Author Topic: Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field  (Read 2226 times)

Offline Wutz

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 107
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #30 on: November 21, 2001, 03:44:00 PM »
- - - -Energy        - -Energy
          - - - -kinetic       - -Explosive
             -  - - -(kJ)       - - -(kJ)
30 mm MK 103      --854         --2765
30 mm MK 108      --318         --2987
20 mm Type1(ho5)  --654         --1004
20mm M2           --557         --636
20mm Mk V Hispano --516         --632
20 mm ShVAK       --410         --553
20 mm MG 151      --343         --589
20 mm Type 99     --157         --442
20 mm MG FF       --146         --388

12.7mm UBK        --303         ---0
12.7mm UBS        --231         ---0
.50 M2 Browning   --220         ---0
12.7mm Type I     --130         ---0
13mm MG 131       --112         ---0

7.62mm ShKAS       --98         ---0
7.9mm MG 81        --67         ---0
7.9mm MG 17        --57         ---0
.30 M2 Browning    --52         ---0
.303 Browning      --47         ---0
7.7mm Type 97      --36         ---0
7.7mm Type 92      --32         ---0

 Essentially, the lethality of a gun can be measured by multiplying the destructive power of its projectile and the number of hits.  For nonexplosive projectiles, destructive qualities are generally proportional to Kinetic Energy: One half the mass of the projectile times the square of the velocity.  To be more technically correct, the velocity used should be the relative impact velocity, but for comparison purposes, muzzle velocity will do.   Cannon are a somewhat different case, since much of the lethality of these weapons are derived from their explosive shells.  When computing the lethality of a cannon, an additional amount of Energy from the explosive component of the shell must be added to the Kinetic Energy, ie Explosive Energy + Kinetic Energy = Total Energy.

This is how it is in RL so the faults in AH should be easy too discover.

Web page abt Energy and guns+++++

[ 11-21-2001: Message edited by: Wutz ]

[ 11-21-2001: Message edited by: Wutz ]

[ 11-21-2001: Message edited by: Wutz ]

[ 11-21-2001: Message edited by: Wutz ]

Offline BenDover

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5803
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #31 on: November 21, 2001, 03:59:00 PM »
i don't know if this was said before or not,but does the mk5 hispono round have both ap and he properties in one round???

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #32 on: November 21, 2001, 04:00:00 PM »
Ahhh, theres hope for you yet Karnak!

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #33 on: November 21, 2001, 04:46:00 PM »
Hi Vermillion,

>FYI the effect of explosives is linear, ie the energy liberated by the explosives themselves. Its the application of that energy, ie the shockwave, fragmentation, and other transmission effects, that is not linear.

Well aware of that, I used the term "effect" and not "energy". It's your reply that first suggests its the same, then explains why it isn't :-)

>But for the purposes of this discussion its accurate enough without having some really high end explosive simulations software.

For a hangar target, total energy should be quite adequate :-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline Wutz

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 107
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #34 on: November 21, 2001, 04:48:00 PM »
Here is an example of the real life facts Vs AH facts.

Hispano 20mm Mk V used 240 rd's too destroy a VH. Ok 240 rd x Total Energy of the Hispano (516+632) =1148 in Total Energy = 275520 Energy too destroy a VH. Ok Total energy of the Japanees Ho 5 20mm (654+1004) = 1658 in Total energy. Divide the total energy of the VH on the dest.power of the Ho5 20mm 275520/1658= 166,17 rds. Not the 280 rds used in the test. the Ho 5 20mm is in fact not made correct in AH. The dest power of the 20mm Ho 5 is greater than the Hispano in Real Life.  

Hispano 20mm Energy kinetic (kJ) 516
             Energy Explosive (kJ) 632
             Total Energy pr Shell 1148

20mm Ho5     Energy kinetic (kJ) 654
             Energy Explosive (kJ) 1004
             Total Energy pr Shell 1658

1 sek burst from the Hispano will shoot 11.25 shell and do 12915 Dammage in Energy

1 sek burst from the 20mm Ho5 will shoot 14.17 shell and do  23493 Dammage in Energy

[ 11-21-2001: Message edited by: Wutz ]

Offline BenDover

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5803
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #35 on: November 21, 2001, 05:05:00 PM »
huh?????  :confused:   :confused:   :confused:
 
 
 
   ;)

Offline Wutz

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 107
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #36 on: November 21, 2001, 05:25:00 PM »
Lethality has been computed using the equation detailed in Fighter Combat, Tactics and Maneuvering, by Robert Shaw in Chapter 1, Fighter Weapons.   Essentially, the lethality of a gun can be measured by multiplying the destructive power of its projectile and the number of hits.  For nonexplosive projectiles, destructive qualities are generally proportional to Kinetic Energy: One half the mass of the projectile times the square of the velocity.  To be more technically correct, the velocity used should be the relative impact velocity, but for comparison purposes, muzzle velocity will do.   All rankings are computed in kilo-Joules, the SI unit for energy.


