A_Mysterious_Stranger

I don't think you're going to get a neat, single answer for all of this.  Penetration is very complicated even when you focus only on rigid OR eroding regimes.   APFSDS occupy a transitional region between those two, meaning it is likely to be even more complex. 
 
For example I did more digging by changing search parameters.  One thing I turned up came from army-guide and this interesting point:
 


 
Completely unsourced but it shows a the potential for multiple factors at work.    I've found sources that allude to nose shape influencing interface defeat, transitions from rigid to eroding penetration and velocity thresholds, and so on.  I'll share the various things I ran across in the hopes it will prove useful.  In no particular order:
 
CTH hydrocode predictions on the effect of rod nose-shape on the velocity at which tungsten alloy rods transition from rigid body to eroding penetrators when impacting thick aluminium targets
 
Abstract:


Design of hard-target penetrator nose geometry in the presence of high-speed, velocity-dependent friction, including the effects of mass loss and blunting
 
Abstract


 
INTERIOR AND TERMINAL BALLISTICS OF 25g LONG ROD PENETRATORS
 
Introduction:



Investigation of Oblique Penetration I: The Effects of Penetrator Leading End Shapes on Unyawed and Yawed Impacts
Abstract



TERMINAL BALLISTICS TEST AND ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR THE PENETRATION MECHANICS BRANCH
 
Introduction:


 
Penetration of 6061-T6511 aluminum targets by ogive-nosed VAR 4340 steel projectiles at oblique angles: experiments and simulations
Abstract



The Effect of Nose Shape in Long Rod Penetration
(link to free PDF download)
Abstract:


 
This one seems related to the one below, so I included it more for completion's sake and informative purposes. 
 
Comparative Study of Nose Profile Role in Long-Rod Penetration
Abstract:


 
Honestly I'm not sure this is very relevant.  It seems more about eroding-penetrator processes and mushrooming vs non-mushrooming.  But it's also about EM guns specifically, so it was worth mentioning.
 
Interface Defeat of Long-Rod Projectiles by Ceramic Armor
Abstract:


 
This is mostly about interface defeat in general vs ceramics, but there is a bit in there about nose shape.  So nose shape may be a factor here.
 
Interface defeat studies of long-rod projectile impacting on ceramic targets
 
Abstract:


 
Analysis of the Noneroding Penetration of Tungsten Alloy Long Rods Into Aluminum Targets
Abstract



 
This one seems to be more about rigid penetration, but its also about about LRPs. Worth noting for that 'transitional' aspect I mentioned and the fact nose shape has a huge impact in rigid penetration.
 
Modeling Threshold Velocity of Hemispherical and Ogival-Nose Tungsten-Alloy Penetrators Perforating Finite Aluminum Targets
Abstract

I don't know if anyone ever checks the internet archive but they have books.   All kinds of books.  Including gun books. 
 
Understanding Firearm Ballistics
 
https://archive.org/details/understandingfir0000rink
 
The Thermodynamics of Firearms. Design of firearms as heat engines and the interior and exterior ballistics of projectiles.
(two copies)
https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.6268
https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.234005
 
The Big Book of Ballistics
 
https://archive.org/details/BigBookOfBallisticsPhilipMassaro/page/n25/mode/2up
 
 
They also have some older books that might interest some: 
 
Principles Of Firearms [ Charles Edward Balleisen
 
And some DTIC stuff - alot of it actually:
 
DTIC ADA226267: Superconducting and Computational Penetration Mechanics
 
DTIC ADA570804: Physical Mechanisms of Soft Tissue Injury from Penetrating Ballistic Impact
 
So the real treasure may be the fact there's more stuff people can find (and download, they have multiple formats and even torrents it seems) and store for technical discussion.
 
(Also I see some of my links are down.  I'll have to find some time in the future to replace them all but if somebody wants something I posted before send me a private message and I'll try to fix it. 
 

I don't know if anyone ever checks the internet archive but they have books.   All kinds of books.  Including gun books. 
 
Understanding Firearm Ballistics
 
https://archive.org/details/understandingfir0000rink
 
The Thermodynamics of Firearms. Design of firearms as heat engines and the interior and exterior ballistics of projectiles.
(two copies)
https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.6268
https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.234005
 
The Big Book of Ballistics
 
https://archive.org/details/BigBookOfBallisticsPhilipMassaro/page/n25/mode/2up
 
 
They also have some older books that might interest some: 
 
Principles Of Firearms [ Charles Edward Balleisen
 
And some DTIC stuff - alot of it actually:
 
DTIC ADA226267: Superconducting and Computational Penetration Mechanics
 
DTIC ADA570804: Physical Mechanisms of Soft Tissue Injury from Penetrating Ballistic Impact
 
So the real treasure may be the fact there's more stuff people can find (and download, they have multiple formats and even torrents it seems) and store for technical discussion.
 
(Also I see some of my links are down.  I'll have to find some time in the future to replace them all but if somebody wants something I posted before send me a private message and I'll try to fix it. 
 

