Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: coyote on August 06, 2000, 11:17:00 PM
-
Take a tank with 75mm HE rounds, and good luck killing other tank, but hey take a spitfire with 20mm HE and kill tanks all day....... This is getting old..... REALLY....
If 20mm HE rounds are soo good at killing tanks , tell me why RAF had no tank busting spitfire squadrons? Why did russians have to use special planes like P39 with 37mm AP gun ?
and How can 20mm HE rounds disable TURRET in Panzer?????????? I mean, give me a break.....
Drive for 20mm to airfield to have some loser kill you with Hispano's......... rediculous...........
-
hispano 20mm is ap round
LW mauser 20mm and mk108 30mm is HE and dont hurt tanks
[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 08-06-2000).]
-
Hispano is AP????????? I just dont buy that... why would it be AP??? It is meant for air to air........ .50 caliber is AP too....... yet P47 in AH is usless against tanks........
-
Coyote,
If you have a problem with Hispanos, why don't you go back in time and tell the Tiffie, Tempest, Hurri, Mossi, and Spit squadrons that they can't kill tanks with their cannon like they have been doing.
A Panther (and some Panthers were destroyed by Hispano 20mm fire) or Tiger might be nigh invulnerable to Hispano 20mm rounds, but the Panzer IV, which is what we have, was not. Consider where and how the round hits the tank. The rear is thin, the sides aren't thick, the tracks are vulnerable, and the top is very thin.
Whether you buy it or not, the Hispano DID fire AP rounds, not HE. The Hispano fire AP rounds because the RAF was shooting at fighters and surface targets. They didn't need HE rounds because they weren't shooting at big, four engined bombers. Fighters tended to have more of their volume protected by armor than bombers did. Surface targets could be anywhere from invulnerable to aircraft guns to completely vulnerable to .303 fire, let alone 20mm AP. 20mm Hispano cannon were useful for destroying light and medium armored surface targets. Larger cannon with AP and a high muzzle velocity would be better, but reduce aircraft performance even more. The reason the .50s on the American fighters dodn't do it is because they simply don't mass enough. The slug is simply too small to pack enough punch to get through a tank's armor.
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 08-07-2000).]
-
(Sorry about the length of the post, just couldn't stop once I got started, so many questions and to much of it is speculation (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
There's just so many variations in ammo type and I've never really heard what type is modeled for each gun, if it's simplified for game play issues or whatnot, and would greatly appreciate some clarification by the HTC crew if it isn't to much trouble (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif))
I've been kinda confused on this whole cannon issue since the Panzer IVH came out...
Most cannon rounds came in at least one of the various forms of AP, such as AP, APC, APCBC, HVAP, and several others, such as discarding sabot rounds.
The there is the HE rounds, which come in Frag, HEAT, and normal HE, with variations of these. Granted HEAT and Frag are not really viable for smaller cannon rounds.
It's hard to say what is modeled "right" and "wrong" without knowing what type of rounds are which. Should the Spit carry AP rounds? Perhaps if tank busting... I'd like to think this is where the Tiff would have a great role in AH, perhaps being the only one with AP rounds, often a historical situation. What purpose would a F4U-1C have with AP? Anti-shipping I'd think, due to the lack of Japanese armor. Whether it carried AP rounds with frequency I don't know, It would be something good to look into.
I had always made the assumption that all cannon rounds are normal HE types, the most effective on airplanes, most with a primer that explodes on contact, or with a slight delay for maximum damage. For the fifty-caliber, regular Ball rounds. (And if this is the case, it is modeled quite well, against hard armor)
To justify this, I based on that, before tanks, there was no need for AP cannon rounds, because the HE is so much more effective vs planes. That's not saying a 20mm AP round isn't capable, they could snap a spar, punch through a firewall and take a good chunk of engine with it. If it doesn't hit something hard it passes through and through very easily makeing a small to moderate hole. But given that HE cannon shells, especially the Hispano's, with a larger explosive tip, are much better at a variety of duties, from ATA gunnery, and strafing soft targets like trucks and troops (A Hispano 20mm round can be much like a grenade) they are a much better all around round.
But largely this round is ineffective vs tanks, because of the explosion upon contact. The Hispano's much higher muzzle velocity would indicate much higher penetrationin AP rounds vs a Mauser (although 20mm AP on the mauser seems to be almost non-exiestant), and this is so, also due in part to a much heavier shell. But due to the lack of hardness of the HE round, penetration of each gun is not very good, especialy at the angles at which planes attack ground targets.
