german 20mm not able to destroy small tanks intentional

[SR-F_Winger]

`?

 

I tried for around half an hour now. managed quite some hits but not even the smallest of the tanks seems to be destroyable with 20mm cannons. Oh and btw i tried with the nosegun and the 20mm gunpods. It it me or is it supposed to be like that?

 

Thanks

[5th-GIAP_Sytov]

~S~ Winger,

 

You want to use your 20mm gun pods and nose cannon against enemy aircraft, and soft skinned vehicles like trucks, jeeps etc.  Tanks are considered "hard" targets and trying to kill them with a 20mm round won't do the job properly.  You want to use either an SC-250 / 500 bomb to destroy enemy tanks.  If you can use a SC-500, that will do the job properly.

[ImPeRaToR]

I remember seeing some official Beschusstest documents a while a go documenting MG 151 (/15) AP and Hartkern ammunition, I think the 151/20 was also included. Most impressive was however the 15mm Hartkern ammo, it could penetrate most light tanks from any angle iirc. In old il2 it could also destroy light tanks.

 

Unfortunately I dont recall penetration values but the 20mm AP was inferior due to the reduced velocity compared to the 15mm round and the use of tungsten, but it was not very impressive. Pretty sure T-34 were definitely invulnerable, not sure about lighter tanks such as BT series, T-26 and T-60s.

 

 

In BOS the 37mm can destroy the PzIV from the side but that's hardly surprising.

Edited December 28, 2013 by ImPeRaToR

[dkoor]

I have troubles destroying presented panzers with LaGG's 37mm cannon, AP shells ofc.

Wouldn't even try with 20mm's.

But if I do I'd probably attack from almost vertical angle and from the rear ofc.

[rollbear]

I have been able to take out the smallest tank using the 20mm. It took a few passes, though. This, however, was in one of many attempts to take out those tanks in the 109. I've so far never succeeded with any of the other two tanks. Even with the 250kg bomb it's difficult. Most of the times I've failed. 

[ImPeRaToR]

I have troubles destroying presented panzers with LaGG's 37mm cannon, AP shells ofc.

Wouldn't even try with 20mm's.

But if I do I'd probably attack from almost vertical angle and from the rear ofc.

Panzer III and StuG III (PzIII chassis) have identical front and rear armor, side is softest and the biggest target.

[dkoor]

Panzer III and StuG III (PzIII chassis) have identical front and rear armor, side is softest and the biggest target.

Thanks.

Maybe that's why I failed?

 

Will try it later, I mean 37mm is more reliable than rockets in spite of very low amount of ammo.

At least I can take out one tank, if I don't crash in the process that is.

[Sternjaeger]

I'm sure it's a matter of adjustments. Bear in mind though that the 151/15 had a proportionally bigger load than the 151/20, and the AP round would indeed penetrate better than its bigger brother, because it was faster and had smaller diameter.

[Fifi]

Even Rudel had hard time destroying T34 with two 37mm.

Of what he said, he had to aim for rear tank or low sides (not the turret) to blow them up.

Frontal attack was always uneffective...

After some while, Russian T34 found a tactic to avoid Rudel's attacks: they were often circling to hide the weak side of tank from the Stuka!

 

So i don't think a 20mm could blow up a T34. Or maybe only from rear.

[Sternjaeger]

I think the best tactic would still be to go for the tracks and try at least to immobilise the tank.

[Fifi]

I think the best tactic would still be to go for the tracks and try at least to immobilise the tank.

 

Yes, i think it's doable for the 20mm 

But BOS tanks DM should be very limited...

[Zmaj76]

on one occassion i got 4 clear hits with gunpods in the side of a bigger tank....he drove on like nothing happened.....I suppos damage model of ground units is still WIP....

[NZTyphoon]

I think the best tactic would still be to go for the tracks and try at least to immobilise the tank.

 

Tracks? What tracks?

 

[Sternjaeger]

lol what happened there? 

[Emgy]

on one occassion i got 4 clear hits with gunpods in the side of a bigger tank....he drove on like nothing happened.....I suppos damage model of ground units is still WIP....

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/weapons-systems-tech/armor-penetration-20mm-vs-50-cal-911.html#post51845

27mm penetration at ideal conditions for Hispano 20mm with AP ammo.

T-80 smallest tank has 25mm hull side/rear armour and 35mm around the turret.

Thinnest T-34 plating is 45mm, might be weaker areas on the top armour.

Edited December 28, 2013 by Calvamos

[Sternjaeger]

Yes, i think it's doable for the 20mm 

But BOS tanks DM should be very limited...

 

well tracks are modelled ingame, so I guess they could be (or already are?) assigned a DM?

[Rama]

lol what happened there? 

Christie suspension, allowing to run on tracks or without.

[bivalov]

according to official information which i saw, 20 mm shell for 151/20 not was really powerful, but guys on russian forum besides analogical posts, said what can destroy light tanks with some bursts in total...

 

well, MAYBE, 20 mm need to be little more powerful, maybe here were big angles in firing etc, plus WHICH now ammobelts in game? against air targets (1-2 AP among 5 shells or something like this), or against armored ground targets? etc...

 

any 151/15 shells really much better in AP, especially, f-4 could be good with these "tankbuster" loads like "pods + 4xSC-50", and if will be something like 3 151/15 + 4 bombs etc... ie can anyone confirm or no, what f-4 can have 151/15 like f-2 can have 151/20 as motor-gun? it's could be real "schwarzer tod" for any light armored vehicles, especially, with belts with lot of APs...

 

I have troubles destroying presented panzers with LaGG's 37mm cannon, AP shells ofc.

Wouldn't even try with 20mm's.

But if I do I'd probably attack from almost vertical angle and from the rear ofc.

hmmm... it's strange if you attack by rules like needful little angles, ie around 10 and not bigger than 20-30 if i'm not wrong... places like clear sides (starting from 500 m in RL), from above (almost any situation without critical angles and very big distance, of course) and even in front armor (starting from 200 m in RL, but with very little angles like 5-10 if i'm not mistaken)...

 

today personally i saw many tracks with destroying of tanks with sh-37, and even with vya-23 with APs (here good slow motion)... and if what, try to see these very helpful tables for vya/shvak... most likely, somewhere have and for 37 mm, but i forgot where and just you can use what i wrote above...

[Fifi]

well tracks are modelled ingame, so I guess they could be (or already are?) assigned a DM?

 

Only way to figure out is to aim tank tracks and watch video from tank perspective 

[=RvE=Windmills]

The T70 should probably be destroyable with 20mm rounds, it only has 10mm armour on top. Unless the dive angle is really shallow a 20mm AP round should go through that. I am unsure about the side armour on the T70 though, some sources say 15mm, some 35mm thick side armour.

 

T34 shouldn't be destroyable with 20mm rounds in any way.

[bivalov]

Only way to figure out is to aim tank tracks and watch video from tank perspective 

we little discussed question about DM of tanks and especially cars on russian forum, and developers changed some parameters for cars, but looks like for tanks still old or not seriously changed DM, although, of course all these things like tracks, hatches, drivers in cars etc can be as parts of DM... in some future after release, i think... unfortunately...

 

but maybe i'm wrong...

 

The T70 should probably be destroyable with 20mm rounds, it only has 10mm armour on top. Unless the dive angle is really shallow a 20mm AP round should go through that. I am unsure about the side armour on the T70 though, some sources say 15mm, some 35mm thick side armour.

35 mm it's sides of tower...

 

from russian wiki about t-70 (in total, correct source) - sides of hull=15 mm, feed of hull=15 mm, roof of hull/tower=10 mm - versus 12mm/30 degrees/300 meters of best AP shell for 151/20, ie in my opinion too, t-70 really can be destroyed starting from 100-200 meters in 15 mm armor, with 10 better of course...

 

but looks like need lot of APs in ammobelt...

 

T34 shouldn't be destroyable with 20mm rounds in any way.

looks like, really, in fact no...

[Finkeren]

Keep in mind that unless you're going straight down in a 90 degree dive while firing at the top armour of a T-70, you're not actually hitting 10mm armour.

 

At a dive angle of 45 degrees the top armour you have to defeat is closer to 15mm and at 20 degrees (which is not as shallow a dive as you might think) it's nearly 30mm and a ricochet is very likely.

[Sternjaeger]

Christie suspension, allowing to run on tracks or without.

 

well you learn something new every day! Had a bit of a google and apparently the system was ditched after 1939, as the "convertible drive" system took too much precious space inside the tank, so majority of Russian tanks in WW2 actually didn't have this feature, albeit using the Christie suspension. 

 

Another incredible bit of info is that the convertible drive system clocked a record speed of 104 mph in 1931, which is staggering for a tank! 

 

link to document

Edited December 28, 2013 by Sternjaeger

[bivalov]

this was "AP versus clear mms of armor", but picture from fast search, well, really, some places with 10-15 mm not easy to destroy by good design of tank, MAYBE, here can help only lot of AP in belt, good experience and luck...

[Sternjaeger]

it is important to remember that even if one round couldn't go through, there would be enough damage caused for the next rounds to penetrate sometimes.. it's not a precise science of course, because it really depends on hit accuracy, but with enough perseverance I bet one could eventually cause damage by progressively weakening a specific part of the armour.

[bivalov]

it's not a precise science of course, because it really depends on hit accuracy, but with enough perseverance I bet one could eventually cause damage by progressively weakening a specific part of the armour.

you mean 3 mg151/20 of f-4 with lot of AP shells in belts + long bursts? that's could be one of main ways to really destroy of t-70 in many 10-15 mm places, without "force of jedi", in other conditions it's could be very interesting adventure...

 

looks like armor map was optimized exactly against 20 mm shells from sky... but all thought based on parameters of AP of shell, personally i dont know how much correctly this info, although, looking good in total...

 

and this is still just talks and fast conclusions, of course...

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 The 37mm destroys those German tanks and with a lot of ammo to spare. Side or rear, did not matter as with 1-3 hits tank went boom. Tested some flights and it has NO dispersion whatsoever and no recoil to speak of that would affect aiming the slightest   Next should test the VyA23 and see how it works. The MG151/120 is best not used against tanks it seems, even it could destroy external parts and engine if hitting the engine top cover. But otherwise leave them alone and save ammo for softer targets. 

[Feathered_IV]

Another incredible bit of info is that the convertible drive system clocked a record speed of 104 mph in 1931, which is staggering for a tank!  :o

Stopping time would be a week next Thursday. :D

[bivalov]

again forgot and remembered only now... , what's interesting - 12 mm/30 degrees/300 meters of best AP shell for 151/20, it's with speed of plane or not? for example, just some information, AP for shvak it's 22 mm/10 degrees/300 meters = most likely around 15/30/300 and still dont know, it's with or without speed of plane... well, although here could be needful difference for destroying, but without correct information and this is enough...

 

btw, exactly, here about sh-37/ns-37, just for better understanding...

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 MK.Bivalov. I bet those numbers are tested on ground to have any credibility. So gun bolted to a rig and fired on target from different distances and angles. Firing from a plane would not give consistent results as pilot can not be asked to fire from exact ranges and angles. Same applies to many other armor tests, a plate of it being shot at from variable distances and changing the angle of the plate.

[JtD]

Yes, in the penetration test the gun is stationary, and aircraft speed would add to the muzzle velocity. Penetration at the same range would be a little better than the data from ground tests suggest.

[SR-F_Winger]

Thanks a lot for all the great input folks. If its how its supposed to be, then i am happy:)

[Sternjaeger]

more than the airspeed another important difference would be the angle at which the round is shot, as gravity will also influence the bullet speed, and the steeper the angle the more positive the effect of gravity.

 

Also bear in mind that the given muzzle speeds are measured on the ground, but at higher altitudes there will be less dense air, so the bullets are likely to travel slightly faster.

[bivalov]

S!

 

MK.Bivalov. I bet those numbers are tested on ground to have any credibility. So gun bolted to a rig and fired on target from different distances and angles. Firing from a plane would not give consistent results as pilot can not be asked to fire from exact ranges and angles. Same applies to many other armor tests, a plate of it being shot at from variable distances and changing the angle of the plate.

simple, but very reasonable, thx for your answer! moreover, i saw charts for shvak on il-2/ mg151 on fw 190, but just had some doubts about...

 

and now, looks like 151/20 has more chances for destroy t-70, but not really much, because still condition of firing in dive with not big speed, and most likely with using of flaps... etc, just another theoretical conclusion...

 

more than the airspeed another important difference would be the angle at which the round is shot, as gravity will also influence the bullet speed, and the steeper the angle the more positive the effect of gravity.

good reminder, although i think what here "only" 30 degrees for 151/20 ie very close to good "combat" angles like 10-20...

 

Also bear in mind that the given muzzle speeds are measured on the ground, but at higher altitudes there will be less dense air, so the bullets are likely to travel slightly faster.

we mainly about "tankbusting" at SL... but it's sounds interesting, really, and have this in game or not, by answers of developers could be...

[Fifi]

more than the airspeed another important difference would be the angle at which the round is shot, as gravity will also influence the bullet speed, and the steeper the angle the more positive the effect of gravity.

 

Also bear in mind that the given muzzle speeds are measured on the ground, but at higher altitudes there will be less dense air, so the bullets are likely to travel slightly faster.

 

Of what i could learn from the tank killer Rudel (again him  ), he never attacked or fired tanks from high above.

Always from tree top, with a low angle...but it could be also for the surprise matter, not only penetration matter...

But nevertheless i guess it's better to have low angle for better penetration and avoid any ricochet.

[Finkeren]

Of what i could learn from the tank killer Rudel (again him ), he never attacked or fired tanks from high above.

Always from tree top, with a low angle...but it could be also for the surprise matter, not only penetration matter...

But nevertheless i guess it's better to have low angle for better penetration and avoid any ricochet.

Rudel had some help in the form if the sloping armour of many Soviet tanks. It is most apparent on the T-34, but was actually present in more or less all Soviet AFV design from 1943 onwards.

 

The sloping armour is great for protecting against attacks from other ground vehicles or guns, but actually makes it easier for an aircraft to hit the armour in the best angle.

Edited December 29, 2013 by Finkeren

[2GvSAPFlea]

Armor penetration can be deceiving when trying to determine anti-armor lethality. Penetration values just determine the thickness of armor penetrated for a given angle and range (MOTO, I know). What is missing is how much mass remains of the penetrator and at what velocity. There is also a lot of empty space / volume inside a tank. Pk/h (Probability of kill given a hit) is very low for a 20mm AP round. Multiple hits resulting in multiple penetrations are probably needed to hit any vital area. Explosions (catastrophic kills) require hitting and detonating ammo. So absent penetrating and hitting ammo, we should not see a tank go boom. More realistic effects would be mobility or firepower kills (M/F Kill) - tank ceases firing and movement (crew kill, damaged engine or weapon, cut fuel lines, etc), slowly starts to burn (maybe), then explodes 20secs to 5 mins later if fuel/hydraulic fluid is ignited. Even in modern tank vs tank warfare, tanks are hit multiple times because damage/out of action is not readily apparent.

 

Bottom line: 20mm AP ammo, even modern types, is unlikely to cause anything other than M or F Kill at best against anything equipped with more than 10-15mm of armor.

[Zorin]

Yes, in the penetration test the gun is stationary, and aircraft speed would add to the muzzle velocity. Penetration at the same range would be a little better than the data from ground tests suggest.

 

So when I hit the passenger in the seat infront of me with a ball on the head, he has been hit by a ball travelling 850km/h + the speed I threw the ball with? I don't think physics work that way. It is rather the other way around, for example a jetfighter firing a medievil cannon would actually be hit by the cannonball as the muzzle velocity would be too low to even keep up with the speed the fighter is travelling at.

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

Christie suspension, allowing to run on tracks or without.

but it still need a track this was a towing setup, the drive wheels need the track to turn those other wheels.

[BeastyBaiter]

You might want to rethink that zorin. All motion is relative. If I throw a ball straight up (from my perspective) while sitting in a car doing 120 km/h, the ball does not going flying back and shatter the rear window, it lands right back in my hand regardless of how fast the car is moving. Same deal with a gunshot. The bullet has a muzzle velocity that is relative to the weapon's muzzle. Thus no, you wouldn't hit the medieval cannonball with the jet that fired it. Not initially at least. There is still air resistance to account for which would slow the projectile down over time but it is not instant.