Gryphon Posted April 30, 2001 Share Posted April 30, 2001 Hiya Sometime ago i read about certain Panzer III variants being equipped with spaced armor, there was also a part that stated that spaced armor could defeat the Russian 122mm APHE rounds, i was wondering if this effect is the same for tanks with skirts, for example, if a Panzer IV with skirts would be hit by a APHE round, would the round score a no effect like with spaced armor? Thanks in advance Regards, Gryphon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted April 30, 2001 Share Posted April 30, 2001 Assuming APHE means shaped charge, skirts would make a IV more survivable. The round would detonate too far away making the blast unfocused and dispersed. But the only time ive seen Russian 122 HEAT rounds was on SU-122s, which they were dissappointed by at Kursk. I would guess thats due to the use of spaced armor and skirts on the IIIs and IV. Also they were short barreled so it was hard to hit tanks at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted May 1, 2001 Share Posted May 1, 2001 APHE means armour piercing high explosive, a small explosive charge encased in a thick armour piercing shell. It is designed to explode when entering the tanks thereby increasing the damage to the inside. There are indeed reports saying that the APHE rounds of the SU-122's had trouble defeating spaced armour. I don't know about skirts though, it would depend on the sensitivity of the shell. They did prematurely detonate regular HE shells though. The skirts themselves where primarily fitted to protect the tanks from the Russian 14.5 mm ATR's. Later they may have been found to be effective against Hollow Charge rounds as well. M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted May 1, 2001 Share Posted May 1, 2001 From what I have read the skirts were made to use up the energy of the charge so that the tank wasn't tanken out. They were put on all meduim German tanks after January 1943. And some heavey tanks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted May 1, 2001 Share Posted May 1, 2001 The German name for the skirts was Schuerzen. The Panther and all later vehicles had them over the tracks. The Russians also used skirts a bit. If you dig around, you can find pics of IS-2s and T-34s with sheet metal skirts on the sides of their turrets mostly. It apparently helped stop Panzerfaust and schreck rounds. They werent nearly as common as the German kinds though. The skirts were mainly designed to stop HC, because the mesh kind sure as hell wont stop AT rifles. In CM, try to kill a Pz IV H from the sides with a bazooka. Its pretty hard to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Lakowski Posted May 1, 2001 Share Posted May 1, 2001 Yes they were designed to stop ATR shots and APHE and they effected all APHE shots. Not sure if thin mild steel would generate enough shock wave to detonate the round. The concept comes from Italian Battleships in 1900 and was extensivly studied after that. If was also found that these plates 'decaped' APCBC rounds as well. It must have been difficult to do or it would have been done to all tanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted May 1, 2001 Share Posted May 1, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by panzerwerfer42: The skirts were mainly designed to stop HC, because the mesh kind sure as hell wont stop AT rifles. In CM, try to kill a Pz IV H from the sides with a bazooka. Its pretty hard to do.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, mesh skirts where sure as hell used in the initial development of the schürtzen concept and found to be equally effective against ATR rounds when compared to solid plates. For more information on this check the recent thread covering most aspects of this matter. Can't rightly recall the name of the thread but it started of as a discussion on Soviet anti tank rifles. The conclusion was , in my opinion, that shaped charges had nothing to do with the development initially. M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted May 1, 2001 Share Posted May 1, 2001 Hello Paul! Thanks for all the good materiel and interesting angels posted here and elsewhere on this "mythical" subject. It went a long way in finally "fixing" the situation for me. M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted May 5, 2001 Share Posted May 5, 2001 Try looking at this page. [url=http://www.geocities.com/Augusta/8172/panzerfaust1.htm#spaced] Lots of stuff about skirts. Be sure to look at the Russian ones. Those are rather different than the German kind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny D. Posted May 5, 2001 Share Posted May 5, 2001 If the skirts were designed to stop ATR's then why wasn't they deployed a lot sooner than '43, when ATR's were in use prior to the war beginning. I think it's more than irony that schurzen wasn't seen regularly on german vehicles until near when the Germans started fielding HC weapons themselves. The Germans were one of the first to discover the power of the shape charge and one of the only armies with standard protection against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Lakowski Posted May 5, 2001 Share Posted May 5, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Johnny D.: If the skirts were designed to stop ATR's then why wasn't they deployed a lot sooner than '43, when ATR's were in use prior to the war beginning. I think it's more than irony that schurzen wasn't seen regularly on german vehicles until near when the Germans started fielding HC weapons themselves. The Germans were one of the first to discover the power of the shape charge and one of the only armies with standard protection against it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> There was always a battle between the branch that build the Pz and those who use them and a year was about right for the 'solution' to be implimented. Remember from the arrogant German POV the war in the east was never supposed to extend beyond 1941. When it did they institued a number of programs to 'solve' some of the technical problems ..like the Pz could resist 76mm ammo and ATR etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skipper Posted May 5, 2001 Share Posted May 5, 2001 The skirts were designed against soviet anti-tank rifle. We have it on Guderian's word. I guess, inspector general of Panzerwaffe knew what he was talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Johnny D.: If the skirts were designed to stop ATR's then why wasn't they deployed a lot sooner than '43, when ATR's were in use prior to the war beginning.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The British Matilda II was using skirts to protect the tracks and hull sides from early 1940. I can't say if they were specifically intended to provide protection from ATRs or just in general. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted May 7, 2001 Share Posted May 7, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Johnny D.: [QB]If the skirts were designed to stop ATR's then why wasn't they deployed a lot sooner than '43[QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, Johnny.. The Soviet army produced it's ATR's during 1942. As they where issued to the AT weapon starved troops in great numbers during this year they become a problem at this point in time. The design that eventually led to the schürtzen started in the end of 1942 and was tested and approved in early 1943. These tests were made using captured Soviet 14.5 mm ATR's and 76 mm guns firing HE. In April 1943 the schürtzen where in large scale production. M. [ 05-06-2001: Message edited by: Mattias ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts