Vanir Ausf B Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 well i could say the same to you why are the results of a waffenprüfung less believable than combat reports (maybe flawed by bias and exaggeration) ? how come that there are such totally different results between waffenprüfung 1944 and reports out of jents ? As has been stated several times, the wa prüf 1 results are not from combat reports or range tests. They are calculated. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. After all, the result of every tank vs. tank engagement in CM (or Achtung Panzer Operation Star) is calculated. The problem is we don't know what values were used to achieve those results. The quality and thickness of Soviet armor plate in general tended to vary widely from vehicle to vehicle. The official spec thickness of the T-34 upper hull was 45mm, but actual thickness could vary from 42mm to at least 53mm. Some T-34s had applique armor welded to the upper hull. For highly sloped armor that represents a huge range of possible effective resistance. For all we know, the German engineers who produced that report may have assumed a worst case scenario. Or they may have by chance measured a single T-34 that just happened to have an unusually thick upper hull plate, or had applique armor. 2) there are a lot of weak spots in the glacis plate of the t34. iam not saying that a t34 should always withstand the 75mm shots when angled 30° and further away than 100m. But a 60° horizontally angled plate with additional vertical angling of 30°. how on earth can a AP shells bite into that kind of armor at 1000m. theres virtually no surface to bite, it just glides away. You seem to be over-estimating how much the offset angle adds to the effective armor resistance in this example. When the armor is perfectly vertical there is a direct 1 to 1 relationship between the offset angle and increased angle of impact. But when the armor is already angled away from the vertical plane added horizontal angle gives diminishing returns. 60° plate offset by 30° only gives you a compound angle of 64°. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.