Survivability of halftracks

[Bulletpoint]

Ok, before I start this post I should make clear that it's not to complain in any way about the game, and that I have already been searching for posts about this and reading a fair bit.

With that out of the way: How vulnerable were halftracks really against small arms fire, as compared to how they are in the game?

According to this site, halftrack side armour was 6.4 mm thick.

According to this site, MG42 regular bullets could penetrate 5.0 mm of steel at 100 metre range - and that assumes a perfect 90 degree angle of attack, that was rarely ever achieved in battlefield conditions.

So, if we believe this info, shouldn't halftracks be protected against machinegun fire, unless it comes from closer than 100 metres?

In the game, the halftracks seem to be made of tinfoil, hardly providing better protection than a regular truck (I've seen trucks drive all over the place while getting hammered by machineguns, of course they don't survive forever, but they keep trucking for a long time) .

So, what's your take on it? If you think the halftracks are modeled well in the game, then please explain your point of view. It's always nice to learn something new.

[Bulletpoint]

Bonus question: How come the heads of the soldiers in the halftracks are poking up over the sides - doesn't this make them very vulnerable to shrapnel/stray bullets, negating the point of riding a halftrack in the first place? Or is it on purpose to improve spotting?

[stikkypixie]

Ok, before I start this post I should make clear that it's not to complain in any way about the game, and that I have already been searching for posts about this and reading a fair bit.

With that out of the way: How vulnerable were halftracks really against small arms fire, as compared to how they are in the game?

According to this site, halftrack side armour was 64 mm thick.

According to this site, MG42 regular bullets could penetrate 50 mm of steel at 100 metre range - and that assumes a perfect 90 degree angle of attack, that was rarely ever achieved in battlefield conditions.

So, if we believe this info, shouldn't halftracks be protected against machinegun fire, unless it comes from closer than 100 metres?

In the game, the halftracks seem to be made of tinfoil, hardly providing better protection than a regular truck (I've seen trucks drive all over the place while getting hammered by machineguns, of course they don't survive forever, but they keep trucking for a long time) .

So, what's your take on it? If you think the halftracks are modeled well in the game, then please explain your point of view. It's always nice to learn something new.

Are you sure you are reading the numbers correctly? 0.64cm = 6.4 mm and 5mm = 5mm. That aside, it seems there were many types of ammunition around, maybe that accounts for some things?

[JoMac]

In general, halftracks have around 15mm Front & 10mm Side Armor with alittle more if you include striking angle. MMG & HMG's have a good chance of penetration or damage of HT's with a sustained Rate of Fire at short ranges.

Joe

[Bulletpoint]

Are you sure you are reading the numbers correctly? 0.64cm = 6.4 mm and 5mm = 5mm.

Forgot the decimal points They should be in now.

[Skwabie]

I have a guess. A shell's penetration is not a constant value come to think of it but varies. On average we can say "this shell penetrates 8mm of armor". But in practice probably shot 1 pens 10mm, shot 2 pens 6 mm, shot 3 pens 8mm etc. Perhaps BF got it modeled and the RoF of MG makes it more obvious?.. (My guess originates from various armor pen tests recently in CMRT)

Another point: if the gunner does not stand up, rifles of AI don't shoot the HT, at all. Thus the "pertruding" helmet guys are safe. I think it's an AI limitation. When the gunner does stand up all shots fly to the HT and a few are bound to graze the helmets, thus there is dead gunner, as well as dead passengers...

[womble]

I expect BFC use rather more than one reference to determine the performance of a given round against armour. It is, after all, their chosen avocation.

It would be nice to see halfie passengers sit a bit more "hunched over", rather than the May Day Parade "bolt upright" posture they currently adopt.

[Bulletpoint]

I expect BFC use rather more than one reference to determine the performance of a given round against armour. It is, after all, their chosen avocation.

I expect or at least hope the same, and if you know of any sources with different numbers for the penetration, I would be interested in knowing about it.. my sources were just what Google came up with after 2 minutes of searching.

[Bulletpoint]

Another point: if the gunner does not stand up, rifles of AI don't shoot the HT, at all. Thus the "pertruding" helmet guys are safe. I think it's an AI limitation. When the gunner does stand up all shots fly to the HT and a few are bound to graze the helmets, thus there is dead gunner, as well as dead passengers...

So it would make more sense to duck a bit more down, also for shrapnel. If the passengers were sitting like that in real life, I'm happy with it.

I just suppose I would duck down a bit if it were me. Then again, I'm not very brave

[Vanir Ausf B]

I don't really know, but my impression is that BFC has been influenced by anecdotal evidence that the M3 halftrack's armor was more vulnerable to bullets than it's specs would suggest. There is the famous quote from a US soldier who, when asked by Omar Bradley if German machine gun fire went through the halftracks, replied "No sir, it does not. As a matter offact bullets generally only come in one side and rattle around a bit." Perhaps more tellingly, Michael Wittmann reportedly knocked out 12 M3 halftracks at Villers Bocage using only the Tiger's MG34s.

[Bulletpoint]

Michael Wittmann reportedly knocked out 12 M3 halftracks at Villers Bocage using only the Tiger's MG34s.

But at what distance? The numbers above seem to indicate that they were vulnerable at closer than 100 metres distance.

Also, if the halftracks had been abandoned, it would have been a small matter to drive up to them and "drill" through the armour by firing at the same spot. And who knows, maybe the tigers had AP-ammo for their MG34s?

Well, I'm not trying to convince anyone here, just raising the question.

If halftracks were just "anti shrapnel trucks", I wonder why they bothered putting machineguns on them.

[Vanir Ausf B]

If it were up to me, I would probably not allow rifle fire to penetrate but would allow machine gun fire. But it's not up to me.

[Skwabie]

If it were up to me, I would probably not allow rifle fire to penetrate but would allow machine gun fire. But it's not up to me.

eheh reminds me of a friend who was btesting another game and was extremely dedicated to it. Once he was pretty down and at last said to me, 'no game is perfect until I make it'. i understood it not til later but very well too..

[Vanir Ausf B]

The thing of it is, in some formations (I think mainly Panzergrenadiers) the German HMGs and halftracks do carry AP ammo (I presume this is steel core SmK). But since the ball ammo already seems to have AP-like penetration it's never been clear to me what the distinction is.

[Peregrine]

If halftracks were just "anti shrapnel trucks", I wonder why they bothered putting machineguns on them.

At some point it probably seemed a good idea. Didn't necessarily work out that way.

With halftracks if there is AT stuff on the map then they are near useless. With no AT stuff keeping them at minimum 200m from enemy should allow them to use their MG and not get whacked immediately.

[womble]

The back-and-forth made me wonder why individual rounds from MGs should penetrate more than those from rifles. "I know," thought I, "MGs have longer barrels than rifles, so the same round will have a higher muzzle velocity." So I went and compared the Kar98k with the MG42 and found (from Wikipedia, that fount of precise and accurate truth) that neither of these surmises was true. The K98 has a longer barrel than the MG42, but somehow they both have the same MV... I can believe the former, but am sceptical about the latter; surely giving the expanding propellant more time in the barrel to work on the bullet will speed it up more? Or, if the "terminal velocity in barrel" is reached at the MG42 barrel length, why have a longer barrel on the rifle (when the rifle is already more accurate than any shooter)?

Still, given that the opportunity to ablate steel plate armour with an MG under combat conditions is going to be rare as hens' teeth, and assuming the same ammo, what special properties of the MG make it more likely that a single bullet will penetrate?

[Michael Emrys]

With no AT stuff keeping them at minimum 200m from enemy should allow them to use their MG and not get whacked immediately.

Haven't used HTs recently, but used to use them a lot in BN and found that they were not the kind of bullet magnets that people are claiming here. The trick is to keep a screen of nice, juicy infantry between them and the enemy. The enemy is usually too busy trying to deal with them to care about any HT's 100m farther away.

Michael

[Bulletpoint]

The trick is to keep a screen of nice, juicy infantry between them and the enemy. The enemy is usually too busy trying to deal with them to care about any HT's 100m farther away.

In my experience, this doesn't work - since the halftrack is much taller than infantry, it sticks out of cover and will be targeted by all the guns that don't see my infantry screen, but can draw LOS to the top of the vehicle...

However it does look good when I manage to get lucky and drive a halftrack up to a sniper position, guns blazing, then have the troopers jump out and clear it

[Vanir Ausf B]

Still, given that the opportunity to ablate steel plate armour with an MG under combat conditions is going to be rare as hens' teeth

I don't think that is necessarily true, particularly with a machine gun that can spit out 15-20 rounds per second.

But yes, given the same ammo type, a single round from a MG42 would be no more likely to penetrate than a single shot from a K98.

However, IIRC, by this stage of the war SmK rounds were almost exclusively used in machine guns, with the possible exception of scoped K98s for sniping.

[c3k]

SmK were widely distributed. Riflemen even had some for emergency use. (I don't know how realistic it was for them to really save them. The German Army was certainly capable of strict ammo accounting. )

The US-style halftrack was famously vulnerable to German rifle/mg rounds. The German halftrack, not so much.

The SPW armor was thicker (8mm ? Going from memory). It may have been a harder steel, as well.

The US M2 ball was lead-filled; no steel core.

Sum:

- German armor piercing ammo widely distributed

- US armor vertical

- US armor thinner

- US armor (possibly) softer

- German armor sloped

- German armor thicker

- German armor (possibly) harder

- US used lead core bullets (only)

- Anecdotal evidence points to repeated US halftracks being penetrated, whereas SPW were not so famously porous

Ken

[womble]

The US M2 ball was lead-filled; no steel core.

...- US used lead core bullets (only)

"Last time" light armour penetration by small arms came up, it was asserted that M2 Armour Piercing was widely issued and much sought after by the dogfaces for its ability to defeat masonry cover (and, presumably, its improved performance against light armour). It seemed to be the case that its availability was similar to how you describe the SmK round for the Germans. Of course, the good ole' M-number designation system doesn't help any with distinguishing between casual mentions of "M2" ammunition...

[YankeeDog]

.30 M2 AP was indeed heavily issued, especially to BAR and MG teams. In fact, some sources indicate it was the *primary* .30 round used by BAR teams...

[c3k]

^^^

D'oh! Of course. M2 Ball AP is still widely available...

So, what is the penetration of M2 AP vs. SmK?

[YankeeDog]

As for .30 M2 AP, I have one period (1942) source that lists its penetration as ".42in @ 100 yds." Unfortunately, there are no more specifics than this, which makes comparison difficult (e.g., vs. RHA or mild steel? What was angle of impact? What was standard of penetration -- intact projectile completely through the plate, or something else?)

[Bulletpoint]

The US-style halftrack was famously vulnerable to German rifle/mg rounds.

Again, I think the question is: at what distance?

You Americans are generally well armed, you wouldn't happen to have an old halftrack standing out in the barn, would you?

I'm sure somebody else here has a collection of German machineguns, so we could do a little real-life testing I'll volunteer to be the gunner (not of the halftrack though)