I think the problem lies in high explosive shells as a whole; the 75L48 on the Panzer IVH is capable of easily knocking out other PzIV's with even frontal shots. Due to lag at times, I've had trouble determining just how many shells it takes on average. While AP is normally two, I've killed other tanks with HE shells at ranges from d600 to around d4000. While this is very unlikely with a normal HE round because the force is not shaped at the armor (it takes the path of least resistence) It was possible to hit the top armor near the engine vents and cause catastrophic engine failures with a lucky shot...but largely HE rounds are ineffective tank rounds.
I'm not sure if this is because with how the high explosive round's damage model is done, or how the armor on the tank is done, or a combination of the two. I believe, but I really have no way of knowing what type of round AP round the 75L48 fires, I think it uses a APCBC, or armor piercing capped w/ ballistic cap. These were the most common AP rounds of both the axis and allies througout the war. These differ from smallier caliber cannon rounds (like the hispano and mauser, which are hardened AP rounds, I believe some Typhoon and Tempest squads used a higher velocity sub-core round) in that the APCBC has quite a bit of powder in the very inards of the shell. The cap protects the explosive from going off before penetrating the tank, the idea being the explosive would go off inside the tank killing the crew, igniting muntions, or fuel.
I'm curious on how destruction of a tank occurs within the parameters of the game, such as total kinetic energy delievered per shell (all the explosive plus the energy of the shell in flight I guess), accumulative kinetic energy delievered to an armor panal (I doubt this) or total kinetic energy delievered to an armor panal at one time (like 4 20mm guns hitting the same relative area at the same time)
The again it might be totally different, based only on shell velocity on impact and projectile weight. I dunno. Angle of the shell at which it hits the armor, hardness of the armor type, etc all play a big factor in penetration.
I really think alot of 20mm problems come from a "rough" physics model for the Panzer IV. Just noteing things like shell drop at range; the muzzle velocity (in the APCBC round) is somewhere around 2400-2500 fps, (varies on round type of course, but I calculated from 790m/s with a 6.8kg projectile weight) hurling a much heavier projectile then either the Hispanos or mausers (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) While the 75L48's 75mm round is more subject to wind resistence, it's weight and speed would seemingly make it flat shooting for nearly as far as any other round. Mostly this is true (In AP), the L48 was very flat shooting at ranges up to 1500 yards (requiring only about 2-5 degrees to this range) but in HE rounds it fell like a rock, which AH represents very well.
So anyway, I don't think (but again I am not anywhere near positive) that various or mixed ammo load outs are not modeled. The .50 AP round would have moderate succesfulness against the top armor of the Panzer IVH and at close range, the closer to 90 degrees, the better the chance of penetration, (and this goes for cannons too) but, I believe we have ball type .50, which would be largely ineffective against armor because of deformation and deflection, but a very good ATA gun because of the damage it creates when coming in contact with the plane's skin. If we do have .50 AP or mixed AP/Ball something seems a little off with armor penetration.
- Jig
[This message has been edited by Jigster (edited 08-07-2000).]
-
Ahhh! Did some searching on planes guns, lookie what I found (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Gun ballistics, ammo types, etc on WWII planes :
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-am.html (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-am.html)
This was just something else I found interesting
http://www.concentric.net/~reaper/gunnery/fvsvfw.html (http://www.concentric.net/~reaper/gunnery/fvsvfw.html)
- Jig
-
"tell me why RAF had no tank busting spitfire squadrons? "
They did. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But I agree, if 20 mm were this effective in the war, why would anybody have developed all the rockets and heavier guns used for tank-busting?
-
Originally posted by Citabria:
hispano 20mm is ap round
LW mauser 20mm and mk108 30mm is HE and dont hurt tanks
How can it be AP if it does such great damage in the air too?
It reminds me of some APHE / HE round more than AP (I dont recall that they had APHE either)
Why then MG151/20 is having historical ammo?
-
Originally posted by Fishu:
How can it be AP if it does such great damage in the air too?
It reminds me of some APHE / HE round more than AP (I dont recall that they had APHE either)
Why then MG151/20 is having historical ammo?
