TimoS. Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 Hello. Is there any Penetrationtable for RussianvsGerman Tankgunvs Armor Tables out there? I got one for Western Allies against German Units but not for Russian Against German. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/ It's got a few minor errors here and there, and has some obvious limitations, but it's fairly accurate for most match ups. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcrain Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 Not sure if I agree with their values. Regardless it won't be very helpful in the game considering Because they downgrade German tanks and upgrade Russian tanks compared to the values in game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 Hi, Vanir Ausf B clever table... . However just to restate the usual... the standard work on this subject, used by Charles or was last time he report on the subject is World War II Ballistics : Armor and Gunnery by Lorrin Bird and Robert Livingston. So a search that gives up tables there from is what you are really after. All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 I have a copy of WWII Ballistics, and the gun penetration values that calculator uses are based on that work. The armor thickness values appear to be official spec. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 Hi, Yup... I flicked through a few quick examples and was very pleasantly surprised... looked very good. Have saved it as a favourite. If in doubt can always check to book... Good stuff, All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 It's good for a quick and dirty check when you don't want to take the time to do the calculations by hand. But like I said, there are limitations. It does not separate the turret armor from the mantlet, and it ignores the lower hull entirely. Also, for some strange reason the ballistic K factor is often incorrect, as is the FHA penetration for Soviet rounds. So I always double check the numbers in the advanced options against WWII Ballistics. Thankfully, the values are all user adjustable so you can just input whatever value you want and it will use it (I'm pretty sure it uses Bird and Livingston's formulas. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 Not sure if I agree with their values. Regardless it won't be very helpful in the game considering Because they downgrade German tanks and upgrade Russian tanks compared to the values in game. At the risk of feeding a troll, the obvious question arises: do you have information which would prove both assertions? Do you have information which would prove the assertions wrong (if true)? Or, at least, any kind of information which would be able to cast doubt on the in-game armor? FWIW, supposedly late war German armor suffered from brittleness, due to Allied bombing of the specialized quenching facilities needed to create the proper steel characteristics in early-war German armor. As for Soviet armor, this is the first I've heard that BFC has it too strong. I -think- the behind armor spalling of Soviet armor is higher than other nationalities. This is done due to the extremely high Brinell ratings of Soviet armor tested during and after the war. Ken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 I may have it wrong, but I interpreted gcrain's comment that the table has the values up or down compared to CM. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 Yeah, I think "they" is whoever made the calculator. He was apparently not aware that he can change the values to whatever he thinks is correct. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 TimoS, There are several such charts in the Tank Armament section on Russian Battlefield. They may prove useful in your quest. http://english.battlefield.ru/tank-armament Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 At the risk of feeding a troll, the obvious question arises: do you have information which would prove both assertions? Ken damn, I thought he was just cracking a joke. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcrain Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 At the risk of feeding a troll, the obvious question arises: do you have information which would prove both assertions? Do you have information which would prove the assertions wrong (if true)? Or, at least, any kind of information which would be able to cast doubt on the in-game armor? FWIW, supposedly late war German armor suffered from brittleness, due to Allied bombing of the specialized quenching facilities needed to create the proper steel characteristics in early-war German armor. As for Soviet armor, this is the first I've heard that BFC has it too strong. I -think- the behind armor spalling of Soviet armor is higher than other nationalities. This is done due to the extremely high Brinell ratings of Soviet armor tested during and after the war. Ken The information I have is all the tests I have done in the scenario editor with Panthers, King Tigers, JS2s , T34s and ISU 122's and the values I have seen in other tank games over the part 35 years. The outcomes bear no resemblance to the calculator. In particular the 122mm gun in game is much less powerful in game than it was in the calculator. Also I was getting some ridiculous results for the 88mm L71. That seems to be fixed now, I'm not sure if it was my browser or the website that was having the issue. I don't have time to recheck everything I looked at yesterday but I was getting some very bizarre results. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 The outcomes bear no resemblance to the calculator. In particular the 122mm gun in game is much less powerful in game than it was in the calculator. What 122mm-armed vehicle are you using to test, and what are you testing against that gives differing results than the calculator? You may have discovered a vehicle in the game that uses uncapped AP, which I was not sure existed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcrain Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 What 122mm-armed vehicle are you using to test, and what are you testing against that gives differing results than the calculator? You may have discovered a vehicle in the game that uses uncapped AP, which I was not sure existed. The results I got previously were the 122mm AP penetrating Tiger II and Panther, both Turret and Hull at all angles. What was even more bizarre was the 88mm L71 was showing as less powerful than the 75mm L70. However tonight they are giving the expected results. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 Keep in mind that most "AP" rounds in the game are not actually AP. German AP is APCBC while Soviet AP is usually (but not always) APBC. There are sometimes huge differences in penetration between these types of ammunition. Soviet 122mm AP can only penetrate unflawed Panther glacis plate at spec thickness out to a few hundred meters, but 122mm APBC will penetrate to 1500+ meters. Some Soviet tanks and assault guns have AP, some have APBC, but unfortunately the game doesn't tell you which has what. As for the King Tiger, are you saying that your in-game tests show the 122mm penetrating the front upper hull? That would be surprising. The ballistics calculator says that should impossible. The KT armor would have to be of very low quality. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcrain Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 No my in game tests have always been as expected. It was the calculator that was giving me some strange results. I used it again a couple days later though and it appeared to be giving me similar results to in game. No idea why I was getting such strange results before. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 ^^^ That was unclear to me. Thanks for the followup. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xellos Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 No my in game tests have always been as expected. It was the calculator that was giving me some strange results. I used it again a couple days later though and it appeared to be giving me similar results to in game. No idea why I was getting such strange results before. In the last scenario of RT,my KT's turret(even the mantlet)often get penetrated beyond 900m by Js2 tanks. I have 8 KTs and 11 panthers,5 KTs and 4 panthers had been killed at 1000m range ,only destroyed 2 JS2s(the opponet have 5 JS2s ). In CMBB ,Russian 122mm gun can penetrate 136mm armor at 1000m,so I think there's something wrong with the armor or the gun's data. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 The penetration of Soviet cannon is definitely higher in CMRT than CMBB. I don't know for sure, but I think all the CMx2 games use WW II Ballistics as a basis, which if true would mean the Soviet 122mm cannon penetrates 158mm of RHA at 1000 meters when using AP ammunition and 162mm when using APBC. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pewpewchewchew Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 How exactly do I read the pencalc chart? http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/# 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Key Chart assumes target is in the center with the front at 0° Red: Areas where penetration is likely to occur Orange: Areas where penetration can occur but is unlikely Green: Areas where penetration will not occur Yellow: Areas where the projectile may shatter and fail to penetrate 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xellos Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 The penetration of Soviet cannon is definitely higher in CMRT than CMBB. I don't know for sure, but I think all the CMx2 games use WW II Ballistics as a basis, which if true would mean the Soviet 122mm cannon penetrates 158mm of RHA at 1000 meters when using AP ammunition and 162mm when using APBC. But Rexford's figure still can't explain why KT's mantlet even got penetrated at 900m-1000m .I think KT's mantlet is some kind of reinforced mantlet just like Tiger's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 But Rexford's figure still can't explain why KT's mantlet even got penetrated at 900m-1000m .I think KT's mantlet is some kind of reinforced mantlet just like Tiger's. In your previous post you didn't say it was the mantlet, you said "front turret", so that's what I went off of. Unlike the Tiger I, the KT's mantlet only covers a relatively small portion of the front turret area. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.