Sirchby

super pershing
Was T26E1-1 Super Pershing auxiliary armor completely made of standard boiler plate instead of some "special" boiler plate?

21 posts in this topic

http://wiki.warthunder.ru/images/6/68/T26E1-1_%C2%ABSuper_Pershing%C2%BB_-_%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BE.jpg

 

Was the Super Pershing really used generic boiler plate with 0.45x RHA effectiveness?

 

It seems uncanny if it was heavy enough, slowing it down considerably, while having no additional protection against tanks like King Tiger, right when the Allied knew about its existence (that's why they made Super Pershing).

 

Pros including (does not reflect the same effect in the game):

  • Exploding AP round prematurely by triggering the fuze (for medium penetrating gun)
  • Stopping shaped charge rounds effectively (multiple spaced armor lineup)

 

Cons including:

  • Helps AP normalization in progress if the shell is highly penetrating enough (3x)
  • Heavy enough for an auxiliary armor that it damped the tank toward the front while having no significant advantages

 

Really generic boiler armor found on German factories or some special boiler armor like from, say, naval warships?

Edited by Sirchby
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2017 at 0:50 AM, Sirchby said:

 

Was the Super Pershing really used generic boiler plate with 0.45x RHA effectiveness?

 

It seems uncanny if it was heavy enough, slowing it down considerably, while having no additional protection against tanks like King Tiger, right when the Allied knew about its existence (that's why they made Super Pershing).

 

Pros including (does not reflect the same effect in the game):

  • Exploding AP round prematurely by triggering the fuze (for medium penetrating gun)
  • Stopping shaped charge rounds effectively (multiple spaced armor lineup)

 

Cons including:

  • Helps AP normalization in progress if the shell is highly penetrating enough (3x)
  • Heavy enough for an auxiliary armor that it damped the tank toward the front while having no significant advantages

 

Really generic boiler armor found on German factories or some special boiler armor like from, say, naval warships?

 

According to Hunnicutt's book on the Pershing...

"A piece of armor was flame cut from the 80 mm glacis plate of a captured Panther and welded to the front of the gun shield. The front hull armor was reinforced with a double layer of plate greatly increasing its slope."

 

Though this exonerates the gun mantlet plate from being a simple "boiler plate" as you said, the book made no explicit mention of what kind of armor was used on the front hull other than it was double-layered and sloped at a greater angle than the front hull.

 

I should also note that the pro of stopping shaped charge rounds effectively is rather dubious with spaced armor. Some sources like Steven Zaloga's book "Panzer vs Bazooka" indicates that the spaced armour most of the time did not affect the penetration ability of the shaped charge and actually increased its penetration ability. This is because shaped charge rounds require an "optimal" space away from the armor to reach their maximum potential, and if the spaced armour helped the HEAT round reach this "optimal" distance, it doesn't really help the tank that much.

Prematurely exploding AP rounds are out of my league and knowledge, though.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Inceptor57 said:

I should also note that the pro of stopping shaped charge rounds effectively is rather dubious with spaced armor. Some sources like Steven Zaloga's book "Panzer vs Bazooka" indicates that the spaced armour most of the time did not affect the penetration ability of the shaped charge and actually increased its penetration ability. This is because shaped charge rounds require an "optimal" space away from the armor to reach their maximum potential, and if the spaced armour helped the HEAT round reach this "optimal" distance, it doesn't really help the tank that much.

 

Yeah, the optimal distance is why modern HEAT shells have a probe on the nose.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sirchby said:

Didn't Super Pershing auxiliary armor work like schurzen? Just a bit thicker... & immensely heavier.

38.1 mm > 5 mm, so yeah.

It's basically spaced armor. Heavy enough that it actually has the whole tank leaning towards the front.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sirchby said:

Wouldn't it be physically effective?

 

I mean, It's 38 mm thick steel with relatively wide gap on its front hull.

 

I would argue that the armor should indeed bolster the Super Pershing's ability to defend against AP rounds, and generally that's the argument going on right now on why the Super Pershing is not as efficient in-game due to the added armor not being a reliable barrier against AP rounds. (however, since I do not play Super Pershing in a big degree I'm only speaking on what I've seen on the forums and wiki)

 

But I think that because it is spaced should not give the Super Pershing a few added bonuses that few other tanks in the game could even be modeled with. The prematurely AP round for example is one that would need to give the Super Pershing a completely new damage model to get in correctly (if it could ever physically happen that is).

 

My 2 cents

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

most of the weight is the long 90mm gun and the new turret. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, *Baconator100012 said:

most of the weight is the long 90mm gun and the new turret. 

 

Not really.

 

You can find the T26E1-1 in American soil with 90 mm T15 onboard in Aberdeen Proving Ground with proportional hull inclination, before strapped with auxiliary armor.

 

T26E1-1.jpg

Edited by Sirchby
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Sirchby said:

 

Not really.

 

You can find the T26E1-1 in American soil with 90 mm T15 onboard in Aberdeen Proving Ground with proportional hull inclination, before strapped with auxiliary armor.

 

T26E1-1.jpg

comparing to the M26, the T26e1-1 has a slightly different turret and a much heavier gun.  

Maybe the engineers made it lowered on the front on purpose.  Possibly to avoid the Lower plate weakness. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, *Baconator100012 said:

comparing to the M26, the T26e1-1 has a slightly different turret and a much heavier gun.  

Maybe the engineers made it lowered on the front on purpose.  Possibly to avoid the Lower plate weakness. 

 

That is T26E1-1...

 

Lowering the front on purpose sounds ridiculous for a tank engineer.

 

The only logical reason behind it is its front-heavy boiler plates damped the front section of the tank.

Edited by Sirchby
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sirchby said:

 

That is T26E1-1...

 

Lowering the front on purpose sounds ridiculous for a tank engineer.

 

The only logical reason behind it is its front-heavy boiler plates damped the front section of the tank.

Lol, what i was saying is the chassis of the M26 is the exact same as the T26e1-1. Only difference is the turret and gun.  The motor and suspension is the same.  Maybe they put on some duckbills, but other than that..  its all the same except the turret and gun. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, *Baconator100012 said:

Lol, what i was saying is the chassis of the M26 is the exact same as the T26e1-1. Only difference is the turret and gun.  The motor and suspension is the same.  Maybe they put on some duckbills, but other than that..  its all the same except the turret and gun. 

 

I know.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sirchby said:

 

I know.

i take that back, i looked into the weight the plates..  8ft by 20ft is nearly 10,000lbs at 1.5in thickness.  That is heavy as fawk. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, *Baconator100012 said:

i take that back, i looked into the weight the plates..  8ft by 20ft is nearly 10,000lbs at 1.5in thickness.  That is heavy as fawk. 

 

I know.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way i can test the difference is buy RHA/CHA and boiler plates and take it down the range.  Thing is, idk anyone selling rha or cha. 

 

If you can find a source where i can buy these RHA or CHA, then i'll shoot them down and compare the strength. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't really find RHA, but you can find rolled steel that has the same hardness, Which is basically armor grade steel.  Which means you'd need to find SAE 4340 steel or better.  Which from what I can tell can be hardened to around 300bhn.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Conraire said:

You can't really find RHA, but you can find rolled steel that has the same hardness, Which is basically armor grade steel.  Which means you'd need to find SAE 4340 steel or better.  Which from what I can tell can be hardened to around 300bhn.

Do you think Gaijin would accept my experiment if i use rolled steel to replace RHA? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, *Baconator100012 said:

Do you think Gaijin would accept my experiment if i use rolled steel to replace RHA? 

As long as it is up to the standards for RHA

Specifications[edit]

For current United States Army use, RHA is produced to military standard MIL-DTL-12560[1] by several manufacturers. Another standard is MIL-DTL-46177;[2] however, this standard has been inactivated, and all new designs should use MIL-DTL-12560. MIL-DTL-46177 RHA is similar to SAE 4340 steel alloy.[3]

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lord_of_Sofa said:

As long as it is up to the standards for RHA

Specifications[edit]

For current United States Army use, RHA is produced to military standard MIL-DTL-12560[1] by several manufacturers. Another standard is MIL-DTL-46177;[2] however, this standard has been inactivated, and all new designs should use MIL-DTL-12560. MIL-DTL-46177 RHA is similar to SAE 4340 steel alloy.[3]

Alright, i'll save this and add this to my bucket list and take it out shooting. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.