Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

killmore

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    826

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

 Content Type 

Posts posted by killmore

    Why KV has "very low" chance at 90 meters to PzIII?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Found some numbers - T-34 and KV1 were getting better guns throught the war

    L-11 guns then F-32 gun and then longer barreled F-34 gun (muzzle speed of about 660 m/s capable of piercing a 65mm thick plates at 30ยบ on a 457 meters range).

    Standard BR-350A round was capable to pierce 69mm of armor on the common battle range of 500 metres, later a new BR-350P round, capable to penetrate a 92 mm steel plate on the same range, was used.

    KVs used L41,L42 guns (and in CMBB Demo)- no idea what their penetration was or whether they could use BR-350P round...

    Anyone has more to share?

    For details see http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/4635/index.htm

    (Main page is http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/4635/index.htm)

    0

    Why KV has "very low" chance at 90 meters to PzIII?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by Denizen:

    So please, before you question CMBB's modeling of the Pzr III, understand that the tank was certainly not cannon-fodder

    Not really questioning BTS modeling - I was just very, very suprised.

    I wanted to be educated better why it is so.

    Can someone post penetration comparison of 76mm AT Gun and 76mm Gun of soviet tanks?

    [ September 04, 2002, 07:19 PM: Message edited by: killmore ]

    0

    Why KV has "very low" chance at 90 meters to PzIII?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    1) Since you mentioned different 76mm guns

    Did T-34 model 1943 had better 76mm gun than previous versions?

    2) There was a story about 2 soviet T-34s killing Tigers by shooting at their tracks while Tiger was moving. Then when Tiger rotated side ways they could penetrate the armour. If my memory is correct Tiger had 80mm side armour - that makes the story hard to believe. Chances of penetration seem low.

    0

    Why KV has "very low" chance at 90 meters to PzIII?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Actually angle looks much larger on this picture than it really was (less than 30 degrees)

    KV cannot penetrate PzIII under 100m - you learn something new every day...

    What was the point of making SU-76 then if they could not penetrate anything? Just as an infantry support?

    Do soviets get getter ammo later in the war?

    (I seem to recall they had Hollow-point for 76mm at the end of the war)

    0

    Why KV has "very low" chance at 90 meters to PzIII?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by Bastables:

    Because your 7,62cm guns are firing AP shells that are supposed to explode after penetrating armour. So the 7,62cm shell punches through 2cm of FH armour and the shell decides to explode in the dead space, we now no longer have a solid mass and it comes in contact with another 5cm FH plate with most of its velocity lost though the HE exploding and digging its way through 2cm of FH armour. The thicker armour on the PIV is just one solid plate, which presents comparably fewer difficulties to the 7,62cm gun.

    Don't need tthose images.[/QB]

    I updated the image links...

    Wow - and CMBB simulates this?

    I just found it incredible that PzII cannot be penetrated at 90 meters...

    How did soviets ever survived 1943???

    0

    Russian infantry attacking - realism or a joke?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    I never had a problem with this scenario - got Total Victory on first try...

    Spoilers...........

    .

    .

    .

    .

    I put my MGs and Mortars in positions to cover the front. Never moved them forward.

    Kept moving T-34 close together forward couple of hundred meters first turn, after that kept them in place as long as they had target. Then moved them forward slowly about 20 meters or less...

    I lost only 1 tank commander, tank paniced but return to action on turn 15.

    My infantry spent 10 turns panicing (except MGs/Mortars) on the ground. I wanted to execute them myself! When T-34s reduced german defences (by turn 15) I was advancing forward.

    Overall my losses were relatively light...

    0

    Operation Citadel

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    ...SPOILERS... - and lots of them

    I managed to kill all german tanks in 1 turn!

    I positioned ATGuns on both edges of valley (and map) (before any flags)

    I consider this positioning extremely gamey!!!

    I think this scenario cannot be won against reasonably good human.

    I tried reverse slope defense - I killed 6 tanks and then I died...

    0

    How AI suprised me! (good and bad)

    in Strategic Command 1

    Posted

    After Poland AI attacked Belgium/France. It would be able to hold AI for quite a while, but it suddenly moves 2 tank armies to Italy and attacked France with German armies from Italy! France lasted until 1941...

    Then Germany attacked Denmark!

    After Denmark Axis attacked Yugoslavia and Italy got the booty! So Italy bought Airforce and Tank Army and attacked Greece!

    AI Italy positioned its new airforce at the hill of the italian boot and I was able to kill it in 1 turn with 4 battleships and 3 Aircraft carriers. Then I shifted my Navy to support Greece and destroyed Italian Tank army at the gates of Athens. (and infantry army too)

    So now Greece is free!

    But what is going on supply? I am holding Gibraltar, Palermo-Sicily, Malta, Egypt, Athens and I still have huge supply problems in Greece/Sicily. Why???

    Germany attacked Soviet Union after It started to prepare for war... No airforce on east front since all German airforce is trying desperatly to hold off British jets...

    0

    Russian AT weapons?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by Michael emrys:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by killmore:

    By the way what about say 88mm clean shots through Sherman - That leaves a nice large hole! You would have much larger chances of bullets going in... tongue.gif

    Son, if you have anything as big as an 88 go through your tank you won't ever have to worry about MG bullets again.

    :rolleyes:

    Michael</font>

    0

    Russian AT weapons?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Hey - I am not crazy just stiring up the discussion and having fun with it! :cool:

    My conclusions are that it is on the border of needing to be modeled. If so called weak spot penetrations are 1/100 and that darn Daimler nailed my Tiger through front armour at 650m...

    :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

    ... bullet seems to have as much chance of killing someone inside the tank through the ATR hole.

    By the way what about say 88mm clean shots through Sherman - That leaves a nice large hole! You would have much larger chances of bullets going in... tongue.gif

    0

    Russian AT weapons?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Hey see what Mike posted --- this is a "theoretical math" - just for fun!

    Originally posted by Mike:

    well I know the Bren was regarded as too accurate when I was doing my time in the infantry because it could put all its bullets into a playing card at 500 yards in the hands of even an average gunner, and that is NOT what it was supposed to do!! smile.gif

    But guess what - I think now that assuming you know where hole is you have a chance to penetrate tank. Say 1 in 100.

    [ August 27, 2002, 10:43 PM: Message edited by: killmore ]

    0

    Russian AT weapons?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by Mike:

    Yeah - your math is wrong!! smile.gif

    .........

    the chances of getting 0 (zero) "penetrations" from 300 shots in this case are about 99.875%

    So you have about .125% (1 in 800) chance of getting at least 1 bullet through the hole cleanly.

    Thanks for correction! smile.gif I was very busy when I wrote it and I had no idea about how big the hole would be.

    However if MG is able to put all its bulltes into plaing card then we only have an area of 90mm by 60 mm thats 540mm. The effective area of the hole is as 37.2 sq mm (as you said).

    That would make it 37/540 = 6.8%

    So a bullet would have 6.8% of penetration.

    So out of 100 bullets say 6 will go into the hole. Now that exciting ;)

    Feel free to fix my math!

    0

    Russian AT weapons?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    ATR bullet looses all its power after punching a hole. Therefore small amount of damage. Bullets going through the hole don't loose energy thus they will ricoshet inside and kill crew.

    Now the chance of bullet going through ATR hole is small. But after a couple of more penetrating shots it would grow.

    The penetrations would also weaken armour making it easier to penetrate with AP.

    What are the real chances at close distance?

    Say we are looking at front of small tank frontal surface are would be around 3 meters square... Probably less if you know where hole was made. Hole size is about 15mm square.

    So how many 15mm sgr in 3 m sqr?

    3000000/15 = 200000

    So chance is 1 bullet for every 200,000.

    Quite small.

    Now you would probably fire at least 100 rounds.

    So that would make it 1/2000.

    So with 300 bullets from MGs and 3 holes that would be 300*3/200,000 = 1/222

    Still sounds quite improbable.

    Oh, well that was fun while it lasted...

    My math may be wrong too, anyway I think I proved to myself it is highly unlikely...

    0
×
×
  • Create New...