February 7th News Update! -1 reply

Please wait...

emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#101 14 years ago
SMAUGWow, a lot of fuss about some "tommy-coockers" or "Ronson's"

Please show me the tank manufactured in the Netherlands that helped win the war...oh thats right there wasnt one. Seems it was T-34's and Shermans.

And to help reduce your ignorance factor, moving to the wet hull model Shermans removed the ammo boxes from the sponsons to the floor and eliminated the Shermans propensity to easily catch fire when hit ending the Ronson and Tommycooker knickname.




Barget

Großdeutschland

50 XP

30th November 2004

0 Uploads

137 Posts

0 Threads

#102 14 years ago

I always thought it had something to do with their fuel systems? Mostly in Africa though, right? I mostly heard it was due to the Shermans using gasoline, poor armor or something similar, and the Germans used diesel. Can you clear this up for me Anlushac11?




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#103 14 years ago
BargetI always thought it had something to do with their fuel systems? Mostly in Africa though, right? I mostly heard it was due to the Shermans using gasoline, poor armor or something similar, and the Germans used diesel. Can you clear this up for me Anlushac11?

Germans did not use diesel very much, most of their vehicles had petrol engines. The Germans used a additive which which reduced the likelyhood of the vehicle to catch fire.

Shermans in North Africa were very good tanks and had very good armor. Sherman armor was also liked because if it was penetrated it tended not to spall much.

The 75mm gun was also very effective at that time since the most common tank was the PzIII and the PzIVf2 was just entering service at second El Alamein. Up armored PzIII's and PzIV's carried 70mm and 80mm respectively which was mounted mostly vertically. The Shermans 75mm could penetrate either one of these tanks at 500m. Only the long barreled PzIVf2 had a good chance of first shot penetration.

The Shermans caught fire easily due to where and how the ammo was stored.

Any gasoline engined tank will burn if the fuel tanks are penetrated and ignited be it a Sherman, Cromwell, Panther, Tiger, or Tiger II.

Even diesel engined T-34's will catch fire if hit. Diesel fuel will burn, its just harder to ignite than gasoline.




Barget

Großdeutschland

50 XP

30th November 2004

0 Uploads

137 Posts

0 Threads

#104 14 years ago

Ah ok, thanks a bunch. Also about spalling, what is this exactly? My knowledge of it is extremely vague.




McGibs

FHdev

50 XP

3rd October 2003

0 Uploads

4,064 Posts

0 Threads

#105 14 years ago

basicly when something hits metal (ie, shell hitting armor) with extream kenetic force (doesnt have to penitrate), it essentually "shatters" a layer of metal on the exit end. These little chips of metal bounce around inside the tank like bullets, effectivly turning any nearby crew into hamburger. happens often with poorly forged metal, because they crack easier. Which is why good steel is good to have for tanks. Hopefully it can absorb the kenetic energy without shattering.




Barget

Großdeutschland

50 XP

30th November 2004

0 Uploads

137 Posts

0 Threads

#106 14 years ago

Interesting, thanks for clearing that up because my idea of it was something along those lines. Better than my initial guess that it was just the shells bouncing off of the armor. :p




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#107 14 years ago

When you shoot a round at armor and wheher it penetrates or not the energy is still transferred through the armor like a sound wave and when it exits out the backside of the armor it has a tendancy to flake off and splinter off and bounce around inside the tank.

What may look like a clean hole on the outside may have a huge chunk of armor broke off on the inside, like instead of a straight hole it may have a funnel shaped crater on the backside of the hole.

Shermans used cast and rolled armor that was not face hardened and had a Brinell hardness rating of between 200-225. Tiger I had a Brinell rating of about 250 but was face hardened. O is soft and 500 is hard. So the higher up the scale the more brittle and inflexible the armor is.

The Sherman and Tiger when hit flexed a little and absorbed some of the energy. According to a interview with a Soviet tanker one reason their Shermans were liked was when hit there was very little spalling, the round usually went through cleanly. With a T-34, which had a Brinell hardness rating of between 350-450, when hit the armor would spall off and send splinters into the crew.




Mazz

BFE-WAW

50 XP

16th November 2003

0 Uploads

1,245 Posts

0 Threads

#108 14 years ago

everytime I hear spalling I think of the Jagdtiger story Anlushac ;).




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#109 14 years ago
Mazzeverytime I hear spalling I think of the Jagdtiger story Anlushac ;).

Yeah that was pretty nasty.




ww2freak

Ingame name: Major.

50 XP

27th April 2003

0 Uploads

648 Posts

0 Threads

#110 14 years ago

Maybe FH could insert some damaging health value for the crew when the tank gets hit? If you get a shot into a strong tank, you still get a small amount of damage for the player, and a cam shake, with a loud metal hit sound? That would be the ultimate realism.