±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: 785
Total: 785
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Community Forums
03: Community Forums
04: Community Forums
05: Community Forums
06: Home
07: Photo Gallery
08: Photo Gallery
09: Community Forums
10: Community Forums
11: Community Forums
12: Community Forums
13: Community Forums
14: Community Forums
15: Community Forums
16: Downloads
17: Community Forums
18: Community Forums
19: Downloads
20: Community Forums
21: Community Forums
22: Community Forums
23: Community Forums
24: Photo Gallery
25: News Archive
26: Community Forums
27: CPGlang
28: Community Forums
29: Community Forums
30: Community Forums
31: Community Forums
32: Home
33: Photo Gallery
34: Community Forums
35: Community Forums
36: Photo Gallery
37: Community Forums
38: Home
39: Community Forums
40: Community Forums
41: Community Forums
42: Community Forums
43: Community Forums
44: Downloads
45: Community Forums
46: Community Forums
47: Community Forums
48: Home
49: Your Account
50: Community Forums
51: Community Forums
52: Member Screenshots
53: Community Forums
54: Community Forums
55: Community Forums
56: Downloads
57: Photo Gallery
58: Downloads
59: Home
60: Community Forums
61: Photo Gallery
62: Community Forums
63: Downloads
64: Community Forums
65: Community Forums
66: Community Forums
67: Community Forums
68: Community Forums
69: Community Forums
70: Home
71: Community Forums
72: Home
73: Photo Gallery
74: Downloads
75: News
76: Downloads
77: Home
78: Community Forums
79: Home
80: Photo Gallery
81: Home
82: Community Forums
83: Community Forums
84: Community Forums
85: Your Account
86: Community Forums
87: Community Forums
88: Community Forums
89: Photo Gallery
90: Community Forums
91: News
92: Downloads
93: Community Forums
94: Community Forums
95: Community Forums
96: Community Forums
97: Downloads
98: Home
99: CPGlang
100: Community Forums
101: Home
102: Downloads
103: Photo Gallery
104: Community Forums
105: Downloads
106: Community Forums
107: Photo Gallery
108: Home
109: Community Forums
110: Community Forums
111: Community Forums
112: Community Forums
113: Photo Gallery
114: Community Forums
115: Home
116: Community Forums
117: Community Forums
118: Community Forums
119: Community Forums
120: Community Forums
121: Photo Gallery
122: Photo Gallery
123: Home
124: Home
125: Community Forums
126: Community Forums
127: Home
128: Home
129: Home
130: Community Forums
131: Community Forums
132: Community Forums
133: Community Forums
134: Downloads
135: Community Forums
136: Photo Gallery
137: Photo Gallery
138: Community Forums
139: Community Forums
140: Community Forums
141: Photo Gallery
142: Photo Gallery
143: Home
144: Community Forums
145: Community Forums
146: Community Forums
147: Community Forums
148: Downloads
149: Member Screenshots
150: Community Forums
151: Photo Gallery
152: Community Forums
153: CPGlang
154: Your Account
155: Your Account
156: Photo Gallery
157: Home
158: Home
159: Community Forums
160: Downloads
161: Photo Gallery
162: Photo Gallery
163: Photo Gallery
164: Community Forums
165: CPGlang
166: Home
167: Community Forums
168: Community Forums
169: Community Forums
170: Community Forums
171: Community Forums
172: Home
173: Community Forums
174: Community Forums
175: Member Screenshots
176: News Archive
177: Community Forums
178: Home
179: Photo Gallery
180: Community Forums
181: Community Forums
182: Home
183: Home
184: Community Forums
185: Community Forums
186: CPGlang
187: Community Forums
188: Photo Gallery
189: Community Forums
190: Community Forums
191: Community Forums
192: Photo Gallery
193: Community Forums
194: Photo Gallery
195: Community Forums
196: Community Forums
197: Statistics
198: Community Forums
199: Home
200: Home
201: Member Screenshots
202: Community Forums
203: Community Forums
204: Community Forums
205: Community Forums
206: Downloads
207: Member Screenshots
208: Community Forums
209: Community Forums
210: Community Forums
211: Community Forums
212: Home
213: Photo Gallery
214: Community Forums
215: Community Forums
216: Community Forums
217: Community Forums
218: Downloads
219: Community Forums
220: Home
221: Community Forums
222: Member Screenshots
223: Community Forums
224: News
225: Community Forums
226: Community Forums
227: Community Forums
228: Downloads
229: Home
230: Community Forums
231: Home
232: Downloads
233: Community Forums
234: Home
235: Community Forums
236: Community Forums
237: Community Forums
238: News Archive
239: Community Forums
240: Photo Gallery
241: Community Forums
242: Community Forums
243: Community Forums
244: Community Forums
245: Photo Gallery
246: Home
247: Home
248: Community Forums
249: Photo Gallery
250: Photo Gallery
251: Downloads
252: Statistics
253: Downloads
254: Home
255: Community Forums
256: Photo Gallery
257: Community Forums
258: CPGlang
259: Community Forums
260: Community Forums
261: Community Forums
262: Community Forums
263: Community Forums
264: Photo Gallery
265: Photo Gallery
266: News Archive
267: CPGlang
268: Downloads
269: Home
270: CPGlang
271: Community Forums
272: Downloads
273: Home
274: Community Forums
275: Community Forums
276: Community Forums
277: CPGlang
278: Community Forums
279: Photo Gallery
280: Community Forums
281: Home
282: Community Forums
283: Community Forums
284: Photo Gallery
285: Photo Gallery
286: Photo Gallery
287: Community Forums
288: Home
289: Home
290: Home
291: Community Forums
292: Photo Gallery
293: Community Forums
294: Community Forums
295: Community Forums
296: Community Forums
297: Community Forums
298: Photo Gallery
299: Community Forums
300: Community Forums
301: Community Forums
302: Community Forums
303: Home
304: Home
305: Community Forums
306: Photo Gallery
307: Community Forums
308: Your Account
309: Photo Gallery
310: Statistics
311: Community Forums
312: Community Forums
313: Community Forums
314: Photo Gallery
315: Community Forums
316: Community Forums
317: Downloads
318: Community Forums
319: Community Forums
320: Photo Gallery
321: Community Forums
322: Community Forums
323: Member Screenshots
324: CPGlang
325: Community Forums
326: Home
327: Community Forums
328: Community Forums
329: News
330: Community Forums
331: Community Forums
332: Community Forums
333: Home
334: Photo Gallery
335: Community Forums
336: Home
337: Home
338: Community Forums
339: Home
340: Community Forums
341: Home
342: Community Forums
343: Community Forums
344: Community Forums
345: Community Forums
346: Community Forums
347: Home
348: Photo Gallery
349: Community Forums
350: News
351: Community Forums
352: Community Forums
353: Downloads
354: Downloads
355: CPGlang
356: Photo Gallery
357: Community Forums
358: Community Forums
359: Photo Gallery
360: Community Forums
361: Your Account
362: Community Forums
363: Downloads
364: Community Forums
365: Photo Gallery
366: Photo Gallery
367: Photo Gallery
368: Community Forums
369: Downloads
370: Photo Gallery
371: Community Forums
372: Home
373: Community Forums
374: Community Forums
375: Home
376: Home
377: Community Forums
378: Community Forums
379: Community Forums
380: Community Forums
381: Community Forums
382: Photo Gallery
383: Community Forums
384: Community Forums
385: Community Forums
386: Photo Gallery
387: Photo Gallery
388: Member Screenshots
389: Home
390: Community Forums
391: Home
392: Home
393: Photo Gallery
394: Statistics
395: Home
396: Photo Gallery
397: Home
398: Community Forums
399: Community Forums
400: Photo Gallery
401: Photo Gallery
402: Community Forums
403: Community Forums
404: Community Forums
405: Community Forums
406: Home
407: Community Forums
408: Photo Gallery
409: Community Forums
410: Community Forums
411: Community Forums
412: Community Forums
413: Community Forums
414: Community Forums
415: Community Forums
416: Community Forums
417: Home
418: Downloads
419: Community Forums
420: Community Forums
421: Photo Gallery
422: Home
423: Community Forums
424: Member Screenshots
425: Photo Gallery
426: Community Forums
427: Community Forums
428: Community Forums
429: Community Forums
430: Home
431: Community Forums
432: Home
433: Community Forums
434: Community Forums
435: Community Forums
436: Community Forums
437: Home
438: Home
439: Community Forums
440: Home
441: Community Forums
442: Community Forums
443: Downloads
444: Photo Gallery
445: Downloads
446: Home
447: Community Forums
448: Community Forums
449: Home
450: Community Forums
451: Community Forums
452: Community Forums
453: Community Forums
454: Community Forums
455: Community Forums
456: Home
457: Home
458: Downloads
459: Community Forums
460: Home
461: Community Forums
462: Community Forums
463: Community Forums
464: Home
465: Photo Gallery
466: Community Forums
467: Community Forums
468: Community Forums
469: Home
470: Community Forums
471: Community Forums
472: Statistics
473: Community Forums
474: Community Forums
475: Community Forums
476: Photo Gallery
477: Community Forums
478: Community Forums
479: Photo Gallery
480: Photo Gallery
481: Home
482: Community Forums
483: Community Forums
484: Community Forums
485: Community Forums
486: Your Account
487: Downloads
488: Community Forums
489: Downloads
490: Home
491: Community Forums
492: Photo Gallery
493: Community Forums
494: Community Forums
495: Community Forums
496: Community Forums
497: Community Forums
498: Community Forums
499: Home
500: Community Forums
501: Community Forums
502: Community Forums
503: Community Forums
504: Home
505: Community Forums
506: Community Forums
507: Community Forums
508: Member Screenshots
509: Community Forums
510: Community Forums
511: Downloads
512: Community Forums
513: Community Forums
514: Community Forums
515: Downloads
516: Home
517: Community Forums
518: Home
519: Community Forums
