Gryphon Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 Hello, I must say that despite the fact I am a ww2 fanboy, I love the new setting! What puzzles me however, is how you guys are going to handle armour (penetration) for modern vehicles. Modern armour composition (resistance) and armour penetration numbers are generally well kept secrets. So, how did you guys do it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 You'ld be surprised how much info is available on this stuff. Some if it is estimated, but that's even true of some ww2 armor. Example: T-80U Armor Estimate: Preliminary notes: The maximum thickness of the T-80U front turret armor is reported to be 815mm thick reaching ~920mm near the gun in the "weakened zone". The insert is probably similar in size to the T-90 with ~380mm LOS insert thickness suggested. The turret is cast with almost half insert which is probably AD-90 mounted on STEF. The KE value of this combo is probably (0.9+0.41)/2 = 0.65 and HEAT value of (1.5+0.55)/2=1.025. Thus the effectiveness is 0.78 KE and 1.02 HEAT around the front turret and 0.66 KE and 0.775 HEAT around the rest of the turret. In other words the 815mm front turret LOS thickness translates into 0.78 x 815 or 64cm KE resistance while the mantle reaches ~83cm and the sloping walls reach 56cm KE resistance. However the 'free edge effect' should reduce the KE values below these figures, the area near the gun would go down 0.6 to 50cm KE, while the 815mm section should be ~0.9 x 64cm or 57cm, and the main walls would be ~ 0.95 times 56cm or 53cm. So the weakened area is around 50-51cm while the main walls are 53-57cm KE. The HEAT values should be 720-815 x 1.02 or ~73-83cm along the main walls. Kontakt-5 coverage seems to be about 60%. Upper front turret is 5cm cast plus 5cm STEF at ~77-78°. Glacis is 235mm thick with three steel plates of varing hardness and one layer of STEF. If we assume all plates are 5cm with one of the steel plates semi-hardened steel and the STEF is 5.5cm thick, - The steel would equal 10 + 5 x 1.34 or 16.7cm plus the STEF, which has a KE resistance of 0.41 and HEAT value of 0.55, thus the total resistance is 18.9cm KE and 19.7cm HEAT @ 67° or 49.7cm KE and 52cm HEAT .But a 3cm hard steel plate was added in the 80s boosting the KE resistance by 1.34 x 3 ч 0.38; or 60cm KE & 63cm HEAT. With K-5 thats 78±2cm KE & 108± 5cm HEAT. Lower hull is 8-10cm at 64° = LOS thickness of 0.438 or 17-23cm KE armor, plus a rubber flap that hangs from the hull nose and provides a basic spaced armor for HEAT warheads. Since the rubber flap is likely to slide against the penetrating HEAT Jet it probably offers about 7-9cm plus the effect of standoff [6cm HEAT] for a total of about 30-38cm HEAT armor. The additional KE resistance is maybe +1cm due to projectile deflection or yaw.Linky 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 Ok, but can you find a similar site for the Abrams? Or the armour penetration for the Javelin? There is some good info out there, but much of the performance of the new stuff is classified in one form or another. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undead reindeer cavalry Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 there's lots of good info about very modern stuff out there. here's one page to get you started: http://members.tripod.com/collinsj/protect.htm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 Um, of course it's classified. That's why the values are estimates in some cases (as I pointed out). Steel Beasts uses stats compiled by Paul Lakowski. You'ld have to ask him where he gets his info. I'm not sure where Major H gets the values used in TacOps. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roqf77 Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 still, its all classified. No one realy has an idea how good chobbam mk1 and 2 are etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 Originally posted by Gryphon: Hello, I must say that despite the fact I am a ww2 fanboy, I love the new setting! What puzzles me however, is how you guys are going to handle armour (penetration) for modern vehicles. Modern armour composition (resistance) and armour penetration numbers are generally well kept secrets. So, how did you guys do it? This is perhaps the BEST question yet. -tom w 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gryphon Posted October 10, 2005 Author Share Posted October 10, 2005 Shameless bump for BFC to reply. While there are very detailed "estimates" and the link about the T-80U is nothing short of impressive, I still wonder how they are going to handle this puppy. Some posters already pointed it out in this thread, the info about western equipment is safely kept secret. For all we know the [insert any western modern tank in here] may have Mk IV paper maché armour or Mk-9ZX void shields. Gryphy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 bump 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gryphon Posted October 10, 2005 Author Share Posted October 10, 2005 bump 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMC Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 The real data is classified. They're going to guess... or they're going to crib from Close Combat: Marines and make the M1A2 the indestructable supertank from hell. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 CMSF is a near future hypothetical thingy! Good educated guesstimations are all they need regarding penetration and armor stats. Who can gripe about incorrect modelling when the realities are top secret? BFC can't be proven wrong! Hehe.... Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Drago Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Pffft, it's a well-known fact that BFC is in cahoots with the armies of the U.S., U.K., Germany and most other Western European powers. The top brass is shelving out top cash to make sure BFC gets the right values so all other future operations can be properly simulated dozens of times to insure the highest possible rate of success! The Russian Federation has been in talks with Madmatt about giving up their info in return for this high-tech sim, but it's reported BFC won't settle for anything less then two dozen suitcase nukes one of those 100 megaton ICBM's they claimed to have decommisioned. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Some of whatt you say just might be correct, Ivan. I predict BFC will get some military contracts out of their Syria simulation. Such contracts may even have been a motivation to do Syria first. More power to 'em! Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMC Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 'cept the "hot" Army scenario in recent years has been Caspian Sea. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Yes, we are going to have to guess in some instances. However, we do have some real world data to take a look at. We know of documented cases of certain ATGMs taking out Abrams in certain spots. Since we know a bit about the ATGMs' abilities we can get some preliminary guestimates about what the defensive value is. There are others who have taken a stab at it as well. For Javelin we aren't worried. Official sources state that it can KO a current Abrams without difficulty. Therefore it can kill anything without difficulty. All we have to do is just make it's penetration value 100000000000mm and we're all set What is more interesting, and challenging, is simulating the various other defensive systems and how to defeat them. For example, in Grozny the defenders found that if one guy hit a side with an RPG it would detonate the reactive armor. No kidding Then two of his buddies, carefully placed, would fire at the same exact spot. With the reactive armor gone from that spot, a penetration was pretty much a sure bet. So not only do we need to simulate these systems, but we need to simulate them very much 1:1. So that is exactly what we are going to do! BTW, the other way to get decent numbers is to have guys with classified info play it and listen for complaints that such and such should be "a little bit more" or "a little bit less". Think I'm kidding? Let's just say we weren't the ones that came up with this idea Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 BTW, the other way to get decent numbers is to have guys with classified info play it and listen for complaints that such and such should be "a little bit more" or "a little bit less". Think I'm kidding? Let's just say we weren't the ones that came up with this idea Steve Excellent, Smithers! -tom w 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: BTW, the other way to get decent numbers is to have guys with classified info play it and listen for complaints that such and such should be "a little bit more" or "a little bit less". Think I'm kidding? Let's just say we weren't the ones that came up with this idea Steve Hehe...this is great. CMSF modelling will be well within the ballpark; and very few, if any, will be able to argue differently with any concrete evidence to back them up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwazydog Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Also to add to what Steve said there is actually a lot of information out there available on Russian equipment and capabilities which is openly available, even including their newer gear. And as such it will mainly be some of the US gear that may be somewhat harder for us to tie down (and there is actually quite a bit of info about on it if you look hard enough). Anyone interested in info on the Russian gear should check out the below book as it has a lot of interesting information in it... Soviet/Russian Armor and Artillery Design Practices: 1945 to Present Dan 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Originally posted by KwazyDog: Also to add to what Steve said there is actually a lot of information out there available on Russian equipment and capabilities which is openly available, even including their newer gear. And as such it will mainly be some of the US gear that may be somewhat harder for us to tie down (and there is actually quite a bit of info about on it if you look hard enough). Anyone interested in info on the Russian gear should check out the below book as it has a lot of interesting information in it... Soviet/Russian Armor and Artillery Design Practices: 1945 to Present Dan I have to vouch for that book also, it is a gem. I actually thought it was out of print (Darlington Productions seems to have disappeared off the map) so get it while you can. You won't regret it. The photos from the Russian army national tank museum (Kubinka IIRC?) are especially intriguing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillweed Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 All I can say is you guy f*ckin rock! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwazydog Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Originally posted by gunnergoz: I picked it up about two years ago now, and Im pretty sure its been in and out of print since! Acutally, Ive noticed that the $65 price has a 'special purchase' comment next to it and under second hand copies people people are trying to sell it for up to $190! I suggest that if anyone is interested they would want to pick it up sooner rather than later Dan 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.