Guest AggroMann Posted November 24, 2000 Share Posted November 24, 2000 1. Was playing a pal in CMBO the other day and he had a King Tiger. I had 3 M36 Jacksons with a 90mm gun. The KT knocked out 2/3 of my M36s. I ordered my last M36 to charge, as he was bouncing shells of the KT from 150m away. He managed to get within 4 meters of the KT and they both fired a round. Now i have a screen shot of this but i couldn't figure out how to post it, anyways the 90mm round of my Jackson deflected off the front armor of the KT. And the KT knocked out my M36! My M36 was 4 meters away! the barrel of it's gun was right up close to the hull of the KT and still it was deflected! Now i don't know much in the way of the gun to armor ratios in WWII but this seemed a bit bogus to me... 2. Also i was playing a game where i set up an ambush marker with a flamethrower in the hopes that my opponents StuGIIIG (late)would wander through that area. It did and i knocked it out. I didn't complain, but is it really realistic that a flamthrower can knock-out a StuG that is buttoned? ------------------ AGGRO-MANN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted November 24, 2000 Share Posted November 24, 2000 Don't have the penetrations values of the 90mm against the front armor of a KT so I can't help you there but... Just think what happens to a vehicle whe you COVER it in liquid fire. All the oxygen goes bye-bye, thus the engine stalls and the men inside get hot and can't breath. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted November 24, 2000 Share Posted November 24, 2000 In my very first game of CMv1.01, I had a flamethrower EXPLODE one of my Panthers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted November 24, 2000 Share Posted November 24, 2000 Aggro, check out the armor thickness on the KT vs the stated penetration values of the M36 gun. Even at 100m, the Jackson's gun will penetrate just barely 150mm of armor at 30 degree slope; the KT is listed as having turret/hull front armor at least that thick and/or much more steeply sloped. Also keep in mind the oft-recorded tendency of US AP shells to shatter upon impact regardless of range. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Posted November 25, 2000 Share Posted November 25, 2000 Does'nt most AT ordinance need some travel distance to build up speed to have good penetration? Maybe the U.S. 90mm was too close to enter the KT. ------------------ Blessed be the Lord my strength who teaches my hands to war and my fingers to fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Stars Posted November 25, 2000 Share Posted November 25, 2000 I don't think so.I am not a hard core ballistic expert, but I think once it leaves the barrel that is the fastest the shell goes...I could be wrong though.....fetch a Grog!! ------------------ "Life is pain. Anyone saying otherwise is selling something." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Captain Foobar* Posted November 25, 2000 Share Posted November 25, 2000 I don't claim to be a grog, but I know for a fact that a shell receives its forward energy while in barrel. After that, for all intents and purposes, it will not increase in speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris5110 Posted November 25, 2000 Share Posted November 25, 2000 It breaks down like this the 90mm gun of the M 36 will with an AP round penetrate. 149 mm with 0 armor slope 115 mm with 30 degrees of armor slope 65 mm with 60 degrees of armor slope The King Tiger ( Pz VIB ) has 185 mm of front turret armor with a 10 degree slope. The upper hull has 150 mm with 50 degree slope. The lower hull has 100 mm with 50 degree slope. Thus no armor penetration. these figures represent gun penetration out to 100 meters. I believe a slope of 60 degrees effectively doubles your armor thickness. Hope it helps [This message has been edited by Chris5110 (edited 11-24-2000).] [This message has been edited by Chris5110 (edited 11-24-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Malan Posted November 25, 2000 Share Posted November 25, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AggroMann: 2. Also i was playing a game where i set up an ambush marker with a flamethrower in the hopes that my opponents StuGIIIG (late)would wander through that area. It did and i knocked it out. I didn't complain, but is it really realistic that a flamthrower can knock-out a StuG that is buttoned? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Go and look at a tank sometime. They have engines, with air inlets, cooling air inlets, radiators, fuel lines, suspension, hatches that maybe don't quite seal, etc etc etc. Now immerse it in flames from a burning fuel mixture. Now sit inside. Engine stops (if you are lucky), crew can't see. Lots of noise, thick black smoke. Molotov cocktails (bottle of petrol with a rag fuse) will knock out a tank, flamethrowers do it easy. (Trick is to get close enough to do it!) ------------------ The conception of such a plan was impossible for a man of Montgomery's innate caution...In fact, Montgomery's decision to mount the operation ...[Market Garden] was as startling as it would have been for an elderly and saintly Bishop suddenly to decide to take up safe breaking and begin on the Bank of England. (R.W.Thompson, Montgomery the Field Marshall) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dima Posted November 25, 2000 Share Posted November 25, 2000 Someone already posted when I was typing Regarding #2 - very realistic ! Russians during WW2 used to destroy tanks with wat was called "Molotov's coctail" Two parts of gasoline and one part of motor oil, all in a glass bottle, with some cotton sticking out from the bottle. Fire up this piece of cotton, and through on the tank, especcialy on its back park. Bottle brakes, misture of gas and oil spills in flames. Because tank (even buttoned) has holes here and there, burning liquid goes inside tank and starts fire there. Even one 1L bottle was enough to disable tank. I am pretty sure other nations used similar stuff ! [This message has been edited by dima (edited 11-24-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Stars Posted November 25, 2000 Share Posted November 25, 2000 OOh! recipie for a Molotov!!! Now my revolution can begin!!!!!hahaha!!! (Now if I only Knew J. Pieper's Address...) P.S. I AM KIDDING.....no feds waking me up, please..... ------------------ "Life is pain. Anyone saying otherwise is selling something." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Petersson Posted November 27, 2000 Share Posted November 27, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wayne: Does'nt most AT ordinance need some travel distance to build up speed to have good penetration?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Depends on what type of ordnance it is; - Regular gun/howitzer/mortar ammo (including small arms) does get a little extra push even after it leaves the barrel, say for about one calibre or so beyond the barrel. - Rocket propelled missiles accelerate for some distance after leaving the launcher, before reaching cruise speed. Neither of this have any real influence on penetration though. Another point is that projectiles fired through a rifled barrel have a precessing moment (the projectile length axis isn't parallell to the movement, but rotates along the movement axis), that decrease penetration, for some distance. When moving down range the projectile stabilises, which decrease drag and increase penetration. For a typical assault rifle the stabilisation distance is about 100m IIRC. I guess a larger calibre guns will have longer stabilisation distances. Cheers Olle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts