100 replies to this topic

[Andre27]

Unless it has the same armor on top as it has on the other sides (which i doubt) the typhoons should have no prob punching through the armor.

[DAA]

Why would the Germans make the hatch/lob armor that thin if they learned their lessons and built it after '44
After all had the germans given the hatches/turret armor on top lots more armor then they wouldnt have lost such huge casualties during ww2 in terms of konigstigers and tigers.

Edited by DAA, 12 April 2006 - 04:29 PM.

[Andre27]

Why would the Germans make the hatch/lob armor that thin if they learned their lessons and built it after '44
After all had the germans given the hatches/turret armor on top lots more armor then they wouldnt have lost such huge casualties during ww2 in terms of konigstigers and tigers.

DAA, are you certain you're in the militairy if you cannot answer such a question? Weight.

[DAA]

Weight you say hmm I never really thought of that because well as far as the German High Command was concerned bigger tanks , with lots of armor was what hitler wanted the germans to have. I think that the tigers should have had better weight dist.

[Mig Eater]

Your speculating too much, the Germans never bothered too much with the armour on the top & bottom of their tanks (in fact most other countries didn’t too). Just because you think it’s the best thing to do doesn’t mean it was what would have happened, that is the worst mistake a historian could make.

[Jeeves]

Since the end of their trial period (ww1), tanks have been developed with the main objective of destroying other tanks, NOT combatting aircraft. Top armor, therefore, is only nessecary if you're already in deep ----, so not worth the weight. Whatever the Germans did or didn't think was a good idea, I'm sure somebody did the math to see how much armor they could get away with, and the fact and physics remains, that its not much.

[wilmet]

I'm no expert, but ammunition physicly penetrating the armour of a tank isn't the only way of stopping it. the force of impact of bombs or artillery rounds landing nearby have been enough to injure crewmen and damage equipment inside in some cases.

in normandy I heard stories of typhoons straffing tigers with 20mm guns knocking the crew about and hurting some quite seriously. Even though the rounds didn't pierce the armour, the men still got out bloodied and contusionned from the attack having to abbandon their tanks.

in some cases armour isn't everything.

Edited by wilmet, 13 April 2006 - 10:06 AM.

[Mig Eater]

Well seeing as it weighs over 1000 tons it’s gona take hell of a lot to shake it around, doubt even an A-bomb would shift it.

BTW I've redone the P-1000 voxel, still needs a few things before I post a pic tho...

[wilmet]

duno about that, as I'm no expert in physics or balistics I heard that in iraq there have been 1 or 2 cases where an M1 tank (60 tons-ish) had been flipped over by very large IEDs. don't know exatly what the quantities of explosives were though (made of an AT mine and several artillery shells IIRC)

eager to see the new voxel

Edited by wilmet, 13 April 2006 - 11:53 AM.

[Ash]

I don't see how it's physically possible for tank crews to be injured by rounds which didn't penetrate...

But still, weight might be a problem for consideration, but bearing in mind the weight it IS carrying, I fail to see how a few more tons of additional top armour will actually make a great deal of difference.

Whatever the powerhouse is for this beast, I imagine it must pack some serious horsepower to even attempt to move it.

[wilmet]

about the injuries, it's to do with the kinetic impact and people actually being shook up inside the tank I believe.
theres not much room in there and theres a lot of stuff to scrape and hit against.
you'd have to talk to a tanker but it's apparently very dangerous, you really don't want to be in a tank if it flips over for example.

about the engine, I think they wanted to use U-boat engines on that thing IIRC.

[Jeeves]

Splinters of metal get knocked off and thrown around the tank from the force of the impact, regardless of penetration, there are types of AT ammo solely designed to do the maximum internal damage. And seriously, there is no room for being shaken. Last time I was in a tank (driver, centurion) it was so cramped I couldnt even shut the hatch, if I had theres still just an inch or so of padding that's all thats stopping you from smashing your skull open as you drive along, let alone actually being hit.

[wilmet]

not very comfy at any rate

[MrSlay]

this tank is so big so other small tanks can just run troug it, or?

[Mig Eater]

Unfortunately they can :/

Edited by Mig Eater, 14 May 2006 - 01:16 AM.

[MrSlay]

its bad that there no command in art that have Voxelsize=2x3 or something, but it is in the wishlist for rock patch site....

[Andre27]

I'm not sure if that can be done with the RP, but i just checked the RP site today and it has some very interesting new features when it's going to be released.

http://rtb.strategy-x.com/

Edited by Andre27, 13 May 2006 - 11:58 PM.

[Mig Eater]

None of them are of any use to D-day TBH, what I really need is airstrikes that can drop multiple ordnance & the EMP cannon code redone so it works just like it did in TS >_<

[Andre27]

Ehm.. AFAIK the EMP has been in the RP since 1.07 :O

Edited by Andre27, 14 May 2006 - 07:53 AM.

[Mig Eater]

I'm talking about the EMP cannon superweapon not "EMP", if it worked correctly I could use it on the railcannons.