Re: YT channel with penetration simulations
Quote:
|
Re: YT channel with penetration simulations
Quote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wargames_Research_Group The writers of what were the standard "competition" tabletop rules of the 70s onwards army list books, troop reference guides etc. Eespecially wrt to Ancients, but the WW2 rules were also used in competition till Tabletop Games "Firefly" and "Challenger" sets replaced them in the 80s. |
Re: YT channel with penetration simulations
http://www.wargamesresearchgroup.net...story/wrg.html
gives a history of WRG and links to downloads of some of the rulesets |
Re: YT channel with penetration simulations
Another one. It seems that the Maus had strong enough armor to withstand early APFSDS rounds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oZ51UJ9lQQ |
Re: YT channel with penetration simulations
T62 hardened steel APFSDS vs. M1 upper frontal plate at around 500m.
|
Re: YT channel with penetration simulations
|
Re: YT channel with penetration simulations
I've worked up my own penetration simulator based off a few equations here.
http://alternatewars.com/BBOW/Ballis...Marre_Calc.htm It implements the following formulas: 1.) Franz Kosar's Panzerabwehrkanonen 1916-1977 on page 15 reproduces a "DeMarre" Formula. 2.) The Soviet "DeMarre" Formula reproduced in Курс артиллерии. Кн. 1. Общие сведения. М., 1941 (Course of artillery. Book 1. General information. M., 1941). 3.) The ARMET-TR-17002 Linear Velocity Decay Formula from The 76mm Gun M1A2 and M1A2: An Analysis of US Anti-Tank Capabilities during World War II to rapidly calculate striking velocities at arbitrary distances. The Kosar and Soviet "DeMarre" formulas are near identical, the only difference being that the Soviet formula adds a parameter to incorporate armor slope LOS effects. There's a lot of working parts; and I'll write a user's guide one day. But you can use it to figure out hypothetical guns on paper, or obscure guns that little information is known about. No, it's not as reliable or as accurate as some of the CFD penetration simulations that are linked here that the youtubers are doing -- but you can run them on limited information (no accurate scaled drawings/models of shell needed) and rapidly (results within a second, rather than hours). EDIT: The biggest thing that screws up a lot of simple armor penetration formulas (like my attempt) are slope effects. Slope effects are far more than just a simple "increased LOS thickness" SIN(angle) or COS(angle) calculation -- sloping increases the energy required to penetrate the same amount of armor; and scaling laws don't work too well -- at around 45 degree slope -- 76mm HVAP (K=2418) and 90mm HVAP (K=2268) diverge; with the 90mm shell having an easier time penetrating armour than the 76mm shell, presumably having to do with increased areal density, or the shell being large enough to "turn into" the slope, like the Soviet 122mm shell was notorious for. |
Re: YT channel with penetration simulations
70ies matchup: Chieftain APDS round vs. T64/T72 hull armor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GG4OOJymX5U That was the period where top of the line Soviet tanks were really hard to get knocked out. |
Re: YT channel with penetration simulations
152mm HE vs. the strongest part of the Kingtiger's armor (the hull):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fhr-jf-ZSZQ (two versions, one with a 250BHN steel and one with lower quality with reduced ductility). |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:52 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2024, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.