Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Raubvogel on March 27, 2001, 12:05:00 AM
-
This is a bit ridiculous that the Spit can bust Panzers like a IL-2. If it was really like that they wouldn't have bothered with rockets and bombs, they would have just built a load of Spits with 2 Hispanos and destroyed every Panzer division. Pathetic.
------------------
Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerrkorps.com)
-
The Spitfire Mk IX has 317 kills and has been killed 250 times against the
Panzer IV H.
The SpitV has 100 kills and has been killed 109 times against the Panzer
IV H.
The SeaFire has 29 kills and has been killed 57 times against the Panzer IV
H.
Hardly peeling 'em open like sardines. If you look, they're only marginally better than the US A2G mainstays:
The P-38L has 123 kills and has been killed 160 times against the Panzer
IV H.
The P-47-D30 has 87 kills and has been killed 92 times against the Panzer
IV H.
The P-47-D25 has 24 kills and has been killed 28 times against the Panzer
IV H.
Now compare to the Fighter A/C with a major A2G role and a mess of cannons:
The Typhoon IB has 547 kills and has been killed 267 times against the
Panzer IV H.
The F4U-1C has 1158 kills and has been killed 514 times against the
Panzer IV H.
The Yak-9T has 574 kills and has been killed 280 times against the Panzer
IV H.
The Fw 190F-8 has 73 kills and has been killed 72 times against the
Panzer IV H.
But who are the real panzer hunters?
The TBM-3 has 115 kills and has been killed 75 times against the Panzer
IV H.
The B-17G has 128 kills and has been killed 80 times against the Panzer
IV H.The B-26B has 237 kills and has been killed 133 times against the Panzer
IV H.
The Ju 88 has 102 kills and has been killed 44 times against the Panzer IV
H.
The Lancaster III has 118 kills and has been killed 32 times against the
Panzer IV H.
That's where you should be squeaking. A heavy bomber proves to be the best tankbuster in the game. But then again, many of those kills are probly hits on the VH when the tanks spawn. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
In short: two hispanos don't cut it. You have to make numerous passes on the tank, and each pass increases your likelihood of getting shot down or augering.
[This message has been edited by Dinger (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
Can we have an Attack button for the Yak 9t please (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
(http://content.communities.msn.com/isapi/fetch.dll?action=MyPhotos_GetPubPhoto&photoId=nHwD6d60JNIFs2mHfM9ggHF4xY6Gy1uBBOIL0vAzWuZ4VQ!pBhaoFjvmZM4qCFICQ)
[This message has been edited by brady (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
Interesting statistics. What did the Panzers kill the planes with - their main guns?
In RL, of course, it would have been highly unusual for planes to take out Panzers with 20mm, or for the planes to be shot down by tanks.......
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: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/index.htm (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/index.htm)
-
I really dont know how to approach this now. If I say its roadkill and not realistic, one of our wonderful self-proclaimed engineer scientist experts will say something like this.
The Hispano Mk2 firing APCDQW... shell could penetrate 20.14386578mm at 311.2yards, at a relative humidty of 10%, and 76.4 farenheit.
(gee arent I clever theyll say when they type the message)
So therefore he'll proudly proclaim spitfire Mk.Il2s are accurarate in AH. And all his buddies will also post and pat him on the back, prooving just how cool theyall are to uphold the honor of the gracious maid AH.
Well kiddos thats all crap, most if not all armor penetration tests are done with the gun fixed, firing at a non moving steel plate, with the plate facing 90degrees, thus providing the optimum firing position to the gun and giving it optimum performonace.
If the plate or gun are angled you will see that penetration is reduced substantialy due to the rounds deflecting and the relatively greater thickness of armour now that its angled.
So you come in in a fighter fire ur guns and hit it 90degress all the time? Yea right.
Guys its just wrong theres no way to reason around it, in RL armies developed 37mm and 40mm anti-tank guns for use in planes, the 20mm didnt work.
Even against PzII and PzIII and those horrible little Italian M13/40s the British mostly faced in Africa. There were 4 hispano hurricanes there the whole time doin groud attack and the british still had to develop a 40mm AT variant. Im sorry but its just not right how it is in AH, I understand some of u guys love AH so much and hate to see it challenged- but this is simply wrong.
I dont know whate else I can say guys, I honestly and genuinely belive from the historic record that this is incorrect ability for hispano cannons.
-
Hardly peeling 'em open like sardines. If you look, they're only marginally better than the US A2G mainstays:
You just made my point! Even being marginally better than well-known ground attack aircraft such as the P-47 and P-38 is ridiculous. No way should a plane with 2x20mm cannon be able to rip apart Panzers. And I don't know where you're getting this multiple pass thing from, because I've been killed by Spits in 1 pass quite a few times.
In short....it's not right.
------------------
Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerrkorps.com)
-
Mr Williams:
Sometimes the tanks get a kill if the plane crashes next to it, the tanks also have an AA MG 34.Tank busting is kind of tricky and I imagine a lot of those kills have more to do with pilot earor than to the tankers AA MG.This may also explain why the bombers K/D ratio is as high as it is the are not diving on the tanks merely drooping on parked ones or hitting ones in the VH as they spawn by chance.
------------------
(http://content.communities.msn.com/isapi/fetch.dll?action=MyPhotos_GetPubPhoto&photoId=nHwD6d60JNIFs2mHfM9ggHF4xY6Gy1uBBOIL0vAzWuZ4VQ!pBhaoFjvmZM4qCFICQ)
[This message has been edited by brady (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
Tony, Panzer IVH in the game AH kills airplanes with the cupola mounted 7.92mm MG34, it can completly rip apart a Typhoon that comes in at low level. The 50cal on the M3 halftrack is also excellent vs B26 bombers doing low alt strafing attacks.
This outrageus performance of MG34, is clearly a gameplay compromise in light of the equally unreal Hispano 20mm AT performance we have in AH. It just keeps on building and building one realism compromise on top of another.
-
I've repeatedly presented my arguement over armor penetration and will not do so here (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
oth 80% of my ATA kills in the Pz IVH this tour have been with the main gun. If people are stupid enough to fly straight at the turrent at 20 feet off the ground, up to 700 yards away and closer, more power to them. I can put the coaxel on them from 1200 to 700, then let loose a single AP round. Realistic? Not really. But neither is their approach.
some of mine have been from zeroing in on the spawn/rearm points from about 4k out and reaping the dorks however (mostly level bombers) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
ermmm... When I attack panzers in a spit I use a bomb.... Do the score stats show how many of those spit vs panzer encounters involve deployment of bombs? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Effdub
-
There is really no way a 2 cannoned or even a 4 cannoned plane (spit, tiffie, c hawg etc) could kill a Panzer 4 with the cannons unless they put those rounds in the engine or straight down the open hatch.
The Panzer Mk 4 has got armor from 50mm to 80mm, wich is WAY more then a 20mm round could handle, specially at the angle they shoot (like Grunherz said). If the Hispano had been like this for real they would have used them in their Main Battle tanks, aswell as Anti Tank guns.
------------------
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson
III/JG5 Eismeer
-
Hehe Raub, you opened one of the oldest AcesHigh can of worms. Judging from Hispanos lethality against Flak-Panzers and Tanks can you imagine where those damned air-to-air, 800yds, 1 ping kills come from? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
I've still to find a book with description of consistent 2x20mm Hispano tank kills. Even the 4x20mm armed fiters had serious problems to knock down Panzers without bombs (rockets hit ratio against tanks was *very low* in RL, a bad surprise for USAF and RAF commands in Normandy).
Lets enjoy and "game the game" guys. Ok now, where are the cheerleaders in their pantyhoses? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
P.S.: During the last two months of fighting in Tunisia, No.6 Squadron's Hurricanes MkIID (40mm cannons armed) flew 115 sorties claiming hits on 26 Panzer IV (none destroyed) and 37 Panzer III (17 destroyed).
Source: "Aggressors: Tank Buster Vs. Combat Vehicle" by Alex Vanags-Baginskis
[This message has been edited by gatt (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Skyrats/files/spit_ixc.gif)
Tronsky
[This message has been edited by -tronski- (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
Realism be damed!
The ballance 'tween Hispanos and GV's is just right IMO. I am having a blast in my Panzer and , yes, I get killed by Tiffs and C-Hogs alot <never a Spit though> but I still have better than a 1 to 1 ratio against those tank killers. When Spittys use the wrong tactic to attack my Panzer I get a gleam in me eye and start rubbing my hands together ala Flounder <this is gonna be great>. I'm not revealing the way a true tank killin' pilot does it in 1 pass with Hispanos since it will be more fun for me if they have to figure it out from themselves <EG>.
So, IMO, HT should leave the relationship 'tween Hispanos and GV's as they are.
------------------
Lars
***MOL***
Men Of Leisure
-
Originally posted by MrLars:
Realism be damned!
Exactly what I said .. I guess it is part of the game like the $30 monthly fee, the actual spawn points and the gunners Brownings. I can pay $30 a months, so I can play with those (IMHO) silly things and still enjoy the game. Who knows, the future could bring us Mausers able to kill FP titanium shields and gunners (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Even Mk103 (30mm german gun) was ineffective against tanks. And this was a much better gun than Hispano, with much heavier proyectile and faster muzzle vel.
IMO, in the best case, the hispano armed planes should be able to damage some parts of the tank, like machineguns, tracks or killing the commander (if you are in external view or handling the machineguns), even with lucky shots they should be able to damage the engine, but never to KILL a panzer.
Same level of damage chance should be achieved by any other cannon armed plane.
-
I thought the Spitfire VIII replaced the Hurricane IIC and IID in the anti-tank role in Africa in WW2? Did the Spit VIII have the C version with optional 4x20mm? Just curious, almost all RAF squadrons replaced the Hurricane with either Spitfire VIII, IX or P47-25 during 1943-1944. Perhaps they did this for bomb load reasons?
Regards
Nexx
[This message has been edited by Replicant (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
There's something wrong with the modeling of the ground vehicle vulnerability.
20 mm will Explode the Panzer. Even 150 rounds of .50 cal to the frontal armor will Kill the Panzer.
But 20 mm or .50 cal in the top of the Ostwind turret... does Nothing.
And sometimes more than ten 75 mm AP direct hits to the Panzer or Ostwind... does Nothing.
Like Effdub, I kill tanks in the Spitfire, with bombs. Killing with cannons is possible, but it takes about a full magazine to kill one, even with nearly 100% hit rate.
And as Grunherz points out, the MG 34 is modelled like a GE Minigun, so strafing them is risky business. 5 light MG hits can (LOL) take off your wing.
Anyways let's get the discussion moved towards the armor/vulnerability model, because that's the real problem.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
It's unusual to get a MG34 kill from the panzer unless the guy plays chicken and gets within D150 of you on his run. It's pretty easy to beat the Panzer gun anyway, come in high or switch side on him so he can't traverse it all the way around fast enough. I bet 1/2 those panzer kills of fighters are from augers closeby.
I've taken on a number of tanks in a Spit, it takes a whole lot of 20mm to usually get any sort of kill. I usually consider any run like that to be pretty much desperate measures. Against an Ostie it's basically suicide.
I though this had all been discussed so many times before, the numbers pointing to the fact that the 20mm could kill a Panzer from the top/rear with AP rounds. The fact that it can be killed from almost every angle (and more effectively from the front it seems) is a problem with the armour modelling on GV's.
-Soda
-
Alrighty Funked. Armor specs of the Panzer IV H:
Hull front: 80mm (3.2 in) @ 80º
Hull sides: 30mm (1.2 in) @ 90º
Hull rear: 20mm (0.8 in) @ 78º
Turret front: 50mm (2 in) @ 79º
Turret sides: 30mm (1.2 in) @ 64º
Turret rear: 30mm (1.2 in) @ 74º
Turret roof: 10mm (0.4 in) @ 74º
Now most of the ballistics nuts say a Hispano will blow through 10mm of armor plate. They're right it will, but will it blow through at an oblique angle? In order for a bullet to grip the target face at oblique angles it has to be given a very sharp edge. So you end up firing a wadcutter at a target; why? Because only the sharp edge (90º angle change) at the nose of the bullet will grip an odd-angled surface. Anyone with a pistol can check this and confirm it.
Here's what you do. Get an old car door and shoot at it from any angle 45º or less. Meaning eventually you'll be shooting at the car door looking nearly down its length. At hard angles, anything over 45º, the bullet should not only grip but go through. However, at very shallow angles (like a fighter coming in low) the bullet will skid OFF the target. Why does it do this? Because the nose of the bullet is rounded; it doesn't have a sharp enough angle on the nose to grip the target. Gun nut Jim Cirillo proved this in the 1993 issue of the Guns & Ammo Annual.
Now look at a Hispano round. It's got a nice ballistic shape, like a rifle bullet. Which means it can't penetrate crap at oblique angles. Any rifle bullet is ballistically shaped to give the longest range performance possible. Unfortunately this has the DISadvantage of not being able to penetrate any hard target at weird angles. Why? it's got a real smooth taper to the nose.
I'm gonna track down the article if I can and post a link.
-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"For yay did the sky darken, and split open and spew forth fire, and
through the smoke rode the Four Wurgers of the Apocalypse.
And on their canopies was tattooed the number of the Beast, and the
number was 190." Jedi, Verse Five, Capter Two, The Book of Dweeb
(http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/htbin/delta6.jpg)
-
Great flakbait, now we'll get them whining about the 151/20mm minengeschoss
-
Like Effdub and Funked said, when I kill tanks with a Spitfire, I use bombs. I have killed a single Ostwind by straffing it with my MkVb this tour.
Spitfires on ground attack need to use bombs.
Do Dinger's stats say how many of those kills were with bombs? No, I didn't think so.
Sounds like you guys are trying to exagerate a problem by distorting what your numbers mean.
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Bring the Spitfire F.MkXIVc to Aces High!!!
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
Something else that is wrong but related...why does the MG34 on the PzIV only swivel like 180 degrees?
------------------
Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerrkorps.com)
-
(http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/htbin/hispano.gif)
AP-T Hispano round from Verm's PDF file. With this rounded nose it wouldn't penetrate at odd angles. Against a tank, with all the lumps and bumps, it would do some damage. But you can almost count on no harm to the crew. You can see .50 caliber ammo skipping off things in WW2 gun cam footage. It skipped because it uses a nose similar to the Hispano. I've got a complete .50 cal round hanging on my wall, and right next to it is a .44 magnum hollowpoint. The .44 magnum's bullet design has a better chance of penetrating anything than the .50's design. Simply because it has sharp edges around the rim of the bullet.
-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"For yay did the sky darken, and split open and spew forth fire, and
through the smoke rode the Four Wurgers of the Apocalypse.
And on their canopies was tattooed the number of the Beast, and the
number was 190." Jedi, Verse Five, Capter Two, The Book of Dweeb
(http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/htbin/delta6.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
Sounds like you guys are trying to exagerate a problem by distorting what your numbers mean.
The fact remains that it is a problem. No plane with 2 Hispanos should be able to EXPLODE a Panzer. I understand that you like the Spitfire and everything, but something is wrong here.
------------------
Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerrkorps.com)
-
Originally posted by funked:
Anyways let's get the discussion moved towards the armor/vulnerability model, because that's the real problem.
If this were the case, you could also kill a Panzer with Mausers, which is impossible no matter how many rounds you fire at it. See thread about AP for Mausers I punted.
------------------
Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerrkorps.com)
-
Hate to discourage the bomber boys, but while a 250 lb or 500 lb would finish any Panzer with a direct hit, and disable one from a short distance, accuracy in RL was terrible - the CEP was about twice as bad as the rockets (which only scored around 1 hit in 200 against tanks).
The Stukas were much more accurate because they used a vertical dive (even so, it took a real expert plus a lot of luck to hit a tank) but in the shallow-diving RAF/USAF fighter-bomber attacks a bomb was just an area weapon.
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: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/ (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/)
-
Originally posted by Raubvogel:
The fact remains that it is a problem. No plane with 2 Hispanos should be able to EXPLODE a Panzer. I understand that you like the Spitfire and everything, but something is wrong here.
Again you distort the issue. All it means when it EXPLODES is that the driver was killed. Not that the Hispano rounds literally tore the tank apart. It could have been a single round that penetrated and did the driver in. I don't think a short burst of 50 cal fire would cause a Lanc to explode, but it has happened to me because I hit the PILOT.
Yes, the Hispano cannons do pierce tank armor too effectively as things stand now. How do you know that the problem lies with the Hispano modeling and not the tank armor model? I happen to think that the tank armor is not modeled as being hard enough.
Tony,
I actually miss with most of my bombs, but I do have a far, FAR better hit rate than 1 in 400. Keep in mind that because of the limitations of computer modeling of these things, as well as the ammount of practice we get at no risk to ourselves, we are far more accurate than WWII pilots were.
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Bring the Spitfire F.MkXIVc to Aces High!!!
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Karnak you are trying to distort the issue and move it away from examining the Hispano cannons unusual AT performance.
Dont try to be noble and deny it, you fly the spit and its armed with Hispano and you dont want it getting re-examined. Thats the simple truth of the matter- thats why you and whovever else always say its the tank thats badly modeled, deflecting the issue away from Hispanos. Well if the tank was badly modeled then certainly the Nikiss or FW190's guns could take advantage of this bug and kill panzers. We all know you cant kill a tank under any circumstance with Mausers and I personally never killed one with a Niki.
Face it guys Hispano is different than the other cannos in AH, far beyond its slight RL perfomance advantage would show.
Its just another thing that needs fixing sooner or later like any other adjustments that were made in AH before.
[This message has been edited by GRUNHERZ (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
GRUNHERZ,
I beg to differ. I don't use my Spit's cannons against ground targets unless I have no other option. I have also used Zero's, Niki's and 109's cannons against tanks because that is all that I had.
Is it possible that the armor value on tanks is high enough to keep the lower damage rated guns out, but not high enough to keep the Hispano's out? I think that is not only possible, but likely.
I have not found Hispanos to be staggeringly better at air-to-air than other 20mm cannons.
I would like the ability to select what kind of ammo my guns are loaded with.
I'm not being noble, I'm stating how I see it. I accused Raubvogel of distorting the issue because he insists on using inflammatory language to sensationalize his points. When you debate, you should keep the langage as level as possible. Debates are about reason, not emotion.
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Bring the Spitfire F.MkXIVc to Aces High!!!
Sisu
-Karnak
-
This coming from a guy who wants a Mk XIV in here (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)? J/K anyway something has to be looked at, whether it be the hispano or the MG 151. Try ground attacking a osty with a D-9 from vertical see how many rounds it takes to kill it compared with the hispano. Open topped vehicle no less, the MG 151 takes forever to get a kill in. I grab the tiffie if a tank is near by, simple fact hte hispanos will kill quicker then anything else, cept the yak 9t.
------------------
Sturm6 StaffelKapitän
JV44 Platzschutzstaffel
Airfield Defense Squadron
-
Like I said, we need to examine Hispano's unusual AT performance, so far we all seem to agree that its a bit overdone vis-a-vis the other cannon.
Now the sole point of disagreement restest wheter this has to do with the tanks or the Hispanos, and this needs looking into.
Actually for a Hispano topic this one has been most reasonable and level-headed. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) <S>
-
AKDjV has 12 kills and has been killed 1 time in the F4U-1D against the Panzer IV H.
AKDjV has 22 kills and has been killed 14 times in the F4U-1D against the Ostwind.