520: Photo Gallery
521: Home
522: Community Forums
523: Community Forums
524: Community Forums
525: Community Forums
526: Community Forums
527: Community Forums
528: Home
529: Home
530: Photo Gallery
531: Photo Gallery
532: Downloads
533: Community Forums
534: Home
535: Photo Gallery
536: Community Forums
537: Photo Gallery
538: Home
539: Community Forums
540: Downloads
541: Community Forums
542: Home
543: Community Forums
544: Community Forums
545: Community Forums
546: Community Forums
547: Home
548: Community Forums
549: Community Forums
550: Home
551: Community Forums
552: Community Forums
553: Your Account
554: Photo Gallery
555: Home
556: Community Forums
557: Photo Gallery
558: Community Forums
559: Photo Gallery
560: Home
561: Community Forums
562: Member Screenshots
563: Photo Gallery
564: Community Forums
565: Home
566: Community Forums
567: Community Forums
568: Community Forums
569: Community Forums
570: Downloads
571: Photo Gallery
572: Community Forums
573: Community Forums
574: Downloads
575: Community Forums
576: Home
577: Community Forums
578: Photo Gallery
579: Community Forums
580: Home
581: Home
582: Home
583: Downloads
584: Photo Gallery
585: Community Forums
586: Home
587: Community Forums
588: Home
589: Photo Gallery
590: Downloads
591: Downloads
592: Community Forums
593: News
594: Community Forums
595: Community Forums
596: Downloads
597: Downloads
598: Community Forums
599: Photo Gallery
600: Community Forums
601: Downloads
602: Home
603: Community Forums
604: Photo Gallery
605: Community Forums
606: News
607: Community Forums
608: Community Forums
609: Photo Gallery
610: Downloads
611: Home
612: Community Forums
613: Community Forums
614: Photo Gallery
615: Community Forums
616: Community Forums
617: Community Forums
618: Home
619: Community Forums
620: Home
621: Home
622: Community Forums
623: Photo Gallery
624: Home
625: Statistics
626: Community Forums
627: Community Forums
628: Your Account
629: News
630: Community Forums
631: Downloads
632: Downloads
633: Community Forums
634: Home
635: Community Forums
636: Photo Gallery
637: Community Forums
638: Downloads
639: Community Forums
640: Statistics
641: Home
642: Community Forums
643: Photo Gallery
644: Photo Gallery
645: News Archive
646: Member Screenshots
647: Photo Gallery
648: Home
649: News
650: Home
651: CPGlang
652: Community Forums
653: Community Forums
654: Home
655: Community Forums
656: Community Forums
657: Community Forums
658: Community Forums
659: Statistics
660: Community Forums
661: Your Account
662: Photo Gallery
663: Community Forums
664: Community Forums
665: Photo Gallery
666: Community Forums
667: Community Forums
668: Community Forums
669: Community Forums
670: Member Screenshots
671: Home
672: Member Screenshots
673: Community Forums
674: Home
675: Community Forums
676: Community Forums
677: Community Forums
678: Photo Gallery
679: Home
680: Home
681: Community Forums
682: Community Forums
683: Community Forums
684: Photo Gallery
685: Community Forums
686: Community Forums
687: Community Forums
688: Photo Gallery
689: Community Forums
690: Community Forums
691: Community Forums
692: Community Forums
693: Home
694: Community Forums
695: Community Forums
696: Community Forums
697: Member Screenshots
698: Community Forums
699: Home
700: Community Forums
701: Community Forums
702: Photo Gallery
703: Home
704: Community Forums
705: Community Forums
706: Community Forums
707: Community Forums
708: Community Forums
709: Community Forums
710: Community Forums
711: Community Forums
712: Downloads
713: Community Forums
714: Home
715: Community Forums
716: Home
717: Community Forums
718: Community Forums
719: Photo Gallery
720: Community Forums
721: Home
722: Community Forums
723: Community Forums
724: Downloads
725: Community Forums
726: Home
727: Home
728: Community Forums
729: Photo Gallery
730: Community Forums
731: Photo Gallery
732: Community Forums
733: Home
734: Community Forums
735: Downloads
736: Community Forums
737: Home
738: Community Forums
739: Community Forums
740: Community Forums
741: Community Forums
742: Home
743: Community Forums
744: Your Account
745: Community Forums
746: Home
747: Photo Gallery
748: CPGlang
749: Home
750: Community Forums
751: Home
752: Home
753: Photo Gallery
754: Downloads
755: Photo Gallery
756: Community Forums
757: Community Forums
758: Photo Gallery
759: Downloads
760: Home
761: Community Forums
762: Community Forums
763: Photo Gallery
764: CPGlang
765: Downloads
766: Downloads
767: Home
768: Community Forums
769: Community Forums
770: Photo Gallery
771: Photo Gallery
772: Downloads
773: Community Forums
774: Community Forums
775: Photo Gallery
776: Downloads
777: CPGlang
778: Community Forums
779: Community Forums
780: Community Forums
781: News
782: Downloads
783: Community Forums
784: Community Forums
785: Home

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