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

Energy(k) = Kinetic Energy = 1/2 * ( Mass ) *   (Velocity ) ^2

Mass = Total mass of projectiles hitting the target in one second = Weight of Fire
              Weight of Fire = ( Rate of Fire {#/sec} * Projectile Mass {grams/#} ) / 1000
              Velocity = Muzzle Velocity ( meters/sec)

E(k) = 1/2 ( Weight of Fire {kg/sec} ) * ( Muzzle Velocity {meters/second} ) ^2


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

Cannon are a somewhat different case, since much of the lethality of these weapons are derived from their explosive shells.  When computing the lethality of a cannon, an additional amount of Energy from the explosive component of the shell must be added to the Kinetic Energy.   The Kinetic Energy is calculated as above.

Total Energy = Explosive Energy + Kinetic Energy

E(t) = E(x) + E (k)

Explosive Energy, E(x), can be calculated by determining:  (1.) the type of explosive, (2.) how much explosive is in each projectile, (3.) and the Energy yield per mass of explosive.

(1.) Many different types of explosives were used in cannon shells during the Second World War, such as TNT, Amatol, RDX, HBX, PETN, and Tetryl.  The most commonly used by far was TNT.  It was used by all the major combatants as their primary shell loading explosive due to its ease of manufacture, stability, low cost, and wide availability.  Therefore, it is assumed that for these calculations that TNT is the explosive used in the bursting charge of the cannon shells.    Source:  Explosives, 4th Edition.  By Rudolph Meyer.   ISBN:  1-56081-266-4

(2.)  The amount of explosive per cannon shell, varies slightly from shell type to shell type, and country to country.  However, the percent weight of explosive compared to the total weight of the shell is fairly constant.   Since data for each countries shell types is not available, a representative shell for each class was found and its percent mass of explosive was used for the calculations.

    20mm Class:  (this includes all 20mm & 23mm Cannon Shells)

    The US Army's 20mm High Explosive/Incindiary cannon shell used during WWII has the following characteristics.      

Total Projectile Mass =  1565 grains
Explosive Mass = 165 grains of TNT
% Mass of Explosive =  10.54 %
Therefore, it is assumed that all 20mm cannon shells contains explosives equal to 10.54 % of their total mass.

Source:  US Army's Small Arms Ammunition Pamphlet, 23-1 SSA.  August 1968. Picktany Arsenal. Or alternatively, US Army Ammunition Data Sheets, Small Caliber Ammuntion. TM 43-0001
 

    30mm Class:  (this includes all 30mm & 37mm Cannon Shells)

    The US Army's 30mm High Explosive/Incindiary cannon shell used during WWII has the following characteristics.      

Total Projectile Mass =  2295 grains
Explosive Mass = 600 grains of TNT, plus 70 grains of RDX
% Mass of Explosive =  29.19 %
Therefore, it is assumed that all 30mm cannon shells contains explosives equal to 29.19 % of their total mass.

Source:  US Army's Small Arms Ammunition Pamphlet, 23-1 SSA.  August 1968. Picktany Arsenal. Or alternatively, US Army Ammunition Data Sheets, Small Caliber Ammuntion. TM 43-0001
 

(3.)  The explosive yield of TNT is reported as 1080 kCalories / kilogram of mass, or as 4.10 kJoules/ gram of mass.  Since we are working with the Unit of joules already, the second factor will be used here.  Source:   Explosives, 4th Edition.  By Rudolph Meyer.  ISBN:  1-56081-266-4


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

Explosive Energy = (Explosive yield) * (Mass of explosive), therefore

E(x) = 4.10 kJ  * (Weight of Fire* 10.54%)             for 20mm class shells
E(x) = 4.10 kJ  * (Weight of FIre * 29.19%)             for 30mm class shells

So, TOTAL ENERGY =

[ 1/2 ( Weight of Fire {kg/sec} ) * ( Muzzle Velocity {meters/second} ) ^2 ]   + [ 4.10 kJ  * (Weight of Fire (grams/sec) * 10.54%) ]

  :D   :p   :eek:   :confused:   :mad: The normal order when trying too understand this.

Offline Raubvogel

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3882
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #37 on: November 21, 2001, 05:26:00 PM »
That's a pretty good analysis Wutz. Did the Ho5 have a heavier projectile? Just wondering why the higher kinetic energy.

Offline funkedup

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9466
      • http://www.raf303.org/
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #38 on: November 21, 2001, 05:29:00 PM »
Wutz, Vermillion made those tables and calculations you are posting a long time ago and I'm sure he will agree that they aren't valid for predicting real life damage.  However they are still interesting.

     
Quote
This is how it is in RL so the faults in AH should be easy too discover.

It's not nearly that simple.  You can't just add the energies like that.  As Vermillion says, it's non-linear.  How much of each type of energy actually does damage is dependent on a lot of variables.  If the round over-penetrates or deforms then there is lost kinetic energy.  And the explosive energy has losses from several sources.  Only a small percentage of the chemical energy is transferred to the target.  As Vermillion says, a real answer requires a quite fancy computer analysis.

Those tables are an interesting reference though.  <S> for reminding me about them.

[ 11-21-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]

[ 11-21-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]

Offline Wutz

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 107
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #39 on: November 21, 2001, 06:36:00 PM »
Raubvogel

the Ho 5 20mm shell weight 164.00 (g)
the Hispano 20 mm shell weight 130.00 (g)

As said abowe, there is many factors too take into consideration. But these tabels should give an indication on how powerfull a shell/bullet was.

Eks 8x303 from a spit I does a damgd of 376
while 2x50.cal Browning does a damgd of 441 in other words. A 1 second burst from 2x.50 does more damage than a 1 second burst from 8x303. It is in other words a reason for why the 303 was replased by .50 and 20mm. So if you take a spit IX with 4x303 and 2x20 you should IF YOU FOLLOW THESE CHARTS end upp with more firepower if you take 2x.50 cal and 2x20mm. Pure hypotetical offcourse.

It should sure have been fun too know how HT calculate the Dammage model in AH for shell/bullets.

Does anyone here know?????????????

Offline Tony Williams

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 725
      • http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #40 on: November 21, 2001, 06:44:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Wutz:
[QB]
"(1.) Many different types of explosives were used in cannon shells during the Second World War, such as TNT, Amatol, RDX, HBX, PETN, and Tetryl.  The most commonly used by far was TNT.  It was used by all the major combatants as their primary shell loading explosive due to its ease of manufacture, stability, low cost, and wide availability.  Therefore, it is assumed that for these calculations that TNT is the explosive used in the bursting charge of the cannon shells.    Source:  Explosives, 4th Edition.  By Rudolph Meyer.   ISBN:  1-56081-266-4"

Not so for aircraft ammo.  This is a freebie from my next book (with Emmanuel Gustin):

The types of high explosive chemicals used in shells did vary, although not by as much as might be thought, as different names were used for similar substances.  The basic HE in general use was TNT, as used in the Great War.  This was often mixed with ammonium nitrate to create Amatol; cheaper but just as effective, except for increased susceptibility to damp.  Before the Second World War, more powerful substances were introduced into service.  One of these was PETN, also known as Penta or Penthrite.  The problem was that this was too sensitive to use by itself, as it was inclined to be detonated by the shock of firing.  It was accordingly desensitised by adding about 15% of Montan wax to produce Penthrite Wax, or Nitropenta.  An alternative use was to mix PETN with TNT or Amatol to form one of the Pentolites; this actually helped with pouring TNT and Amatol into shells, as by themselves they solidified too quickly and tended to leave holes.  Another new explosive, as powerful as PETN but less sensitive, was RDX, which was also known as Cyclonite or Hexogen.  
Aluminium powder was often added to HE, as this both increased the power and provided an incendiary effect.  A typical German HEI mix was 63% Penthrite, 29% aluminium and 8% wax, although these proportions did vary. Shell fillings for the 30mm M-Geschoss typically consisted of 75% Hexogen, 20% aluminium and 5% wax.  The (rarely used) M-Geschoss for the BK 3.7 contained a mix of 45% Hexogen, 40% TNT and 15% aluminium.  Much use was made of HA.41, a mixture of 80% Cyclonite and 20% aluminium.
Allied explosive fillings included Pentolite, Torpex (a mixture of RDX, TNT and aluminium) and Tetryl or CE.  The Japanese used several types, with TNT, Pentolite and Cyclonite all being recorded, by themselves or in various combinations.  The Soviets used a mixture of RDX and aluminium.
These explosives exhibited some differences in the temperature, volume and rate of expansion of the gasses on detonation, but all of the newer compounds based on Penta, Cyclonite/Hexogen/RDX and Tetryl/CE were in approximately the same class in terms of effectiveness, and indeed have not been much exceeded in destructive power since.

