Jump to content

Penetration, Accuracy and Armour Protection


Holo

Recommended Posts

I am wondering what penetration tables, accuracy tables and armour protection levels are used for CM:SF?

The reason I ask this is while playing CM:BB and CM:AK I was on more than one occasion puzzled with data given there, not to mention the changing stats from game to game for the same weapon type - for instance, ELITE King Tiger targeting T-34/85 at 1000m frontally on all flat, prop free terrain, gives only 57% hit chance, which is very different from data that states King Tigers performance at 100% practice, 85% combat hit chance with PzGr. 39/43 (Jentz, Thomas L.); the same is with penetration of 88mm KwK 43 L/71 at 1000m (30 degrees from vertical) – CM:BB – 146; CM:AK – 159; Jentz, Chamberlain, Doyle – 165.

Now, WWII happened a long time ago, and although, obviously, there is a lot of difference from source to source, it is hardly that any data on this matter is classified, as opposed to current systems, where all that can be found on net are various estimates. Therefore, for example, when looking for stats of modern mbts on net, you can come up with something like this:

M1A2 SEP

Turret Front: 940-960 RHAe against APFSDS; 1320-1620 against HEAT

Glacis: 560-590 RHAe against APFSDS; 510-1050 against HEAT

Lower Hull Front - 580-650 RHAe against APFSDS; 800-970 against HEAT

Also you can find this, concerning Kornet-E ATGM (www.army-technology.com):

"Armour penetration for the HEAT warhead is stated to be 1,200mm. Range is 5km."

So, at least in theory, this two sums up to conclusion that from range of 3-4km Syrian soldier equipped with Kornet-E fires a missile, it hits lower hull front and penetrates Abrams. Hmmm....is this really possible? What the CM:SF outcome would be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are going to have to fudge some stuff, for sure. However, the info out there is generally pretty good. One thing that is somewhat beneficial to us is the fact that most stuff out there tends to either penetrate or not. This is quite different than WWII where there were a LOT of marginal matchups where if the angle was juuuuuuust right, or the range juuuuust short enough, a penetration would happen that otherwise had no chance. Now a days if an RPG-7V round of x type hits you on the side of y vehicle you are pretty much assured of only one result. Obviously it isn't THAT simplistic, just saying that in a way ballistics modeling doesn't require the same level of data accuracy that was a must have for WWII stuff.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa!! I'm not a Kornet gunner or anything, BUT... How the hell does someone aim at a specific spot on a target vehicle at 5 kilometers? What, does each launcher have a Hubble sized telescope? Or, do they run a high-fidelity video link back from the seeker to the launcher?

Thanks,

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea if it's really possible to hit ANYTHING 5km away with any ATGM, especially in war conditions, let alone specifically lower hull front, although I presume that 2-3km may give results, but the real question was if hit there what would happen in the game, in the light of estimates, manufecturer's specifications, and recent performance in Lebanon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by cassh:

As a former employee of NRI who managed the publication www.army-technology.com for four years I can tell you the info there is only as good as the manufacturers supplied us, or our journalists could come up with from what ever their sources they had - i.e. it is not 100% accurate by any means. For more accurate data try Janes info group.

Just curious - what makes you say the people at Janes could get their hands on more accurate information than your people could?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because I know where our guys got their info from, and I know where Jane's can get some of their stuff from - and theirs tends to be more "sensitive" so to speak. Our senior journos were former Jane's staffers, so it's quite incestuous but Jane's have much more juice within the right circles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

re: Jane's. Well, I was in a room for of US Army Colonels, Majors, Captains, and experienced civilian contractors one time and there was a brief discussion about us using classified info. A couple of the Colonels said "the public domain stuff is just about right anway, so why bother going through all the cloak and dagger stuff?". Mumbles of agreement and the issue was pretty much dropped :D

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Holo:

I have no idea if it's really possible to hit ANYTHING 5km away with any ATGM, especially in war conditions, let alone specifically lower hull front, although I presume that 2-3km may give results, but the real question was if hit there what would happen in the game, in the light of estimates, manufecturer's specifications, and recent performance in Lebanon.

With thermal sights and a good target profile, its easy. As long as you are sure that the thermal signature is the enemy.

The Javelin, 1990's tech, locks onto the thermal signature of the target and tracks that. The missile will go and kill as far out as its rocket motor will send it downrange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To echo Imperial Grun's comments...

I have some experience with Javelins. Even got to see one scatter a T-72 all over Redstone's nicely mowed backyard ;) One of the things that I was impressed with most was the max range. The original screen resolution was the limiting factor, which has recently been upgraded. IIRC the minimum range is somewhere around 4k now. However, I've been told that a good gunner, in good conditions, with a bit of luck, can hit things out "much farther". So I asked, how much farther? "As far as the missile can go". How far is that? "far". How far is far? "further than the stated max range". hehe... I love having conversations with people that know a lot more than they can say :D

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

To echo Imperial Grun's comments...

However, I've been told that a good gunner, in good conditions, with a bit of luck, can hit things out "much farther". So I asked, how much farther? "As far as the missile can go". How far is that? "far". How far is far? "further than the stated max range". hehe... I love having conversations with people that know a lot more than they can say :D

Steve

It seems to me that situation with MBTs and ATGMs is developing in direction where later are becoming more of the threat than oposing MBTs. Especially in "not so flat and open" terrains. Ooooh, I can see them clearly flying all over the battlefield in CM:SF, just blasting away everything that moves. :cool:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...