AKDjV has 11 kills and has been killed 1 time in the Typhoon IB against the Panzer IV H.
AKDjV has 14 kills and has been killed 6 times in the Typhoon IB against the Ostwind.
AKDjV has 22 kills and has been killed 2 times in the Panzer IV H against the Panzer IV H.
AKDjV has 24 kills and has been killed 0 times in the Panzer IV H against the Ostwind.
Some of the Typhoon victories were done with Cannons, but most were with rockets or bombs. Virtually all of the F4u-1D kills were done with rockets and bombs.
The one place where I've noticed the Hispano to really have an advantage is with the lighter armor vehicles. It opens up the M3 and M16 with only a few hits. I've peppered both with .50s before without getting a kill.
I'd say things seem about right.
AKDejaVu
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
I accused Raubvogel of distorting the issue because he insists on using inflammatory language to sensationalize his points. When you debate, you should keep the langage as level as possible. Debates are about reason, not emotion.
Inflammatory language? LOL Didn't mean to offend you with my outrageous use of the word explode.
Is it possible that the armor value on tanks is high enough to keep the lower damage rated guns out, but not high enough to keep the Hispano's out? I think that is not only possible, but likely.
[/b]
Well that theory is simply not true, because enough 50 cal rounds will also kill a Panzer.
DejaVu, why do you always have to post your stats? Is it really always about you? LOL You crack me up. That's not a dig, you really do crack me up from a professional standpoint...but thats neither here nor there.
Anyways...back to the topic. A Spit with 2 cannons shouldn't be able to pop open Panzers. If someone can provide some data proving that a Hispano round can penetrate the armor of a Panzer at oblique angles and at long ranges that would be helpful. Otherwise, maybe it should be looked at for next version.
------------------
Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerrkorps.com)
-
Originally posted by AKDejaVu:
The one place where I've noticed the Hispano to really have an advantage is with the lighter armor vehicles. It opens up the M3 and M16 with only a few hits. I've peppered both with .50s before without getting a kill. I'd say things seem about right.
Actally 2x20mm Hispanos open FlakPanzers (Pzr III chassis) like tin cans as well, with only a few hits. Spitfires V and Seafires are great at it. I did it many times in the past, defending fields. And FP are the problem here. "Things seems right"? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by gatt (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
Grunherz, Raub, you guys are missing the point.
It's clear that the Hispano should have better armor-piercing capability than any of the other 20 mm cannons. And some of the data presented in this forum indicates that the thinnest armor on the Panzer is slightly below the thickness that the Hispano could penetrate, and slightly above the thickness that the Mauser could penetrate. So that's why the Hispano can do more against a tank than its little cousin the Mauser.
But the problem is not that the Hispano is better than the Mauser (because it SHOULD BE - Mauser could not defeat even the thinnest armor on the Panzer), the problem is that any 20 mm weapon is exploding Panzers. That's where the problem is.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
Grunherz:
you fly the spit and its armed with Hispano and you dont want it getting re-examined. Thats the simple truth of the matter- thats why you and whovever else always say its the tank thats badly modeled, deflecting the issue away from Hispanos.
That's absolutely false. Moronic generalizations like that are why threads like this degenerate.
Face it guys Hispano is different than the other cannos in AH, far beyond its slight RL perfomance advantage would show.
Sorry, the advantage was not slight historically. The Hispano has over 70% more kinetic energy at the muzzle than the MG 151/20, and better ballistics mean that that advantage grows rapidly downrange. I have not crunched the numbers but it wouldn't be too far downrange before the Hispano has twice the kinetic energy of the Mauser. That's twice the hitting power folks.
-
funked my friend, your just doing it again- you cant even fathom the possibility hispano is wrong in ah. BTW IIRC Mauser AP could do 20mm of penetration according to some numbers posted by Tony Williams here.
-
Why does the panzer with someone in the copula gun not die easier to smaller calibres? I mean, if you are using the copula gun isn't the hatch wide open? Wouldn't a single .50 cal round flying inside do some nasty damage to everything/everyone inside?
Was standard policy to button up and wait out the attack or to actually open up the hatch and try to fire back? Anyone know?
-Soda
-
plus we all have to rember that any armor penetration test is done firing at a plate fixed at 90degrees to the gun- thus giving it ideal performance every time.
In real combat that is seldom achived.
The PzIVs thinnest armor (roof) is slightly thinner that Hispanos max penetration so If you only hit it in 90 degree dive every time it might penetrate. But from any other angle it would just bounce off and face thicker armor.
In AH u can kill panzers from low angle passes in Hispano planes. PzIV sides are 30mm plus 10mm Schurzen around sides and turret. No 20mm shuold ever go through all that, not eveh AH Hispano.
Thats whats wrong with it, even if u examine Hispanos AP numbers they dont match what we see in everyday AH.
-
you cant even fathom the possibility hispano is wrong in ah.
Wrong, I can fathom it just fine. Somebody needs to come up with some facts to support such an assertion before I will believe it.
PS
Where are these numbers from Tony? I'm serious, we should get this info together.
-
GRUNHERZ, Raubvogel,
Let me ask you this: If we Spit drivers are so concerned about having the effect of the Hispanos not be examined because we like having super weapons, why are we advocating making tanks more resistant to our shells?
The end result is the same, e.g. 20mm Hispanos can't straffe tanks with much expectation of success.
Ruabvogel,
It wasn't the use of the word "explode". It was that you emphasized it and in its context it indicated that the Hispano's were blowing the tank to bits, not just killing the crew.
It'd be like me saying that:
"John BRUTALLY beat Max to death."
When what happened was:
"John caught Max in the process of killing John's wife, John lost it and brutally beat Max to death."
The two stories are completely different because of the additional information, yet both could be used to describe the same event. In the first one, John is a murderer and in the second story, he saved his wife's life from the murderous Max.
When you emphasize one word and then omitt the reason that the thing occurs, it distorts the event and makes it seem like something entirely different occurred.
BTW, you didn't offend me.
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Bring the Spitfire F.MkXIVc to Aces High!!!
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
Please notice the armor surrounding the crew area (the thickest of course). Also take into account the turrent covers most of the area where side and roof armor is not overlapping.
Oh yes, and there is a rear armor panel, engine, and particularly thick firewall seperating the crew from the rear compartment.
The fact that the Hispano will give a driver wounded, (albeit to no effect) with even the modest bursts, to the Mark IV is absolutely silly.
Damage complexity needs to be reworked.
Versus an armor surface, half the cannon shells should be thrown out anyway (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
i agree with karnak, the problem is not with hispano but with armor modelling
-
Tony Williams said:
In RL, of course, it would have been highly unusual for planes to take out Panzers with 20mm, or for the planes to be shot down by tanks.......
