Jump to content
xWulffx

Armor Quality

Recommended Posts

I'm not referring to  thickness angle or roundness, but things such as elasticity and malleability due to the actual metallurgy.

 

I recently read Otto Carius' book Tigers in the Mud and he made a significant statement about the quality of the metal of the Tiger I.  He described it as elastic yet still hard enough to withstand shots.

As the war went on the quality of the German steel diminished due to shortages of  key rare materials, but early on the steel was top notch.

 

When he was a Pz38(t) crewman they took a hit and he said they got hurt not from the actual shell exploding but from metal fragments and spalling due to the inelastic and brittle nature of the Czech steel.

 

Has this factor been incorporated into the tanks of WOT in some hidden fashion, in a general fashion such as HP of tanks, or not at all???

 

Do people think it would be a good idea or too complicated and unnecessary?

Link to post
Share on other sites

From recent Q&A http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/10/07/7-10-2013/

 

- the 25 percent penetration spread is not a “random number”, it reflects the quality of shells and armor and is based on how often did Soviet 76mm guns ZIS-3 and F-34 penetrate the Tiger flanks

 

Shouldn't be too hard to find the german armor specific answers from the Q&A, I'm too lazy to dig through them all though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There used to be an "Armour Homogenization Factor", up to 20% increase in the strength of any given thickness, but it's been stated repeatedly that it's no longer used.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an interesting topic, one that I can speak on IRL more than the game.

 

First a couple quick, short definitions;

 

RHA = Rolled Homogeneous Armor.  Steel is melted and rolled into a sheet, and heat treated.  This controls imperfections, thickness, and hardness/toughness.  You then cut it into the shape you need to use. 

 

Homogeneous means it is all one blended material, not layers or lumps.

 

Heat Treating means controlled heating and cooling of the steel to give properties you want.

 

CHA = Cast Homogeneous Armor.  Steel is melted and poured into a mold that is the shape of the final part you want.  This part is heat treated and used as-is.  You can pour a large turret at one time, not build it out of plates.  Remember that welding armor was pretty new around 1943, and takes lots of skilled people. 

 

From the EU topic on the FV4202 inspection, I was under the impression the Armor Homo Factor was something that factored the average thickness of a (Example - a Turret Front Face) armor feature.  If you look in a cast tank turret, they are not the same thickness across the ENTIRE surface.  There are lumps, bumps, mounts, holes, etc.  They also can change the thickness along the faces of the casting, to tune the Line Of Sight thickness.  This Armor Homogeneous Factor would be more relevant on Cast Homogeneous Armor hulls and turrets, than Welded RHA (Rolled Homogeneous Armor), or Riveted/Bolted RHA. 

 

This is because the Cast parts are poured into molds with lots of shape and form, while the RHA parts are plates that are cut to shape and attached to each other.  This is a generalization of IRL parts, so don't take it toooooo far without technical discussion.  And I'm only saying I THOUGHT the Armor Homo Factor took this into account.

 

Another possibility might be the game version of RHAe, (Rolled Homogeneous Armor Equivalence).  This is where armor/ballistics engineers use RHA penetration as the baseline for testing, and factor the performance of each different armor material back the the RHA baseline.

 

Example:

 

1) CHA may have more porosity (small little air pockets or holes) than RHA, so it's given a factor less than RHA.  You may need 9" of CHA thickness to give the same protection as 8" of RHA.

 

2) Spaced armor (Two or more pieces of armor with a gap between) might provide the same protection as 8" of RHA, but only uses two 3.5" plates (7" total)

 

3) Face Hardened RHA.  They make the strike face (Outside face, where the projectile hits) harder in the heat treat to break up the projectile, but keep the back of the armor softer so it won't crack and spall.  (Spall - throw off pieces of steel inside the tank)  This can give better protection than RHA for the same thickness.

 

 

If the Game Designers account for Germans having harder, or better quality armor than the norm, or Russians having good castings, this could be the factor.  (But if they don't use it anymore......  Well....)

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never heard that the armor homogeinization factor isn't used in game anymore.

 

I recently read Otto Carius' book Tigers in the Mud and he made a significant statement about the quality of the metal of the Tiger I.

 

Another interesting thing on his book is just how often (read: very often) russians would shell his Tiger's positions with whatever artillery/mortar they had in range.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never heard that the armor homogeinization factor isn't used in game anymore.

 

Best I can find at the moment is this. The entire topic has since been removed from the mechanics page for lack of supporting evidence of its existence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shelling the pizz out of them is always a great move.  Roof armor is very thin, radio antennas are easily damaged, and it drives people to button up. (Close hatches and stick to little squinty view ports.)

 

The damaged radios and poor visibility removes an advantage of the defender/germans.  Also, you can do great damage with blast and frag to a tank.  Even small mortars and arty can pen the roof or engine deck, damage tracks and suspension.  You also start fires, wreck anything stored outside the tank, remove the camo and cover, plus the supporting infantry.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an interesting topic, one that I can speak on IRL more than the game.

 

First a couple quick, short definitions;

 

RHA = Rolled Homogeneous Armor.  Steel is melted and rolled into a sheet, and heat treated.  This controls imperfections, thickness, and hardness/toughness.  You then cut it into the shape you need to use. 

 

Homogeneous means it is all one blended material, not layers or lumps.

 

Heat Treating means controlled heating and cooling of the steel to give properties you want.

 

CHA = Cast Homogeneous Armor.  Steel is melted and poured into a mold that is the shape of the final part you want.  This part is heat treated and used as-is.  You can pour a large turret at one time, not build it out of plates.  Remember that welding armor was pretty new around 1943, and takes lots of skilled people. 

 

From the EU topic on the FV4202 inspection, I was under the impression the Armor Homo Factor was something that factored the average thickness of a (Example - a Turret Front Face) armor feature.  If you look in a cast tank turret, they are not the same thickness across the ENTIRE surface.  There are lumps, bumps, mounts, holes, etc.  They also can change the thickness along the faces of the casting, to tune the Line Of Sight thickness.  This Armor Homogeneous Factor would be more relevant on Cast Homogeneous Armor hulls and turrets, than Welded RHA (Rolled Homogeneous Armor), or Riveted/Bolted RHA. 

 

This is because the Cast parts are poured into molds with lots of shape and form, while the RHA parts are plates that are cut to shape and attached to each other.  This is a generalization of IRL parts, so don't take it toooooo far without technical discussion.  And I'm only saying I THOUGHT the Armor Homo Factor took this into account.

 

Another possibility might be the game version of RHAe, (Rolled Homogeneous Armor Equivalence).  This is where armor/ballistics engineers use RHA penetration as the baseline for testing, and factor the performance of each different armor material back the the RHA baseline.

 

Example:

 

1) CHA may have more porosity (small little air pockets or holes) than RHA, so it's given a factor less than RHA.  You may need 9" of CHA thickness to give the same protection as 8" of RHA.

 

2) Spaced armor (Two or more pieces of armor with a gap between) might provide the same protection as 8" of RHA, but only uses two 3.5" plates (7" total)

 

3) Face Hardened RHA.  They make the strike face (Outside face, where the projectile hits) harder in the heat treat to break up the projectile, but keep the back of the armor softer so it won't crack and spall.  (Spall - throw off pieces of steel inside the tank)  This can give better protection than RHA for the same thickness.

 

 

If the Game Designers account for Germans having harder, or better quality armor than the norm, or Russians having good castings, this could be the factor.  (But if they don't use it anymore......  Well....)

 

 

God bless you sir!

 

My tank encyclopedia finally makes sense!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am lead to believe that the Germans were fond of FHA at a 10 degree angle (you see this everywhere on their tanks) because it supposedly offered superior protection against uncapped projectiles, the harder layer sometimes being hard enough to shatter the incoming projectile entirely.

However, vs. capped projectiles, which became common among all the Allies fairly early on in the war, it fared far less well, and strikes with capped projectiles of 75mm or 76.2mm would often produce nasty internal spalling.

Oh, and a glossary:

AP = Armor Piercing: Typically refers to a plain armor piercing munition that is a solid piece of steel. Typically refers to the plain-jane article, with no explosive filler or armor-piercing cap, and sometimes refers to ammunition with a ballistic windshield.

 

HE = High Explosive: Blows up.

APC = Armor Piercing Capped: There are two kinds of "cap" in munitions nomenclature, a ballistic cap, and an armor-piercing cap, the latter of which this designation is referring to. An armor piercing cap is designed as a sacrificial bit of metal on the front of an otherwise hardened penetrator, designed to help prevent projectile shatter.

 

-T = - Tracer, e.g., AP-T (Armor Piercing - Tracer): Just like in the movies.

 

APCBC = Armor Piercing Capped, Ballistic Cap: Has both an armor piercing cap and a ballistic cap, which is just a hollow piece of shaped metal on the front of the projectile to make it more aerodynamic.

 

APCR = Armor Piercing Composite Rigid: Lightweight projectiles moving very fast (typically above Mach 3) with a small tungsten armor piercing core. Can penetrate a lot of armor, and often are much easier to hit a target at unknown distances with due to their flat trajectory.

 

HVAP = High Velocity Armor Piercing: The American name for APCR.

 

HKM = Hartkernmunition: The German name for APCR

 

APDS = Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot: It was discovered fairly early on that if the metal guiding vanes of an APCR shot were made as separate pieces and allowed to fly off the projectiles in flight, the projectile would fly further and penetrate more. Sabot is a French word which means "shoe", and refers to the discarding "petals", which function in precisely the same manner as a shotgun shell's wad. The British pioneered APDS. You would think they would have chosen an English word for their invention...

 

APFSDS = Armor Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot: Longer projectiles have a higher sectional density, and penetrate more than shorter projectiles of the same weight moving at the same speed. The logical conclusion of APDS was to make a projectile as long and skinny as possible, however, designers ran into a problem: Rifling, the mechanism used to spin-stabilize projectiles in flight, must spin the projectile fast enough to stabilize it (like a gyroscope). If projectiles were made too long, the rifling twist needed to stabilize them would be too tight to manufacture. The solution to this problem was to use, instead, drag to stabilize the projectiles, hence the fins. The result was long, dart- or arrow-like projectiles, ironically harkening back to the very first cannon munitions.

 

HEAT = High Explosive Anti-Tank: A shaped charge is a formed explosive charge that directs massive amounts of pressure at a single spot and is capable of penetrating armor. A HEAT round propels a shaped charge shell at a nominal velocity, which then explodes on contact with the target and (hopefully) penetrates the armor.

 

HESH = High Explosive Squash Head: Sort of the opposite of a shaped charge. A HESH round doesn't penetrate armor at all, it instead it first squashes its warhead of plastic explosive onto the target and detonates, which sends a mighty shockwave of force through the armor itself, which can cause massive spalling and internal damage.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

APDS = Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot: It was discovered fairly early on that if the metal guiding vanes of an APCR shot were made as separate pieces and allowed to fly off the projectiles in flight, the projectile would fly further and penetrate more. Sabot is a French word which means "shoe", and refers to the discarding "petals", which function in precisely the same manner as a shotgun shell's wad. The British pioneered APDS. You would think they would have chosen an English word for their invention...

 

APDS tank rounds were first designed by French engineers, who subsequently evacuated to England after the surrender of France and joined development of similar weapons in England.  Hence the French word.

Link to post
Share on other sites

APDS tank rounds were first designed by French engineers, who subsequently evacuated to England after the surrender of France and joined development of similar weapons in England.  Hence the French word

 

I was making a joke, actually. You're correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And I thought the French and their shoes refered back to the AP rounds with the CS (Tear) Gas fill..............  Stinky shoes...

 

I would love to see some of the specs from the Tiger and Panther design packages, because it would actually give the hardnesses, materials and heat treats for the intended armor.  I say intended, because accepted as built was more the norm in 1944.

 

 

Anyone have real numbers?  I haven't hit the files for the old Army tech inspections, but I know they are around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the same thing in "Tigers In the Mud" and have wondered about how or if that is factored into WoT.  Their Tiger armor implementation does not seem too supple at all.  ;)

 

Also I saw this show on how metal is tempered for blades and for armor, and as someone mentioned, there is a lot of different types of armor.  And not only the forging process but also the alloy composition of the metal itself.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an interesting topic, one that I can speak on IRL more than the game.

 

First a couple quick, short definitions;

 

RHA = Rolled Homogeneous Armor.  Steel is melted and rolled into a sheet, and heat treated.  This controls imperfections, thickness, and hardness/toughness.  You then cut it into the shape you need to use. 

 

Homogeneous means it is all one blended material, not layers or lumps.

 

Heat Treating means controlled heating and cooling of the steel to give properties you want.

 

CHA = Cast Homogeneous Armor.  Steel is melted and poured into a mold that is the shape of the final part you want.  This part is heat treated and used as-is.  You can pour a large turret at one time, not build it out of plates.  Remember that welding armor was pretty new around 1943, and takes lots of skilled people. 

 

From the EU topic on the FV4202 inspection, I was under the impression the Armor Homo Factor was something that factored the average thickness of a (Example - a Turret Front Face) armor feature.  If you look in a cast tank turret, they are not the same thickness across the ENTIRE surface.  There are lumps, bumps, mounts, holes, etc.  They also can change the thickness along the faces of the casting, to tune the Line Of Sight thickness.  This Armor Homogeneous Factor would be more relevant on Cast Homogeneous Armor hulls and turrets, than Welded RHA (Rolled Homogeneous Armor), or Riveted/Bolted RHA. 

 

This is because the Cast parts are poured into molds with lots of shape and form, while the RHA parts are plates that are cut to shape and attached to each other.  This is a generalization of IRL parts, so don't take it toooooo far without technical discussion.  And I'm only saying I THOUGHT the Armor Homo Factor took this into account.

 

Another possibility might be the game version of RHAe, (Rolled Homogeneous Armor Equivalence).  This is where armor/ballistics engineers use RHA penetration as the baseline for testing, and factor the performance of each different armor material back the the RHA baseline.

 

Example:

 

1) CHA may have more porosity (small little air pockets or holes) than RHA, so it's given a factor less than RHA.  You may need 9" of CHA thickness to give the same protection as 8" of RHA.

 

2) Spaced armor (Two or more pieces of armor with a gap between) might provide the same protection as 8" of RHA, but only uses two 3.5" plates (7" total)

 

3) Face Hardened RHA.  They make the strike face (Outside face, where the projectile hits) harder in the heat treat to break up the projectile, but keep the back of the armor softer so it won't crack and spall.  (Spall - throw off pieces of steel inside the tank)  This can give better protection than RHA for the same thickness.

 

 

If the Game Designers account for Germans having harder, or better quality armor than the norm, or Russians having good castings, this could be the factor.  (But if they don't use it anymore......  Well....)

 

 

This might be doable now with the HD graphics now.

The later tanks like the Leopard I clearly had armor of superior quality to what they were making in the 1940's due to vastly improved metallurgy and manufactring processes, yet it to the best of my knowedge it gets treated the same as any other in regards to penetration mechanics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to factor in armor quality would be a mistake. The quality of armor veried, oftentimes gteatly depending on the timeframe. German armor generally decreased in quality over time while western quality generally increased. But that's only a generalization and hardly what I would build into a shooter as the data to give good normalization numbers is way too sparse to do anything other than annoy people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be doable now with the HD graphics now.

The later tanks like the Leopard I clearly had armor of superior quality to what they were making in the 1940's due to vastly improved metallurgy and manufactring processes, yet it to the best of my knowedge it gets treated the same as any other in regards to penetration mechanics.

Leopard 1

Armor

Leopard 1

Armor

203Yfz5.jpg

 

The entire design philosophy of a good number of nation-states at that stage had abandoned the concept of "armor" as useful on tanks, due to the belief that HEAT warheads had made armor useless. Germany and France (with the Leo and the Amx 30) championed this mindset to its fullest. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire design philosophy of a good number of nation-states at that stage had abandoned the concept of "armor" as useful on tanks, due to the belief that HEAT warheads had made armor useless. Germany and France (with the Leo and the Amx 30) championed this mindset to its fullest. 

 

 

I'm not debating that the armor was thinner during that era due to HEAT, what I'm saying is mm for mm the armor is superior. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...