Russian Big Guns vs Panther

[rexford]

The Russian additions to CM will see the introduction of really big guns and flat nose rounds, which take maximum advantage of flaws and thin armor (relative to their gigantic size).

When 76mm or 17 pounder APCBC hits Panther glacis, the effective resistance is about 177mm at 0° after quality decrease. Against 152mm AP effective resistance is about 136mm at 0°, and 152mm flat nose APBC is resisted by 95mm at 0° (all figures after 0.85 quality adjustment).

Due to a 0.85 quality loss factor and low slope effects against big rounds, Panther glacis becomes highly vulnerable to 152mm hits at fairly long combat ranges.

In addition to the penetration threat, cracking on defeated hits also becomes a major factor.

17 pounder APCBC hits on flawed Panther glacis armor at a few hundred yards cracked the armor where penetration was less than effective resistance. Potapov's site includes a story where 122 AP hit a Panther glacis at 2500m and left large holes where the armor broke like a glass sheet hit by a boulder. Brittle armor does things like that.

Defeated hits on Panther glacis could leave the armor with a crack that would readily allow full penetration on hits close to the damaged area, which may explain why 122 AP penetrated at 650m but broke the glacis at 2500m: there may have been a pre-existing crack.

Panther D at Kursk may have had a face-hardened glacis, and while this would improve performance against 152mm rounds without armor piercing caps, stories of SU 152 kills against Panthers at good ranges suggest that the medium hardness layer under the thin face-hardening couldn't handle the impact very well (thin face-hardened layer at about 500 Brinell, underlying armor at about 250-300 Brinell).

And hits on that exposed weld line along the glacis/nose intersection adds to vulnerability.

It may be necessary to input glacis cracking into CM, where follow-up hits near or on the crack "ace" the armor. This might be handled as a weak point hit.

Panther looks good against 76 HVAP and 17 pounder APCBC, the Russian front and really big guns should change the view.

[KiwiJoe]

I've often woundered about armour weakening after multiple hits. In CM, on occasion, tanks can take 10+ hits to the same general area in a battle. It certainly would spice things up if cracking and weakening was introduced into CM2. Also a basic damage skin would be sweet. Black holes for penetrated rounds, and scraps/pit marks etc for rounds that bounce and break up.

[This message has been edited by KiwiJoe (edited 01-11-2001).]

[This message has been edited by KiwiJoe (edited 01-11-2001).]

[Guest Warphead-]

A 152mm round is able to simply ripp the turret off a Panther. There was no need to penetrate.

------------------

http://www.nahverteidigungswaffe.de

"Haben die Krupp-Werke Betriebsausflug? Da rollt ja halb Deutschland auf mich zu..." (Vincent)]

[Guest Rollstoy]

Is this the historic moment of the introduction of 'hit points' to Combat Mission?!