"(2.)  The amount of explosive per cannon shell, varies slightly from shell type to shell type, and country to country.  However, the percent weight of explosive compared to the total weight of the shell is fairly constant.   Since data for each countries shell types is not available, a representative shell for each class was found and its percent mass of explosive was used for the calculations.

    20mm Class:  (this includes all 20mm & 23mm Cannon Shells)

    The US Army's 20mm High Explosive/Incindiary cannon shell used during WWII has the following characteristics.      

Total Projectile Mass =  1565 grains
Explosive Mass = 165 grains of TNT
% Mass of Explosive =  10.54 %
Therefore, it is assumed that all 20mm cannon shells contains explosives equal to 10.54 % of their total mass."

Not a valid assumption.  The actual percentages I have collected varied from  3% to 24% for 20mm ammo.  Just adding a tracer knocked out almost half the HE.

    "30mm Class:  (this includes all 30mm & 37mm Cannon Shells)

    The US Army's 30mm High Explosive/Incindiary cannon shell used during WWII has the following characteristics.      

Total Projectile Mass =  2295 grains
Explosive Mass = 600 grains of TNT, plus 70 grains of RDX
% Mass of Explosive =  29.19 %
Therefore, it is assumed that all 30mm cannon shells contains explosives equal to 29.19 % of their total mass."

What US 30mm?  They never used one.  The figures I have for German 30mm range from 7% to 26%.  The US 37mm was 7.4%.
null

Other comments:

The ammo types used in the Hispano were HEI and SAPI.  Both contained around 10-11 gram of chemicals.  The HEI was expected to blow a large hole in 12mm armour, the SAPI to penetrate up to twice that.

The Ho-5 looks overrated.  It was a good gun, but the pressures and velocities had to be seriously downloaded as the war progressed because they were having to make the guns from inferior materials.  The HEI shell weighed only 79g (at around 730 m/s) so kinetic energy was low, but the HE content wasn't bad, either 9.7% or 15% (fuzeless) although the latter replaced the fuze with a PETN exploder which would have had no delay effect.

Tony Williams
Author: "Rapid Fire: The development of automatic cannon, heavy machine guns and their ammunition for armies, navies and air forces"
Details on my military gun and ammunition website:
PLEASE NOTE CHANGE OF ADDRESS http://website.lineone.net/~a_g_williams/index.htm
Military gun and ammunition discussion forum: http://www.delphi.com/autogun/messages
null

Offline Vermillion

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4012
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #41 on: November 21, 2001, 11:54:00 PM »
Damn I'm famous  :D

Its really funny when someone quotes my own website, to contradict me.

Even when I state in several places that I make assumptions based upon data available at that time.

Since then I've learned a little bit more, but the overall basis is "ok" for a SWAG  computation (Scientific Wild bellybutton Guess) as its known in Engineering circles.

Tony is the true "expert" in the field and I bow to his knowledge. But considering I put that information together something like 5 years ago, based upon what I can find, its still a decent SWAG.

FYI, the original data used on the HO-5, specifically the shell weight of the projectile, which I referenced from Gustins' original site, is an error. Its since been determined that the shell mass of the HO-5 is quite a bit less. Its around the 100 gram range if I remember, which would make it still a very good gun, but slightly less effective than the Hispano.

Offline Tony Williams

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 725
      • http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #42 on: November 22, 2001, 01:16:00 AM »
The Ho-5 loadings were odd, as apart from the 79g HEI there were APT loadings weighing between 112 and 120g, depending (believe it or not) on the hardness of the steel used.  Measured (by Americans) muzzle velocities at the end of the war were 730 m/s for the HEI and 700 m/s for the APT (exact proj weight unspecified).  So the APT was rather more energetic.

Tony Williams
Author: "Rapid Fire: The development of automatic cannon, heavy machine guns and their ammunition for armies, navies and air forces"
Details on my military gun and ammunition website:
PLEASE NOTE CHANGE OF ADDRESS http://website.lineone.net/~a_g_williams/index.htm  
Military gun and ammunition discussion forum: http://www.delphi.com/autogun/messages

Offline Wutz

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 107
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #43 on: November 22, 2001, 05:14:00 AM »
I never said I did these analyses. I included a Link to Verm's page. Where U all could see these greate tables. They are realy interesting, and it is realy good info.