According to what I have read, The MkII Hispanos on the early Spits and Hurri's were mostly AP rounds, because the technology for a good, reliable small caliber HE round that could survive firing from the guns just hadn't been prefected yet. Keep in mind this was very early on in the war. By 1943 and up, nearly all MkII equipped planes had all HE rounds. An APHE shell was sometimes mixed within the HE loadout to produced more damage; it was not considered effective enough on tank armor to be used in anti-tank squadrons. It seems the cap was not strong enough to withstand the high velocity of the Hispano gun upon impact, and tended to explode prematurely, rendering it useless because no penetration was acheived. On aircraft, it was said to work well on the Fw series by going through the rear armor and exploding in the forward section of the plane. It was generally not used however .The Hispano HE shell had a slight delay that gave it catastophic results on airplane wings and fuselage, and was noted for "sawing off" wings with very few rounds.
The British AT squads normally got the AP variant of the MkII ammo that was suppose to have better ballastics then the HE rounds; it was a lighter round with a FMJ, and a subcore that varied towards the end of the war. Normally this was steel, but tungsten steel and several other dense materials were used in combat. I need to dig a lil more on this. Penetration of the AP round was greatly dependent upon the angle of the attacking plane, past 60 degrees away from perpindicular the armor that the round passes through get considerably thicker, and with greater angle comes greater chance that the round will glance off. The AP round rather rounded and if the point did not dig in a glancing shot was probable.
Also, was looking into the Hispano AP as an ATA gunnery round, from when it was used regularly in combat...I'm having trouble finding stuff on how it fared with the FW, but against the 109's (I'm not sure which variant, I assume the F series , maybe even the G series). The round's velocity greatly hindered it's damage potential against aircraft; it tended to go through and through most parts of the plane, doing little damage if a hard part of the plane was not hit. It was considered to be very effective from dead six-o'clock position, where it would pass through the thickest parts of the plane.
On the link I posted there a few accounts where the 20mm AP round went from tail to spinner, causing the engine failures, and others where it went through and broke wing spars off.
Guess I'll go dig a lil more...
- Jig
-
I know they had AP in Hispano, but my meaning is that in AH those Hispano rounds has pretty good HE effect, to be pure AP.
-
I've been killed by Chawgs and tiffies in low angle headons (me in tank) than any kind of high angle or them approaching from the rear attack. I've also gone almsot level HO against a tank and killed it with only a 1/2 second burst from the guns in a C hawg
-
Originally posted by CavemanJ:
I've been killed by Chawgs and tiffies in low angle headons (me in tank) than any kind of high angle or them approaching from the rear attack. I've also gone almsot level HO against a tank and killed it with only a 1/2 second burst from the guns in a C hawg
You have a film of that or can you make one? It would be useful in finding any inconsistencies, both in the model and in the stories. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Q: If you stood on top of the Panzer IVH turret and fired an armor piercing round straight down into it, would you be able to penetrate?
A: In theory- yes. In practice- who knows?
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
-
I don't know about the 20mm rounds but i am willing to put money on the .50 cal rounds used in P-47's being non-ap (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) ask ammo how many planeloads of .50 cal ammo he poured into my panzer the other day.
------------------
Hamish!
(http://pages.hotbot.com/games/davekirk/images/Logos.jpg)
[This message has been edited by Hamish (edited 08-07-2000).]
[This message has been edited by Hamish (edited 08-07-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Pyro:
You have a film of that or can you make one? It would be useful in finding any inconsistencies, both in the model and in the stories. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Q: If you stood on top of the Panzer IVH turret and fired an armor piercing round straight down into it, would you be able to penetrate?
A: In theory- yes. In practice- who knows?
I mapped one of me buttons to turn on the recorder and I'll try to remember it in these situations (got a postit on the monitor now too).
Course it'll be my luck it won't happen when I'm filmin. All me best sorties have been when I've filmed the 4-5 before it, then forget to turn on the recorder. Dinnae ya just hate that (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Oops, in my question I meant armor piercing round from a .30-06.
As for the question of different types of rounds, we'll probably only do those for large caliber weapons with low rates of fire. For high rate of fire weapons, we try to model the capabilities of the weapon in general based on the different ammo types used.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
-
Originally posted by Pyro:
Oops, in my question I meant armor piercing round from a .30-06.
As for the question of different types of rounds, we'll probably only do those for large caliber weapons with low rates of fire. For high rate of fire weapons, we try to model the capabilities of the weapon in general based on the different ammo types used.
Hey maybe Pyro can model a few more types of ammo for all aircraft guns in use and let us choosw which to carry, just like when arming a tank :-) Yea, I know, dream on.....