Well my grandfarther was all his life in the army, He started WW II as Lt. and by the end of the war became LtCol of tank forces. When he resighned from service at the age of 54 he was General Major..
He told me a lot of stories about WW II. One of them was the way that tanks could caught fire. If you would spray the rear top part of the tank with critical ammount of rounds (high velocity) it will not penetrate the armor but the hit generated from numerus impacts can start engine fire in tank with 99% resulted as death of the machine... The right angle, critical mass and velocity of the round could do the job...
------------------
Best regards
Dmitry aka vfGhosty
-
Did anyone address weather or not those were killed with guns or bombs? I've got a few kills of GV's, panzers included, while flying spits, but I used bombs. Bombs are the best way to attack GV's for me. Rockets might be allright too, but I can't hit anything but acks with those, and I think it takes a direct hit on a GV to do any damage with rockets.
-
Sorry.. I guess I jumped into the thread a little late.. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
DejaVu, why do you always have to post your stats? Is it really always about you? LOL You crack me up. That's not a dig, you really do crack me up from a professional standpoint...but thats neither here nor there.
I posted my stats in a cannon equiped plane verses my stats in a cannonless plane. Everything else is pretty much equal. The stats were virtually identical. I'm sorry you have a problem with that.
AKDejaVu
-
The whole business of armour penetration by aircraft guns is complex and it is very difficult to get definitive answers. There are many figures for penetration out there but few of them are directly comparable, because the range, striking angle and quality of the armour make such a big difference. Even the definition of "penetration" varies (see the thread on 20mm on this site). Depending on the circumstances it was quite common for any particular shot to perform much better, or much worse, than theory would suggest. The quality of manufacture of ammunition and of armour plate in practice varied considerably even when they were supposed to be identical.
The best source of evidence is simply to look at what happened on the ground. I can't speak for the Russian front, but Allied observers in Western Europe could find very few German tanks which had been destroyed by air attack - with any kind of weapon.
That doesn't mean that cannon and HMGs were always ineffective against tanks. I have read that in some cases incendiary bullets slipped through engine louvres and caused havoc inside. It is also possible that a lucky shot might knock out a track pin and temporarily disable a tank. Any of course any tank caught with a hatch open could be in real trouble.
An entirely separate issue is what damage was caused even when armour was penetrated. There are plenty of accounts of high-velocity AP shot blasting straight through a tank and leaving the crew shaken but unharmed. Ironically, slightly less performance could be more deadly; an AP shot which only just penetrated would bounce around inside instead of passing through....
To get back to aircraft, the only air forces which took anti-tank warfare seriously were the RAF (very briefly, with the 40mm-equipped Hurricane IID), the Luftwaffe (mainly with the Hs 129) and the Red Air Force (mainly with the Il-2). ALL of them found that guns had to be big and powerful to have much effect on tanks. The RAF retired the Hurricane from the European theatre because it couldn't deal with Tiger tanks, despite the fact that the 40mm had twice the penetration of the 20mm. The Russians went from 20mm to 23mm to 37mm. The Germans went to high-velocity 30mm and 37mm with tungsten cored ammo, then 50mm and even 75mm. If smaller guns were generally effective, that's what they would have used.
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: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/index.htm (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/index.htm)
-
Originally posted by Tony Williams:
To get back to aircraft, the only air forces which took anti-tank warfare seriously were the RAF (very briefly, with the 40mm-equipped Hurricane IID), the Luftwaffe (mainly with the Hs 129) and the Red Air Force (mainly with the Il-2). ALL of them found that guns had to be big and powerful to have much effect on tanks. The RAF retired the Hurricane from the European theatre because it couldn't deal with Tiger tanks, despite the fact that the 40mm had twice the penetration of the 20mm. The Russians went from 20mm to 23mm to 37mm. The Germans went to high-velocity 30mm and 37mm with tungsten cored ammo, then 50mm and even 75mm. If smaller guns were generally effective, that's what they would have used
True. Actually LW and Russian AlliesHigh air forces (Yak-9T apart) have the worst aircraft to do anti-tank missions. Sorry, it is AcesHigh (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Ok, lets cheerleaders come in again ... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Agree 100% Tony. If you look at the development of anti-tank aircraft, the movement to bigger and bigger guns and rockets indicates that the small guns just were not doing the job.
-
Just a quote from 'the Lufftwaffe fighter force:a veiw from the cockpit' by adolf galland et al, by david isby.
'anti-tank missions'
'it was apparent that ordinary ground attack units were not able to destroy enough tanks with their guns,cannons and bombs,but the special anti-tank units with armour piercing cannon and special anti-tank rockets were very successfull.'
realise it says 'destroy ENOUGH tanks' not 'destroy any tanks'
notice the statement 'VERY SUCCESSFULL'????
jesus people stop argueing that mausers cant kill tanks in RL, so they modeled ok in AH.
ITS BS AND YOU KNOW IT IS.
heres some more for you....
'The attacks with armour piercing cannon were conducted like ordinary strafing missions.To ensure hits,the pilots had to approach as close as possible.The best range was 100-150 yards.The gunnery run had to be very even and calm, and the direction of approach was determined by the ground situation and with the 3cm and 37mm weapons aimed at vital points on the tanks'
mmm we cant seem to hurt anywhere on a tank....
but not only this, if we arent going to get the ammunition, then i demand we get some of these......(same book)...
'it was better to use large formations which carried a great number of containers of 4kg hollow charge armour piercing bombs, which can be dropped from halfway outside the effective anti-aircraft fire.'
when can we have these?
This books information was compiled from interveiws/interrogations conducted by the USAAF just after the war and were intended for the use of the USAAF.They were written by professionals for professionals.there is no room in these accounts for stories, just facts on strategies etc.
this is the second time ive posted this but it does point out that the LW AP rounds did work.Make em work in AH i say.
------------------
Hazed
3./JG2 (http://members.home.net/winyah999/3jg2.htm)
[This message has been edited by hazed- (edited 03-28-2001).]
-
The smallest airborne anti-tank gun worth bothering with was the Soviet 23mm VYa. This had more than 50% more muzzle energy than the Hispano, yet was only capable of penetrating the rear armour of most tanks, at best. The 30mm MK 103 and 37mm NS-37 and BK 3.7 stood a reasonable chance of penetrating side as well as rear armour. Only the BK 7.5 stood a realistic chance of blowing a hole in frontal armour.
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: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/ (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/)
-
I get it now, the Hispano is really a smaler version of the Mk 103 yet has the same ballistics (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Makes sense now, I can sleep easier tonight now. BTW where is our 103?
