Ineffective small-cal penetrations

[Gutshot]

Time and again when small-calibre AP rounds penetrate an AFV,the crew seem to just laugh it off and continue as if nothing happened! Classic examples are when armoured cars are riddled like sieves by multiple AT-rifle penetrations,yet just happily roll on! Surely if high-vel slugs keeps letting daylight into their vehicle and then ricochetting around inside like crazy together with armour fragments,somebody's going to get hurt or severely rattled after just the first penetration? (Sorry if this has already been posted about,I haven't seen it)

[Thin Red Line]

I've seen crew injured and HTs abandonned due to intense AT-rifle fire.

But i've never seen the two members of the crew both killed by tungsten bullets.

[ January 24, 2003, 08:43 AM: Message edited by: Thin Red Line ]

[Sigurd]

As some software ompanies usually answers : It's not a bug, it's a feature ! But here it's true.

Indeed small AP shots like ATR tungsten rounds (which don't have any HE charge) have a good chance of doing no lethal damage when they penetrate small thickness of armour.

Yhey have much smaller kinetic energy than bigger calibers, and have a harder work damaging some vital part of the AFV, or killing a crew member.

Remeber what achieve a KO status when firing at AFV :

Damage the AFV (particularly in the engine compartment, in the amno/gasoline storage)

kill the crew, with armor flaking or shrapnels made from the armour, when it's penetrated. (or with a he charge included in some AP rounds)

Don't forget too the large empty space present in some AFV : hitting an empty passenger compartment of an half track isn't of much help with small ATR rounds.

i think the morale effect depends a lot on the experience of the crew, I saw conscripts/green become "shaken" rather quickly, even without any damage/kills.

[Gutshot]

Yes Sigurd,but I don't feel the "ricochet factor" plays a big enough part in Cmbb. Once a slug penetrates,surely the story doesn't end there,as it (and armour fragments) will continue bouncing around off the inside walls of the vehicle until its kinetic energy dissipates or until it's stopped by human flesh,

and all the "empty space" inside the vehicle won't be regarded as empty enough by the crew!

[Sigurd]

Hmm

I agree I just say you have less mess with small calibers than with higher. It’s a relative assessment.

Now, to obtain an absolute level of mess lethality/fear achieved by those rounds, only real experiences could tell, or veterans (or current soldiers with experience of the precise subject).

Otherwise it’s just a best guess, and it’s diffcicult to argue with guesses… perhaps u’re right, but how can you convince other ?

Perhaps you could try to give the estimated volume of the AFV a given round (say 14mm) should go through in order to damage/kill (keeping in mind the subsequent round fragments can hurt too). It would be a « killing zone ». For a ATR round on a HT, it the current system, such killing zone would be a limited volume of the overall vehicule, say 10% (you have to aim right to hit engine/crew). For a 88mm on a HT, 100% (wherever it lands, a 88mm overkills a HT).

Just an idea of a « math » model to give better idea of the problem. Your idea would be to raise the "killing zone" higher than the low % of the current system.

[SgtMuhammed]

One thing to remember is that there isn't a lot of fragmentation with an AT rifle round penetrating and HT. It is a lot like shooting a car door with a hunting rifle. You punch a nice neat hole and then the round continues inside the vehicle until it hits something. The round may get a bounce or two but it is quickly spent. The Tungsten rounds from an ATR don't have the mass to cause the type of energy transfer that will result in the armor fracturing and thus fragmenting, rather they tend to push the armor out of the way.

[Gutshot]

Yes guys I agree it's a mathy area,and perhaps crews aren't bothered too much by small rounds.I remember a true account of the commander of a Priest SPG being asked by Gen.Patton(I think) how the vehicle stood up to small-cal fire, to which the guy replied "Well sir,the odd round penetrates sometimes,but then it only sorta rattles around inside a little."

[mike the wino2]

SPOILER ALERT

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

I was not a big fan of ATR but played one hotseat game with a scenario as Ruskie paras holding a town that had oodles of ATGs as reinforcements. Got lots of hits before taking out HTs but according to my buddy I had knocked out the mgs/ caused casualities/ knocked out HTs long before they showed as KO'd. Damn Death Clock.

After that I have a new found respect for them against "soft armor".

[SgtMuhammed]

That is one good thing about the ATRs, they don't advertise themselves like other AT assets. So while it may take a number of hits to make a kill they will usually be able to survive long enough to get them.

[Andreas]

The inside of a Panzer III

I doubt there is a lot of ricocheting going on in there, looks awfully crammed to me. I would assume that earlier, smaller AFVs were probably more, and not less crammed?

[AndrewTF]

Don't discount hits to non-vital bits like mudguards, tool boxes, etc. There are lots of pieces on an AFV that can be hit and penetrated without going anywhere near the crew.

[MikeyD]

And a 37mm round won't just go into a BT, it'll got straight through! No 'marble-in-tin-can' rattling about.

You've also got to remember a tank crew bailing when under fire is as close as you'd want to get to a suicide move. The opponent tank would just spray you with mg fire as you bolted. Things would have to get VERY bad for you to choose one over the other.

(That doesn't hold true for the Sherman, which was notorious for burning. A Sherman crew would much rather be shot than burned to death).

[Aacooper]

I don't know if it was necessary or not, but one US tank gunner describes punching a hole in a German AC with an AP round, then following up with an HE round.

[Stalin's Organ]

I'll bet he didn't put the HE through the same hole!

He probably fired AP because that's what was "up the spout" and would normally use HE agaisnt an APC because punching holes in them isn't as good a guarantee as punching a hole in them and then exploding a lump of high explsive inside the tin can.

And you'll see this in CMBB - guns will often fire HE at light armoured vehicles - and they NEVER have to fire twice after hitting! (well not often anyway!!).

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Gutshot:

Yes Sigurd,but I don't feel the "ricochet factor" plays a big enough part in Cmbb. Once a slug penetrates,surely the story doesn't end there,as it (and armour fragments) will continue bouncing around off the inside walls of the vehicle until its kinetic energy dissipates or until it's stopped by human flesh,

and all the "empty space" inside the vehicle won't be regarded as empty enough by the crew!

British combat experience and German combat experience during the Desert war tell a different story. The former fired solid AP shot the latter fired APHE shells.

The fantastic perpetual motion AP projectile bouncing around forever is usually a favoured argument of the various Internet champions of the Browning 50cal gun. Be that as it may an Excerpt from a German report on Armour penetration curves: “As a rule, this effect is of annihilating power when using armour-piercing shells with a high explosive charge. When using hard core projectiles, steel or soft core projectiles, completely annihilating effect cannot always be expected with a single shot, because crew located in the dead space of the tank, cannot be hit under certain conditions.”

It was not until 1942 did the British investigate the high incidence of fires in British tanks post penetration. Major G.B. Jarrett in May 1942: “The German projectiles which have caused the greatest amount of damage to allied tank in the western desert campaigns have been the A.P.-H.E. type in 47mm, 50mm, 75mm and 88mm respectively. These projectiles at long range need only attain a partial penetration and the explosive charge can complete the destruction of at least the tank crew. At closer ranges the destructive effect is very great, where in many cases destruction of the tank is permanent.”……….. Of those (German) mark III and IV knocked out in combat by AP-shot, fewer than 20 percent were destroyed by fire or damaged so severely that they couldn’t be repaired.

A search would have brought out all these old arguments. (and this is all cut and paste from an older thread).

The "Ricohcet" factor does not play a part in CMBB because it did not play a part in real life. Why do you think everyone but the British fired APHE shells as opposed to AP shot as the prefered tank killing round. Never mind the worlds assorted navies settling on APHE shells as the only club in dealing with heavily armoured ships.

[ January 25, 2003, 05:25 AM: Message edited by: Bastables ]

[Stalin's Organ]

IMO the ricochet factor is probably vastly over-rated.

Think of the conditions for a ricochet - an oblique strike and little or no deformation of either the armour or the shell seem the best to me.

If there's a strike at close to 90 degrees then there's going to be no ricochet.

If hte armour or shell deform significantly then some of hte energy is used in that deformation lowering the energy left to propell the shell back into the space.

The shell has already lost a heap of energy coming into the vehicle - it seems to me that the chances of a significant riochet - ie one with enough energy to do further damage - are quite slight.

Armour and shell splinters are another story entirely - here larger shells have a huge advantage over smaller ones - the volume of armour displaced by a penetration increases with the square of the diameter of the projectile.

[Gutshot]

Okay guys thanks for the contributions,but leaving aside the hard data for a second,let's place ourselves in the shoes of the crew of a light AFV taking multiple small-cal penetrations.