Anyway, if the Hispano is an AP round.... It seems to be acting like HE against A2A targets and AP against A2G targets :-( twin personalities :-(
-
Maybe we just need a better tank...... Panther at least......... Hunting Tiger would be awesome with its 120mm gun <gg>, yet a bit SLOW and no turret action..... It's a game play issue..... it takes about 20 min of bordom drivig to a target, just to get whacked by some tower squatter after you get within visual range of the field...... AT least make em use rockets and bombs to kill a tank :-(
Oh yea, why does a M3 ot M16 explode after taking a hit ANYWHERE from a tank? I hit the tread , the whole thing blows to pieces... some of us like to play with our food u know.......
-
Originally posted by Pyro:
Oops, in my question I meant armor piercing round from a .30-06.
As for the question of different types of rounds, we'll probably only do those for large caliber weapons with low rates of fire. For high rate of fire weapons, we try to model the capabilities of the weapon in general based on the different ammo types used.
Ahh I see (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Kinda explains why damage is so leathal.
My question is, do we have the AP velocity AND the KE from the explosive from the HE round? No wonder it was uber before! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But...it is my belief that giving any cannon all the different capabilities of each round type it carried is rather bad, because round varied drastically by mission (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
A good compromise would be to model only the HE type for all the other Hispano armed planes, and giving only the Typhoon the AP.
(Maybe a choice for loadout here?)
Thoughts?
It does seem like perhaps the .50's are off a bit, at least a chance of penetration would be possible. Under 150 yards, the top armor would be pretty vulnerable, however it's hard to get that close and at a good attack angle (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
- Jig
TY for clearing it up
-
Originally posted by Pyro:
You have a film of that or can you make one? It would be useful in finding any inconsistencies, both in the model and in the stories. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Q: If you stood on top of the Panzer IVH turret and fired an armor piercing round straight down into it, would you be able to penetrate?
A: In theory- yes. In practice- who knows?
I look at it this way:
What will a 30-06 AP going to do once it penetrates? Small caliber, very low projectile speed if it survives penetration, and no secondary damage because of the lack of size, speed or explosive.
it would probably plop down on the engine decking, where later the crew would pick it up with a wtf look (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
I'll make it a point to film the Hispano planes attacking me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I did get killed last night by a Fw-190 A5, both a F4U C and it were attacking for several minutes (loaded them with burp gun shells) F4U C got bored and flew off, after 10 passes and expending nearly all my MG34 burp gun ammo he killed me HO.
- Jig
-
Funked.
I go on holidays and you start making arguments like you used to beat me up for...:)
Jig. Good stuff, please share your references with us. I have been searching for any reference to Hispanos in any Aircraft book I see for the last 7 months.
Quiz.
How much armour does a cannon have to penetrate to defeat a Panzer IV?
My numbers say 15mm hull roof and 16mm turrent roof.
Panther is very simular.
Guys that aint a ton...
The open fields of fire in this game REALLY
favour the aircraft. There is no equivilent terrain in NW europe.
Low down was way more dangerous in Normandy than it is here. There was light ack and small arms fire everywhere...and lots of low level hazards.
Am I saying the AH Hispano is perfect..nope
But I think that with an AP load out and the long bursts that this terrain and the ammo of the 1c make common, it can kill panzer IVs.
before we worry too much about the Hispanos capabilies vs the Panzer Iv we should consider how much the enviroment we play in differs from any historical enviroment.
The Panzer is deprived of its greatest defence. Natural cover.
So even if the Hispano is modeled accuratly.(I bet its pretty close) its effectiveness will be multiplied in the game.
-
Originally posted by Pyro:
You have a film of that or can you make one? It would be useful in finding any inconsistencies, both in the model and in the stories. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I can also send a few films of testing this with F4u, Typhoon and Fw190.
H2H testing, but results were the same in main arena also and the one who was testing with me off-line, might also have films from main arena experiements.
6 Pz kills in main arena with cannons of F4u-1c in one flight (and thats just one, theres more similar kind for me when I was trying) does not give reason to doubt why H2H wouldn't have same results..
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
Funked.
I go on holidays and you start making arguments like you used to beat me up for... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Jig. Good stuff, please share your references with us. I have been searching for any reference to Hispanos in any Aircraft book I see for the last 7 months.
Quiz.
How much armour does a cannon have to penetrate to defeat a Panzer IV?
My numbers say 15mm hull roof and 16mm turrent roof.
Panther is very simular.
Guys that aint a ton...
The open fields of fire in this game REALLY
favour the aircraft. There is no equivilent terrain in NW europe.
Low down was way more dangerous in Normandy than it is here. There was light ack and small arms fire everywhere...and lots of low level hazards.
Am I saying the AH Hispano is perfect..nope
But I think that with an AP load out and the long bursts that this terrain and the ammo of the 1c make common, it can kill panzer IVs.
before we worry too much about the Hispanos capabilies vs the Panzer Iv we should consider how much the enviroment we play in differs from any historical enviroment.
The Panzer is deprived of its greatest defence. Natural cover.
So even if the Hispano is modeled accuratly.(I bet its pretty close) its effectiveness will be multiplied in the game.
Pongo, check this link:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-in.html (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-in.html)
The page is well documented on where the information comes from. There is a box towards the bottom for multiple parts of gunnery.
I've read through the whole site...found it quite good.
I'm going to go search for a few of those books he lists, I have several of them and the magazines as well.
- Jig
-
Yes- I cannot understand why people have problems understanding this.
To quote from that page;
". Initially, solid AP ammunition was preferred, but later in the war a mixture of HE/I and SAP/I was introduced"
From what I have read initial cannons ONLY used an AP round, solid tungsten core with softer metal jacket. Was this "perfect" against planes? heck no! BUT it was 20 MM big- had a heck of alot of kinetic force to break things and a good ROF. Planes were said to have just "disintegrated" under them. HE rounds existed but AFAIK were NEVER popularly used. They had problems with early detonation not causing damage to targets. But more importantly most pilots were terrified to fly with them. They had a reputation (earned or not) that any sort of hit could detonate them and destroy the plane. Spit pilots were paranoid enough about ground fire that Buerling once recorded unloading an entire belt of them and replacing them with "normal" ammunition. I imagine many other pilots did the same.
-
LOL Pongo!!!
-
Originally posted by Sorrow[S=A]:
Yes- I cannot understand why people have problems understanding this.
To quote from that page;
". Initially, solid AP ammunition was preferred, but later in the war a mixture of HE/I and SAP/I was introduced"
From what I have read initial cannons ONLY used an AP round, solid tungsten core with softer metal jacket. Was this "perfect" against planes? heck no! BUT it was 20 MM big- had a heck of alot of kinetic force to break things and a good ROF. Planes were said to have just "disintegrated" under them. HE rounds existed but AFAIK were NEVER popularly used. They had problems with early detonation not causing damage to targets. But more importantly most pilots were terrified to fly with them. They had a reputation (earned or not) that any sort of hit could detonate them and destroy the plane. Spit pilots were paranoid enough about ground fire that Buerling once recorded unloading an entire belt of them and replacing them with "normal" ammunition. I imagine many other pilots did the same.
Tungsten was *NOT* a widely used round. Most was hardened steel. As muzzle velocity of guns increased, AP became more and more ineffective. Once the Germans developed the hollowed-out core HE round, most small caliber cannons other countries copied this type and put it into widespread use. Also, the sub-core hardended steel rounds were not actually 20mm in diameter; up to 5mm less once the jacket destroys on impact.
Again if you'll look it refers to earlier in the war, before a good HE round was developed. At this point, explosions and premature detenation were quite common, but, by 1943 almost every country had much more reliable HE rounds. I believe the wide-spread use of HE rounds was due to a much more effective round on a variety of targets, from troops, trucks, buildings, gun installations, and light armor.
And to the effect of pilots being scared of round detenation within the ammo box...this is true for any type. Even .50 and .30 cal ammo will go off like a string of firecrackers if the ammo cans get hit.
From what I've heard the British pilots loved the HE round because of the hitting power it had; capable of even taking down the heavily armored rear of the Fw with very few shots. It's "wing sawing" power was very high in comparison to the AP types, becuase a direct hit was not always needed. The secondary damage is very high, anything from detonating fuel to ammo cans, shrapnel, and utter destruction of the lift surface.
- Jig
-
A cool suggestion was made further up this thread. Make it so we can choose AP or HE (or incindiary-AP or HE, et al..) when we choose our gun setup in the hangar. I think it would be pretty cool.
later guys.
-
Couple of points I'd like to make.
Jigster points out that after 1943 the HE round was pretty much in service everywhere for the 20mm. Since almost all planes in AH are 1943 or later why is the HS 20mm AP round modeled at all?
On the F4U-C, what ammo did it use? Anyone?
Considering how few saw combat and when why does it have the AP ammo?
I have seen a lot of air to tank attacks from the external view of a tank. Everytime someone strafes me I see hit flashes from the rounds that actually hit the tank. I also see hit flash's and hear pings from rounds that hit the ground close to the tank.
Why?
Last is an even bigger puzzler (imo).
Why when in a tank if the turret is damaged do ALL guns stop working?
Seems to me that if the turret is damaged either A it's jammed & won't turn or elevate. B Main gun is somehow damaged, optics are damaged, etc, to keep main gun from fireing.
Even if turret was blown comepletly off the tank the hull MG should still work. Shouldn't it?
I realise that tanks are going to play 2nd fiddle to aircraft, and thats ok. However it would be nice to see some dedicated Air to ground attack planes designed for tank busting. Along with improved damage modeling (when you can afford the time).
------------------
Maj Ghosth
XO 332nd Flying Mongrels
Scenario Corp, AH Trainer Corp
-
Originally posted by Ghosth:
Couple of points I'd like to make.
Even if turret was blown comepletly off the tank the hull MG should still work. Shouldn't it?
I realise that tanks are going to play 2nd fiddle to aircraft, and thats ok. However it would be nice to see some dedicated Air to ground attack planes designed for tank busting. Along with improved damage modeling (when you can afford the time).
If the turret gets blown off, you can bet that tank is a total loss, including the occupants. But it would be neat to have graphics showing the turret exploding off or the ammo in the tank cooking off if you hit it right.
I agree 100% with your last paragraph.
Cobra
-
Originally posted by Ghosth:
I have seen a lot of air to tank attacks from the external view of a tank. Everytime someone strafes me I see hit flashes from the rounds that actually hit the tank. I also see hit flash's and hear pings from rounds that hit the ground close to the tank.
I have seen and tested this too..
Tanker guy hears all those 20mm hits near by.
This tells that those rounds are NOT AP, but HE!
..or then we have incredible AP rounds digging into the soft ground and blowing up there by some mysterious kinetic energy stuff. (i bet i hear some dozen replies why AP would blow up like HE when hitting ground.. cough cough, thumbs up for those whos afraid of their hispano losing super multirole capabilities)
Never came to think mentioning about close by ground hits earlier.
Well, good must win evil, so Hispano must have multirole AP/HE bullets, ok.
For those excusing Hispano having mixture of ammo (AP/HE/AP/HE... etc.), I must already put up a question, why it isn't so in other guns?
-
Originally posted by Ghosth:
On the F4U-C, what ammo did it use? Anyone?
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/pyro/anm2hei.gif) (http://www.hitechcreations.com/pyro/anm2apt.gif) (http://www.hitechcreations.com/pyro/anm2ball.gif)
Ammo selection is not just based on what's the most effective. Supply is the overriding factor, this in turn being influenced by things like cost and manufacturing capability. When I go shooting, I mostly fire low quality FMJ rounds and for good reason.
Since some people are getting whacked out over ammo types, let me reiterate what I said above. We'll probably only model different individual rounds for low rof, large caliber weapons. For high RoF weapons, most circumstances involve multiple hits so we just condense the various ammo properties into one set.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
-
Originally posted by Cobra:
If the turret gets blown off, you can bet that tank is a total loss, including the occupants. But it would be neat to have graphics showing the turret exploding off or the ammo in the tank cooking off if you hit it right.
I agree 100% with your last paragraph.
Cobra
It is possible for the driver to survive when the turrent is destroyed (There were several instances where T-34 crews lost a turrent from a 88mm kwk gun)
But the possibility is slime (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/redface.gif)
-
Originally posted by Pyro:
Ammo selection is not just based on what's the most effective. Supply is the overriding factor, this in turn being influenced by things like cost and manufacturing capability. When I go shooting, I mostly fire low quality FMJ rounds and for good reason.
Since some people are getting whacked out over ammo types, let me reiterate what I said above. We'll probably only model different individual rounds for low rof, large caliber weapons. For high RoF weapons, most circumstances involve multiple hits so we just condense the various ammo properties into one set.
Unvariably true, supply determines what gets used. My only point was by the time of the D-Day invasions getting abundence of every round was not a biggie to the allies; and that HE was used with great frequency on non-GA aircraft. The only round that was never wide spread were tungsten cores, I think the ranged anywhere from 2 to 10 times more expensive the hardened steel.
But, I'm guessing the F4U-1C actually was using mostly AP ammunition during it's service. Given these were treated as attack planes, and from the reports on the attack of the bomber on the kamakazi run (Name escapes me at the moment, Emily?) the volume of 20mm hits that landed on it without destroying it suggests that the ammuntion mix was mostly AP, perhaps even totally without HEI or tracer rounds.
- Jig
[This message has been edited by Jigster (edited 08-09-2000).]