=Salute too Vermillion=

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
Test results of munitions required to destroy a VH at a V Field
« Reply #44 on: November 22, 2001, 08:10:00 PM »
Hi again,

Here's some more information on MG151/20 ammunition (quoted via the "Waffen-Revue").

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

(The ammunition used in air combat was equipped with primers
that blew up the charge after some time to avoid collateral
damage on the ground. I don't know how this is called in
english (in german it's "Selbstzerlegung", literally
"automatic disassembling" :-) I called it "destruction" in
the list.)

The ammunition described was used in the german MG151/20
cannon.

Incendiary explosive tracer round:

total mass   205g
projectile   115g
warhead      2.3g Nitropenta + 2.1g electron-thermite
tracer       3.3s = 1300m
destruction  a) none / b) at 1200m
propellant   14.8g Nz. R. P.
v0           705m/s
usage        a) only against ground targets / b) in air combat
effect       fragmentation, additional blast and incendiary
             effect
penetration  none

There were two variations of this round (additional to the
self-destruction primer), one bright tracer and one dim
tracer round. The dim tracers were used by night fighters to
avoid blinding of the pilot.


Explosive round:

total mass   183g
projectile   92g
warhead      a) + b) 18.6g Nitropenta c) HA41
tracer       none
destruction  a) none / b) at 900 to 1200m / c) at 1400m
propellant   19.5g Nz. R. P.
v0           785m/s
usage        a) only against ground targets / b) + c) in air combat
effect       blast effect
penetration  none

There were two variations of this round (additional to the
self-destruction primer), the conventional Nitropenta round
and a round with a 40% more powerful explosive that was only
used in air combat.


a) Armour piercing round / b) Armour piercing explosive round:

total mass   205g
projectile   115g
warhead      a) none / b) 4g Nitropenta
tracer       none
destruction  none
propellant   18.5g Nz. R. P.
v0           705m/s
usage        a) against ground and air targets
             b) mostly against armoured ground targets
effect       a) armour penetration
             b) after penetrating at least 5mm armour: blast and fragmentation
penetration  a) at 100m, 60degs impact angle 13mm armour of 120kg/mm**2
             b) at 100m, 60degs impact angle 13mm armour of 150kg/mm**2


Armour piercing incendiary round

total mass   207g
projectile   117g
warhead      6.2g incendiary in metal capsule
tracer       none
destruction  none
propellant   19.8g Nz. R. P.
v0           695m/s
usage        against merchant ships and light warships
effect       after penetrating at least 4mm steel and traveling ca. 1m:
             incendiary effect by burning capsule
penetration  at 100m, 75 degs 15mm steel

Note that penetration is given against steel as used with
ship's hulls, not against armour steel.


Armour piercing incendiary round

total mass   202g
projectile   115g
warhead      3.2g incendiary (phosphor) in aluminium capsule
tracer       none
destruction  none
propellant   18.5g Nz. R. P.
v0           705m/s
usage        against heavily armoured air targets and lightly armoured ground
             targets, automobiles, trains, etc.
effect       after penetrating at least 4.5mm steel at 60 degrees and
             traveling 20 to 120cm: incendiary effect
penetration  at 100m, 60degs impact angle 13mm armour of 150kg/mm**2

I've found an incendiary round mentioned that could eject
incendiary on 5 to 7 impacts and was much more effective
than the previously used rounds. I suppose that it refers to
this round.


While the MG151/20 ammo usually had a projectile mass/total
cartridge mass of 115g/205g, the older MG/FF's masses were
134g/202g. However, the MG151/20 had a higher muzzle
velocity. MG/FF ammo exisited in similar variety as the
MG151/20 ammo. The 30mm MK108 cannon's ammo was much
heavier: Its values were 330g/470g. Finally the 13mm MG131:
34g/85g (weight of ammo belt included)

The ammo belts were loaded with a pattern of different
rounds. One example of what a Bf 109F-4 used in 1941 against
bombers: MG151 2 incendiary explosive tracer, 2 explosive;
MG17 4 armour piercing, 1 full metal jacket, 1 full metal
jacket with tracer.

The MK108 was slightly unreliable and sometimes jammed.
There is a case in which a Me 109 suffered a stoppage after
firing the first round, but the single projectile fired
succeeded in blowing up a four-engined bomber anyhow.