------------------
Sturm6 StaffelKapitän
JV44 Platzschutzstaffel
Airfield Defense Squadron
-
Hear, hear this deafening silence. The 20mm Hispano ballistic is completely wrong. It was never ever able to penetrate a Pzr MkIII (FP chassis) armour. If its lethality is clearly wrong modeled, how about his air-to-air lethality? Is it different? How could it be different against a/c? Where are the cheerleaders? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Ok, I'm jokin (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Would be interesting to hear something from HTC. Really. The thing looks too big to be unknown to them.
<S>!
-
Hazed the quotes you provide are directly referring to guns that aren't modeled in AH (37 mm and 30 mm ), not to the Mauser MG 151/20. The only 30 mm modeled in AH is the MK 108 which was a small short barreled weapon with low muzzle velocity and it did not fire an AP projectile of any sort. If you want to kill tanks with Luftwaffe guns, you need the Ju 87G or Hs 129.
Read Tony's post!
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-28-2001).]
-
Yeah Tony and Funked are right, the only real tank busters (using only cannons) were german or russian. And some Desert Air Force Hurricanes. No Spitfire, no Typhoon, no Tempest, no F4U-1C did this on regular basis only with cannons. I agree that Mausers 151-20 should not knock-out tanks but then fix the thing for all the other allied a/c.
Give us HS-129, Ju-87G and Sturmovik if you want real tank busters. All other a/c should use only bombs and rockets.
-
Leaving the HS debate safely behind, (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
(No I don't agree)
All data is skewed in relation to AH and ground vehicles, Range,movement,max slope capability,excessive speed on downslope,armor modelling and damage effects, the lack of cover that makes panzers so easy to find (Historically, you get 1 pass at armor in the open, after that they get scarce real quick)
It hopefully will get looked at again, 'tho HT hasn't really indicated if there's any interest in fixing it.
P.S. Raub, the traverse of the AA Mg34 on the IVH is accurate, My Grandfather complained about it a lot.
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
I do not know how to do the whole quote thing, so i cut and pasted. This quote is from Flakbait "I've got a complete .50 cal round hanging on my wall, and right next to it is a .44 magnum hollowpoint. The .44 magnum's bullet design has a better chance of penetrating anything than the .50's design. Simply because it has sharp edges around the rim of the bullet."
and my respose is "PIFFLE" A hollow point has NO chance of being a serious penetrator, its very design is to transmit as much of the energy as possible to as wide an area as possible. The .50 is not a bad round for very light armour.
Sorry but the whole bit about a .44HP being better suited for anti-armour work got my dander up.
Arty
-
A single .44 mag HP round has a better chance of penetrating at oblique angles than a rifle bullet. Why? Bullet design. I never said penetrating armor, I said penetrating at oblique angles. Look at a hollowpoint round. It has an angle change of greater than 90 degrees at the tip. Meaning where a .50 cal round will bounce off due to that pointed nose, the HP round will actually bite. That sharp edge will grip the surface it hits and it'll dig in. Try the same thing with a rifle bullet and it'll skid right off. Why? Pointed nose. Hit a target near head-on and that nose will give you tremendous penetration. Hit at any weird angles and that nose will act like a ramp and force the round to skid off the target. Hit any library and grab a copy of the 1993 Guns & Ammo Annual. Flip to the article by Jim Cirillo about bullet design. That's the proof a pointed bullet can't penetrate crap at oblique angles. Let alone armor plate welded to a tank.
-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"With all due respect Chaplian, I don't think God wants to hear from me right now.
I'm gonna go out there and remove one of His creations from this universe.
And when I get back I'm gonna drink a bottle of Scotch like it was Chiggy von
Richthofen's blood and celebrate his death."
Col. McQueen, Space: Above and Beyond
(http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/htbin/delta6.jpg)
-
Hello Flakbait,
I must respectfully disagree with you. While I have not read the magazine you have suggested, I can tell you I have shot alot. (If I knew how to underline that I would) I have put a fair amount or .223 rounds through angle iron at all sorts of angles (because it was there and provided a fun target. Tommorow I will try the same with several differing calibres of pistol rounds using hollow points. I am pretty sure I know what is going to happen though.
I think I should get extra credit for using the word "piffle" though.
Arty
-
Does AH model glancing shots?
If it did it would reduce HO effectiveness, and increase survivability of panzers to strafe attacks.
SKurj
-
AH I think only models thickness of armor and not slope or angle of impact. Look say it a thousand times and it still comes out the same. The problem ain't the friggin Hispano's but armor,all armor(aircraft,panzers)
The model only seems to use the most basic level for impact ie; any round the physics model has determined to hit, hits at a perfectly oblique angle so that it's effects can be correctly calculated. While making sure that bullets and shells behave correctly in flight, the treatment of them after impact seems simplistic. Therin lies the problem, Take a round that can go thru that set thickness of armor, have it strike at the optimum angle to penetrate and it does of course, do exactly that.
Until the slope effects are taken in hand, It will always be this way.
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
The Ostwind is based on a Panzer IV chassis not a Panzer III chassis.
The AAMg on the panzer IV was able to travers around the cupola almost 360 degrees. The open hatch is in the way of taking it right to the left(hatch opens left). It has a handle that loosens it on its ring then it can be swung arround. It does not do so in AH because that would require a 3rd level of traversablility. IE hull turrent cuppola. Its travers would be idenitcal in operation to the M3 scarf ring mount.
It should however be a rare beasty on a Panzer IV. the vast majority were not so equiped.
The armour system in AH is very simplistic. One has to assume that a more realistic one will be implemented soon. Perk tanks(or any diversity of tanks) are a mute point the way the guns and armour effects are currently implemented.
(it is still fun though!)
-
I thought the same thing Pzvg. It looks like AH figures armor very simplistically. Instead of the bullet's angle along with the angle of the surface hit being taken into account, it just figures bullet A impacts object N at 90º. Now if it modeled armor and impact angles you'd see hardly anyone getting through tank armor with any aircraft gun. Save for the big guns, of course. Most tank guns are listed with a max penetration depth against an armor plate set at 90º. In German Tanks of WW2 they give some info about penetration on sloped armor. Some examples:
(In regards to the Marder II) "The powerful Soviet 76.2mm gun possesed a muzzle velocity of 1,850 ft/sec firing HE rounds and 2,430 ft/sec firing AP arounds. The latter could penetrate 3.2 inches of 30º sloped armor and 4.1 inches of vertical armor at a range of 3,000 feet."
(In regards to the Panzer IV w/ KwK 40 L43 gun) "The longer gun fielded by the F2 possesed a muzzle velocity of 2,428 ft/sec and could penetrate 3.5 inches of 30º sloped armor at 3,028 feet."
(In regards to the Panzer V w/ KwK 42 L70 gun) "The 7.5 cm (75mm) L70 KwK 42 gun was an accurate high-performance gun with excellent penetration, capable of destroying any enemy tank in existance during 1943-1944 at combat ranges of 6,561 feet. Firing AP rounds, the gun had a superb muzzle velocity of 3,675 ft/sec which allowed it to penetrate some 6.7 inches of vertical armor at 3,280 feet. Equal to that of the Tiger I's much larger 8.8cm gun."
And here's some excerpts from the article I mentioned above:
"In my first gun battle using the Super Vels, I became aware of another factor and how important it is: bullet configuration. The Super Vel bullet had a semi-wadcutter shape with a rather tapered ogive nose configuration. On body hits, its construction usually allowed a fair amount of disruption with resulting large tissue wound destruction. In this firefight, one of the felons ducked down as he ran toward the cashier. He probably wanted to use her as a hostage shield. Only the top of his head was exposed above the display shelves of the dairy store. I fired three shots at his exposed head before he dropped from sight. At the post mortem the next day, it was evident as to how he was able to get off one shot during our gunfire exchange: My first two bullets only pierced the scalp, skidded around the skull and then emerged; only one bullet penetrated the skull and entered the brain.....<snip>....I was satisfied with the body hits Super Vel obtained but somewhat disapointed with the hits on the felon that I head shot."
"I experimented with various bullets - full jacketed, flat nose, hollowpoints - and as a test medium I used auto body metal. They all penetrated well when shot close to right angles. I noticed that the more ogive the bullet had, the more it skidded off the auto body metal when I fired from an oblique angle. So did some Super Vels. All of a sudden, I got the bright idea of pulling a Super Vel, inverting it, and resealing it. I now had a full-diameter, full jacketed, sharp-cornered wadcutter. Wow! What a fantastic auto body penetrator this became. I could hardly get this configuration to skid off the auto body metal no matter how much of an oblique I angled the shot. This worked well within 10 yards. I would not take a chance with this modification for head shots beyond eight yards, as I wanted pinpoint accuracy in the event of a hostage close to a felon's head, and I did not trust the inverted Super Vel bullet for this type of accuracy."
Penetration angles need to be modeled. If they currently are being modeled, which I doubt, then there is a serious problem.
-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"With all due respect Chaplian, I don't think God wants to hear from me right now.
I'm gonna go out there and remove one of His creations from this universe.
And when I get back I'm gonna drink a bottle of Scotch like it was Chiggy von
Richthofen's blood and celebrate his death."
Col. McQueen, Space: Above and Beyond
(http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/htbin/delta6.jpg)
-
I believe they are deep in thought about the armor/damage situation.
-
Correct in part Pongo, The majority of IV's were never fitted with the ringstand, instead
making do with the pintle mount designed for the SdKfz251 being welded to the turret roof in front of the hatch, Those fitted with a ringstand were still not capable of full traverse as the hatch of the panzer IV is of the leaf type, when open it is in two halves one at 9 o'clock and one at 3, effectively reducing traverse to the forward arc.
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
The Panzer IV H and J are not leaf type hatches. They are a single hatch opening to the left. They are the only ones with a ring mount. That is not coincidental. The two modifications go hand in hand. Earlier panzers had "leaf" split hatches that opened in two pieces left and right. With no way to have a ring mount. I have never seen an AAMG on an earlier panzer IV type. There was no doubt some in existance but we would have to consider them very rare.
-
Pongo is correct. The PzKpfwIV Ausf H incorporated a special anti-aircraft mount for the MG34, and the commander's hatch was changed.
------------------
Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerrkorps.com)
-
I think you'll find that less than 1 in 10 H models got the new hatch, the one at Aberdeen sure doesn't have one. But it's all meaningless anyway, let's not nit pick at details while skirting the larger issue. The armor well, ain't.
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
A little speculation on my part here, so don't flame me to bits ok? From what I've seen others post the Hispano Mk II could penetrate 19mm of armor plate at 500 yards. Since the 76mm gun on the Marder II has a 0.9 inch penetration difference with a 30º angle change, I'll take this as a basis for Hispano penetration. So for every 4 inches of penetration, a 30º change in angles reduces the penetration by one inch. Let's apply this theory to the Hispano.
19mm = 3/4 of one inch. Based on my simple theory a 30º change in angles reduces this penetration down to 1/2 of an inch (12.7mm). So an aircraft flying at an exact 90º angle to the armor plate, carrying a Hispano cannon, can penetrate the following surfaces on a Panzer IV at 500 yards or closer:
Turret roof: 10mm (0.4 inch) @ 74º
That's it!! A single Hispano round can only punch through the engine decking and turret roof at a range of 500 yards or less. Now this either tells us that a: armor angles are not modeled or b: the Hispano ammunition is WAAAY off. I'm going with A.
I got the 3/4 inch of penetration figure from the Joint Fighter Conference that Verm posted here:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum1/HTML/006835.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum1/HTML/006835.html)
Pyro originally posted about this conference, so in effect he gave us the evidence that armor angles, and penetration angles, are NOT modeled. What I thought above was true: Acesa High figures bullet A impacts object N at 90º in EVERY CASE!! This means maximum penetration power is available to anyone, with any weapon, regardless of the angle. Verm said the quote in question was on page 157. Now that there's proof something fishy is going on, will they change/alter/fix the problem? I truly hope so.
-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"With all due respect Chaplian, I don't think God wants to hear from me right now.
I'm gonna go out there and remove one of His creations from this universe.
And when I get back I'm gonna drink a bottle of Scotch like it was Chiggy von
Richthofen's blood and celebrate his death."
Col. McQueen, Space: Above and Beyond
(http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/htbin/delta6.jpg)
-
Thats cool flakbait, but the MG151 AP round penetrates over 10mm at 90degrees too but our MG151 cant pop a panzer no matter what angle or range or amount of rounds even firing at roof plate.
So:
Either AH MG151 has no AP modeling.
Or, Hispano has performance that is WAAY off.
Or, both of the above.
-
Originally posted by pzvg:
I think you'll find that less than 1 in 10 H models got the new hatch, the one at Aberdeen sure doesn't have one. But it's all meaningless anyway, let's not nit pick at details while skirting the larger issue. The armor well, ain't.
Its meaningful in the context that I repied to your post. The Panzer IVJ which this is supposed to represent(although the model is of an H) if it had an AAMG, could travers it throughout 300 degrees or so independent of the turrent. The only part that it couldnt travers too it could cover by the travers of the pintle mount.
Not earth shatering in relation to the other tank issues. But its worth while to be accurate.
-
Remember to add the velocity of the plane to the muzzle velocity when working out penetration of a round.
-
Nashwan, Why? would the increase in velocity affect the rounds ballistic performance versus sloped armor in any way? The issue is not the fuggin' gun folks, it's what it's hitting, so stop wandering off the path please.
And do the math yourself, calculate the effective armor thickness in accordance with diminishing angle of impact, ie; 90/80/45/25/10.
Notice that while the round's data remains a constant throughout, the EFFECTIVE armor thickness grows as the angle diminishes, so that even assuming that all rounds that hit actually bite into the armor, you start to get results that are inconsistent with known gun performance. That's incorrect, no matter what weapon you care to praise, I've yet to hear of one exceeding stated performance values by a factor of 10. Hey Tony, I don't have the equations for relative thickness handy, do you? If so please post.
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
I've done some digging through old archives and can't find a copy of that article. Plus the publisher's web site doesn't have a DNS entry. Lucky me!! As I've stated above, the only case I know of (based on limited resources) is a one inch penetration difference with an angle change of 30º. Calculating the actual penetration depends entirely on the round used and armor type hit. Different metals have different denseities. If we break the basic theory down we get the amount of penetration difference.
7.5º = .25 inch
15º = .5 inch
22.5º = .75 inch
30º = 1 inch
37.5º = 1.25 inch
45º = 1.5 inch
52.5º = 1.75 inch
60º = 2 inch
67.5º = 2.25 inch
75º = 2.5 inch
82.5º = 2.75 inch
90º = 3 inch
Unfortunately this is just me guessing. As the ramp angle of the plate changes so does the penetration. So while breaking the basic theory down says a 3 inch penetration difference at 90º we know that can't be true. Why? 90º is perfectly flat, and directly in line with the projectile's flight path. I've been doing some hunting for calculating the penetration of a round algebraically, but can't find anything. It seems I'll have to yell at a ballistics expert to find this one out.
-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"With all due respect Chaplian, I don't think God wants to hear from me right now.
I'm gonna go out there and remove one of His creations from this universe.
And when I get back I'm gonna drink a bottle of Scotch like it was Chiggy von
Richthofen's blood and celebrate his death."
Col. McQueen, Space: Above and Beyond
(http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/htbin/delta6.jpg)
-
OK guys, I've done some more digging and turned up official German penetration data for two MG 151/20 rounds, the AP and APHE.
The AP penetration is as follows:
24mm/100m/90 degrees
12mm/100m/60 "
8.5mm/100m/30 "
23mm/300m/90 "
11.5mm/300m/60 "
8mm/300m/30 "
15mm/600m/90 "
7mm/600m/60 "
4mm/600m/30 "
And for the APHE:
17mm/100m/90 degrees
12mm/100m/60 "
7mm/100m/30 "
15mm/300m/90 "
10mm/300m/60 "
7mm/300m/30 "
There are figures for other loadings but these are probably the most relevant. Note that the fall-off with striking angle is not the same; this depends very much on projectile design.
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: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/ (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/)
-
The way I was shown to calcualte the effect of slope on armour thickness was like this
90 /slope * actual thickness
So a 45 degree slope doubles the thickness of armour and a 30% slope triples it.
The effect of deflection is not factored in.
-
So from this we should be able to kill Ostwinds at a level plane. Try it now in a FW and you will meet your maker every time. Do to the ostwinds light shielding in its turret which was not greater then 23mm we should be able to open them up rather easily.
------------------
Sturm6 StaffelKapitän
JV44 Platzschutzstaffel
Airfield Defense Squadron
-
Originally posted by pzvg:
Nashwan, Why? would the increase in velocity affect the rounds ballistic performance versus sloped armor in any way?
The increase in veocity would apply to al guns of course, but if you are trying to work out penetration you need to know the muzzle velocity of the round. For that you have to add the velocity of the plane to the published (static) muzzle velocity of the gun.
-
Tony can you e-mail that info to HTC?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Tony can you e-mail that info to HTC?
Who he?
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: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/ (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/)
-
HTC is HiTechCreations, the developers of this simulation.
Apparently our MG151/20 doesn't model any sort of AP ammo or the AP modeling is very much weaker than the data you posted.
Perhaps if the developers saw your information, especially with your expertise in the field, they would fix the innacuacy.
-
For any of the cannon and heavy machine gun rounds, how much does the extra ~500 ft/sec of the aircraft speed closing with the tank increase the penetration of the round? The kinetic energy increases approximately 40%, so would penetration increase this much too? This could somewhat reduce the effects of sloping armor. Someone else said that the tests were done with non movement between the cannon and the test target, but were any tests done with adding 500+ ft/sec to the round's velocity? I'm not saying that the Hispanos or MG151's or anything should be better or worse than it is, just a factor that sometimes gets overlooked in these posts.
CJ
-
Yes, the extra speed of the aircraft was a factor. 250 mph would add around 110 m/s. However, penetration would not increase in proportion to muzzle energy; it would be linked more closely to momentum (a much less dramatic increase).
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: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/ (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/)
-
There was one Hell of a thread on the WW2online board discussing this very thing many months ago about 5-10 pages long!!
"Could a 20mm Hispanoe kill a tank?" or some such IIRC
Prolly got zapped but Somebody must have saved it?
BTW: how quickly would the round in question bleed off that extra 500fps?
-
While digging around old posts here for comments on "Panzer Elite," I came across an old post from Pyro when he spoke about introducing ground vehicles. The gist of it I think was that GV's would be a secondary thing wrt the sim, i.e. although the GV's aren't half baked, HTC chose not to go that deep into modelling GV's. So the GV's probably won't be "fixed" because they server their secondary purpose in the sim.
Btw, anyone got a copy of Panzer Elite they want to part with? Tanking in AH got me mildly interested, and Panzer Elite supposedly had the best modelling/AI of them all... little low on the graphics, but that's fine with me.
mauser
-
Mauser I understand their perspective and I actually agree. But they could fix some of the glaring stuff in the GVs without adding much complexity. Make the Panzer immune to 20 cal and lower weapons, make the Ostwind turret vulnerable to weapons of all calibers, replace the GE Minigun on the Panzer with an MG 34, and 99% of the player gripes about vehicles will vanish.
-
Originally posted by chisel:
BTW: how quickly would the round in question bleed off that extra 500fps?
Well it was only 110m/s or so, which is equivalent to 150-180m added distance.
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: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/ (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/)