he's OK, I miss his posts.

Joe D


I spoke with Russ recently, and am happy to report that his absence is due to his having discovered romance that is occupying a lot of his time, which inexplicably, he is finding preferable to the company of a bunch of fellow curmudgeons. "Bully for him", I say! We mean to do a tour of the El Monte collection soon (when I get in off the road for more than two weeks at a time Rolling Eyes ) but he sounded great!

I miss his humor as well.....

This update brought you courtesy of the Flagship Lounge at Chicago O'Hare Airport....
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
JWB2
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 199

PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:50 am
Post subject: Re: Armor penetration formula

- clausb
That is the result of a firing test conducted by the US Army. IIRC it was 90mm vs Panther type armor so it probably has a lot to do with undermatch. Post war tank armor was desiged to deal with HVAP and early APDS.


But the T-34s armour wasn't.....

90mm projectile vs 80mm of Panther frontal armour gives a T/D of 0.88 which is not exactly a massive "undermatch", in fact it is in the same ballpark as, say, a German 75mm vs a late-war Sherman hull at 63mm (T/D 0.84). In the latter case, your logic would dictate that hitting the Shermans armour at an angle of 40 degrees from the side would have a better chance of penetring than a hit at 30 degrees from the side. That sounds rather counterintuitive to me.....
I've yet to see an actual test result, official penetration data or an emperically based penetration formula that would result in what you describe - resistance of armour degrading at angles over 56 degrees. So unless you can point to the exact tests, I'd have to say that it is either a fairy tale or at least a misunderstanding.

Claus B

I got the info from C.G. Erickson a few years ago at one of the visits to Littlefields.
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 1 of 2
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Go to page 1, 2  Next



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum