arpella72 Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 (edited) The upgraded Pz IV H, that appears in the game,was designed with an spaced armour arround the turret and armoured skirts(schürzen) to protect the vehicle from rounds with hollow charges like bazooka rounds.i wonder if this really works in the game because I'm under the sensation that it doesn't make any difference with tanks without this feature.Has anybody made some test about it?,is the spaced armour really effective in stopping bazooka rounds? Edited February 16, 2017 by arpella72 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AttorneyAtWar Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 (edited) That extra armor was initially designed to stop anti-tank rifle rounds, the affect on shaped charge warheads was not intended from the beginning. I'm pretty sure in some cases it actually doesn't help much at all because it detonates the charge prematurely and the jet can still penetrate afterwords. I'm sure someone will come along and correct me but I think I have the jist of it! Edited February 16, 2017 by Raptorx7 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swant Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 According to Steve Zaloga, spaced armor could even help to make hollow charges more effective because they worked better if they exploded a bit in front of the armor. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 I think he means is the skirt merely eye-candy in the game? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swant Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 1 minute ago, Erwin said: I think he means is the skirt merely eye-candy in the game? Yes but if it doesnt make a diffrence to a bazooka in real life then... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snarre Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 i tjust say this . skirt is saved my day many time , again bazooka 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 They are not just eye candy. The skirts protect against anti-tank rifles and to a lesser extent HEAT rounds. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 I recall even the Germans at the time were unsure about the efficacy of those armored skirts. it was designed to counter anti-tank rifles but if the troops wanted to believe they helped against hollow charge too that helped with morale if nothing else. The allies were no better informed. They were the ones who coined the term 'bazooka plates'. A lot of what we consider 'common knowledge' about WWII equipment only came to the surface decades later after much research into original documents. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 Well I just hit a tank with a Bazooka round in the turret last night that had the skirt- result- 1 dead bazooka team. My impressions is they do work at least some of the time- like when it is MY bazooka guy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artemis258 Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 4 hours ago, sburke said: Well I just hit a tank with a Bazooka round in the turret last night that had the skirt- result- 1 dead bazooka team. My impressions is they do work at least some of the time- like when it is MY bazooka guy Yeah, my experiences have often been similar, though sometimes you get lucky. Lots of variable play into it though -what kind of HEAT round, where it hits, angle of dangle, ect... I'd rather have 'em and not need them than need them and not have them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user1000 Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 (edited) The Germans designed them originally on the Eastern front to protect against HE. Some smaller Soviet rounds would detonate on them first before hitting the tank. The soviets used HE rounds instead of AP in their tanks constantly. The bazooka has a shaped charge not hollow. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaced_armour Edited February 17, 2017 by user1000 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user1000 Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 Found this over at WH Despite the reputation of German leviathans such as the Tiger, Panther, and Elefant armored vehicles, the predominant tank in German service throughout the war remained the venerable, dependable Mark IV. In fact, Col. Gen. Heinz Guderian, a legendary German armored commander, even recommended a “quantity over quality” approach, concentrating on mass-producing upgraded Mark IVs rather than expending valuable time, resources and manufacturing capabilities developing new tanks. The PTR series of weapons with the BS-41 tungsten-cored armor-piercing round was able to penetrate 35 to 40mm of armor at 300 meters; the side armor of the German Mark III and Mark IV tanks was only 30mm at its thickest on the flanks. The addition of another 8mm of steel armor Schurzen, physically separate from the hull armor, in addition to providing extra thickness, caused the 14.5mm round to expend much of its energy and begin to tumble from a nose-first attitude while penetrating this first layer. It also helped to protect the more vulnerable wheels and suspension system. Some Western historians have nicknamed these skirts “bazooka pants” and attribute their addition to the appearance of shaped-charge weapons such as the American bazooka and British PIAT. The use of Schurzen was undoubtedly quite effective against shaped-charge HEAT (high explosive antitank) rounds as well, but its adoption was due to Soviet antitank rifles. German accounts from both the field and manufacturers lay the adoption of Schurzen squarely at the feet of the endless supply of Soviet antitank rifles. Guerdian stated, “The ‘aprons’ were sheets of armor plating which were hung loose about the flanks and rear end of the Panzer III and Panzer IV and the assault guns; they were intended to deflect or nullify the effect of the Russian infantry’s antitank weapons, which could otherwise penetrate the relatively thin, vertical body armor of those types of vehicle.” 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 Very interesting. Thanks... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arpella72 Posted February 18, 2017 Author Share Posted February 18, 2017 Thanks guys.Yes,I found that the spaced armour and schürzen were firstly designed as protection against the russian AT rifles.Looks like they weren't that effective against bazooka rounds but the russians didn't have anything like the bazooka or the british PIAT. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted February 18, 2017 Share Posted February 18, 2017 On 18/02/2017 at 1:00 AM, user1000 said: The bazooka has a shaped charge not hollow. What's the difference between a hollow charge and a shaped charge? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armorgunner Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 9 hours ago, JonS said: What's the difference between a hollow charge and a shaped charge? I think the difference might be that user1000 is not native english speaking. Since shaped charges, sometimes is called hollow charges. Due to the Copper cone is hollow in one side. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 (edited) For those unable to use Google: "hollow charge: A shaped charge producing a deep cylindrical hole of relatively small diameter in the direction of its axis of rotation." "A shaped charge is an explosive charge shaped to focus the effect of the explosive's energy. Various types are used to cut and form metal, initiate nuclear weapons, penetrate armor, and "complete" wells in the oil and gas industry. A shaped charge is a concave metal hemisphere or cone (known as a liner) backed by a high explosive, all in a steel or aluminum casing. When the high explosive is detonated, the metal liner is compressed and squeezed forward, forming a jet whose tip may travel as fast as 10 kilometers per second." Edited February 19, 2017 by Erwin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armorgunner Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 30 minutes ago, Erwin said: For those unable to use Google: "hollow charge: A shaped charge producing a deep cylindrical hole of relatively small diameter in the direction of its axis of rotation." "A shaped charge is an explosive charge shaped to focus the effect of the explosive's energy. Various types are used to cut and form metal, initiate nuclear weapons, penetrate armor, and "complete" wells in the oil and gas industry. A shaped charge is a concave metal hemisphere or cone (known as a liner) backed by a high explosive, all in a steel or aluminum casing. When the high explosive is detonated, the metal liner is compressed and squeezed forward, forming a jet whose tip may travel as fast as 10 kilometers per second." The same thing, in other words. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 Yeah, that's what I thought. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 4 hours ago, Armorgunner said: I think the difference might be that user1000 is not native english speaking. I don't think so, though that is a possibility. My own pet theory is that he is a bright but of limited education 17 year old who is new to military matters, but is enthusiastically trying to absorb as much as quickly as he can. Unfortunately, his immaturity sometimes trips him up as he makes declarations with greater confidence than is justified. But he is making progress in that he is not as snotty about it all as he used to be. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armorgunner Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, Michael Emrys said: I don't think so, though that is a possibility. My own pet theory is that he is a bright but of limited education 17 year old who is new to military matters, but is enthusiastically trying to absorb as much as quickly as he can. Unfortunately, his immaturity sometimes trips him up as he makes declarations with greater confidence than is justified. But he is making progress in that he is not as snotty about it all as he used to be. Michael Well as long as he is making progress in the right Way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user1000 Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, Michael Emrys said: I don't think so, though that is a possibility. My own pet theory is that he is a bright but of limited education 17 year old who is new to military matters, but is enthusiastically trying to absorb as much as quickly as he can. Unfortunately, his immaturity sometimes trips him up as he makes declarations with greater confidence than is justified. But he is making progress in that he is not as snotty about it all as he used to be. Michael whine and mope, instead of offering something decent of which the original poster was questioning about... Edited February 19, 2017 by user1000 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 26 minutes ago, user1000 said: whine and mope, I was doing neither, and for you to mischaracterize people in that way does your reputation no good. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 (edited) JonS, Hollow charges, shaped charges, HEAT and what the Russians and others refer to as "charges of cumulative effect" are the exact same thing. The last absolutely baffled me when I came across it in translated Russian military literature, for I had zero idea what it meant and had to puzzle it out for myself. Regards, John Kettler Edited February 20, 2017 by John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arpella72 Posted February 20, 2017 Author Share Posted February 20, 2017 (edited) I found this interesting information,some test carried out by the Canadians in february 1945. https://servicepub.wordpress.com/2014/08/30/allied-trials-to-counteract-panzerfaust-attacks/ It says that spaced armour must,at least, 75cm wide to be effective against hollow charges and that less space can even enhance their effect. Edited February 20, 2017 by arpella72 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.