Human nature being what it is,surely there's no way they're just going to ignore the violent hammerblow against the vehicle followed by the sudden appearance of a hole letting in daylight,to say nothing of possible dust and debris flying inside? Wouldn't the commander immediately order a quick move to try get out of the line of fire? A typical crew might-just might-ignore the first pen and possibly the second,but surely not a third and fourth and..catch my drift?

[Soddball]

Originally posted by Gutshot:

Okay guys thanks for the contributions,but leaving aside the hard data for a second,let's place ourselves in the shoes of the crew of a light AFV taking multiple small-cal penetrations.

Human nature being what it is,surely there's no way they're just going to ignore the violent hammerblow against the vehicle followed by the sudden appearance of a hole letting in daylight,to say nothing of possible dust and debris flying inside? Wouldn't the commander immediately order a quick move to try get out of the line of fire? A typical crew might-just might-ignore the first pen and possibly the second,but surely not a third and fourth and..catch my drift?

Your 'ineffective' small-cal penetrations aren't ineffective at all. They will be knocking out the weapons, or hitting the tracks, or at very least upsetting the crew of the vehicle you're hitting. Unless you're playing without fog of war,how can you possibly know whether the crew is 'shocked' or 'routed'? I suggest you run some tests and generate some proof that these small calibre penetrations actually are ineffective before you make any more inaccurate statements.

[SgtMuhammed]

Read the accounts of the fighting in Somolia. There are multiple reports of vehicles being penetrated by everything from small arms to RPGs yet not one crew decided to bug out even though they were in soft vehicles. Crews will tend to stay with their vehicles unless there is absolutly no other choice (there are exceptions of course) because that is the system they are trained on. At least in a HT you can still move around and have a modicum of protection, the holes are appearing in the vehicle rather than their bodies after all. Don't underestimate how absolutly terrifying it is to be on a battlefield with no means of defending yourself.

[Gutshot]

Hey guys!-If ever we find ourselves together in a light AFV that starts taking multiple holes,and if my veh commander doesn't get us out of there in a hurry, you can stick with that fire-magnet if you like,but I'm sure as hell outta there and diving for the nearest ditch!

(Edited to include-"and if my veh commander doesn't...")

[ January 25, 2003, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: Gutshot ]

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Gutshot:

Hey guys!-If ever we find ourselves together in a light AFV that starts taking multiple holes, you can stick with that fire-magnet if you like,but I'm sure as hell outta there and diving for the nearest ditch!

Well, if BFC needs the opinion of an untrained and inexperienced civilian during the rewrite of the game engine, I guess they know who to call now?

[Gutshot]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Gutshot:

Hey guys!-If ever we find ourselves together in a light AFV that starts taking multiple holes, you can stick with that fire-magnet if you like,but I'm sure as hell outta there and diving for the nearest ditch!

Well, if BFC needs the opinion of an untrained and inexperienced civilian during the rewrite of the game engine, I guess they know who to call now? </font>

[manchildstein (ii)]

gutshot, you may want to try some games without fog of war and see if the 20mm guns and ATRs are really doing 'nothing.'

i know from my own experience that having my AFVs penetrated - even by 'lowly' 20mm or ATRs - is unhealthy. i know that even if the first or even second or third such shots fail to do anything, that eventually the vehicle taking such hits is going to 'die.'

in other words, when my armored cars or light tanks start taking ATR fire, they're either a) toast or moved into cover or c) survive because the firing enemy units are destroyed or run out of ammo...

it's already been said but i'll say it again: if you're playing with detailed vehicle hits, and you get the 'penetration' message about an enemy AFV, yet the AFV continues to 'function,' you may not have the whole story. i've seen AFVs with casualties and in 'shaken' or even 'panic' states actually firing their weapons in the midst of all of it!

in other words, penetrations are almost invariably to some degree good for the firing side and bad for the side taking the fire...

now if you think there is a bug regarding light armor and light guns/ATRs, you should do some extensive testing and provide BTS with the data...

[Gutshot]

Yes Manchild,I'm probably just too impatient waiting for a shot-up light AFV to die! Thanks for all the hard data and comments guys,and especially SgtWoody's suggestion that I read up on Somalia,as I've long believed you can't beat reading true-life accounts to get the most valid appraisal of things.

[mike the wino2]

Original post by Michael Dorosh

Well, if BFC needs the opinion of an untrained and inexperienced civilian during the rewrite of the game engine, I guess they know who to call now?

You dick, I just about shot beer out of nose on this one. Please tone it down for us drinking adult beverages while reading the forum.

BTW, ROFL.