Sloping apparently is also effective against laser weapons according to some.   That is 'Hard Sci Fi Realism' (tm).
 

The really funny part, again, is where a highly-sloped whipple shield somehow allows a ship to shrug off battleship shells.

I don't think you're going to get a neat, single answer for all of this.  Penetration is very complicated even when you focus only on rigid OR eroding regimes.   APFSDS occupy a transitional region between those two, meaning it is likely to be even more complex. 
 
For example I did more digging by changing search parameters.  One thing I turned up came from army-guide and this interesting point:
 


 
Completely unsourced but it shows a the potential for multiple factors at work.    I've found sources that allude to nose shape influencing interface defeat, transitions from rigid to eroding penetration and velocity thresholds, and so on.  I'll share the various things I ran across in the hopes it will prove useful.  In no particular order:
 
CTH hydrocode predictions on the effect of rod nose-shape on the velocity at which tungsten alloy rods transition from rigid body to eroding penetrators when impacting thick aluminium targets
 
Abstract:


Design of hard-target penetrator nose geometry in the presence of high-speed, velocity-dependent friction, including the effects of mass loss and blunting
 
Abstract


 
INTERIOR AND TERMINAL BALLISTICS OF 25g LONG ROD PENETRATORS
 
Introduction:



Investigation of Oblique Penetration I: The Effects of Penetrator Leading End Shapes on Unyawed and Yawed Impacts
Abstract



TERMINAL BALLISTICS TEST AND ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR THE PENETRATION MECHANICS BRANCH
 
Introduction:


 
Penetration of 6061-T6511 aluminum targets by ogive-nosed VAR 4340 steel projectiles at oblique angles: experiments and simulations
Abstract



The Effect of Nose Shape in Long Rod Penetration
(link to free PDF download)
Abstract:


 
This one seems related to the one below, so I included it more for completion's sake and informative purposes. 
 
Comparative Study of Nose Profile Role in Long-Rod Penetration
Abstract:


 
Honestly I'm not sure this is very relevant.  It seems more about eroding-penetrator processes and mushrooming vs non-mushrooming.  But it's also about EM guns specifically, so it was worth mentioning.
 
Interface Defeat of Long-Rod Projectiles by Ceramic Armor
Abstract:


 
This is mostly about interface defeat in general vs ceramics, but there is a bit in there about nose shape.  So nose shape may be a factor here.
 
Interface defeat studies of long-rod projectile impacting on ceramic targets
 
Abstract:


 
Analysis of the Noneroding Penetration of Tungsten Alloy Long Rods Into Aluminum Targets
Abstract



 
This one seems to be more about rigid penetration, but its also about about LRPs. Worth noting for that 'transitional' aspect I mentioned and the fact nose shape has a huge impact in rigid penetration.
 
Modeling Threshold Velocity of Hemispherical and Ogival-Nose Tungsten-Alloy Penetrators Perforating Finite Aluminum Targets
Abstract

What I could find: 
Jacketed Long-Rod Penetrators: Problems and Perspectives
 
 
Though that is about Jacketed Penetrators, it seems it may still apply to regular APFSDS.  Given it cites Rosenberg and Deckel you might look at their work 'Terminal Ballistics' for more information. 
 
Possibly more useful is this: 
 
The Effect of Nose Shape on Depleted Uranium (DU) Long-Rod Penetrators
 
I apologize for not quoting any of this, but its a 66 page non searchable PDF, and I'm not sure that you can just select parts without reading the whole thing for context since it's specifically about LRP and nose shape for DU rounds (some tungsten is mentioned.) 
 
Also of possible interest are these reddit posts.  I'm not sure how 'good' it is since we're talking War Thunder (I'm as wary of that as I am of WoT based research) but I figure I'd include it for completeness sake and potential for discussion: 
 
APFSDS the Science of Ricochets
 
How tip shapes affect APFSDS performance on sloped armour
 
I also believe that most APFSDS don't operate fully in the eroding (hydrodynamic) regime and would slow down on impact anyhow.  So rigid penetration effects may apply (nose shape does matter quite a bit there).
 
Lastly because it may be of interest to someone materials which may be of interest but may not be relevant to the discussion:
 
Penetrator strength effect in long-rod critical ricochet angle
 
Interaction between High-velocity Penetrators and Moving Armour Components
 
PENETRATION OF METALLIC PLATES BY KINETIC ENERGY PROJECTILES
 
The Relation Between Initial Yaw and Long Rod Projectile Shape after Penetrating an Oblique Thin Plate

I don't think you're going to get a neat, single answer for all of this.  Penetration is very complicated even when you focus only on rigid OR eroding regimes.   APFSDS occupy a transitional region between those two, meaning it is likely to be even more complex. 
 
For example I did more digging by changing search parameters.  One thing I turned up came from army-guide and this interesting point:
 


 
Completely unsourced but it shows a the potential for multiple factors at work.    I've found sources that allude to nose shape influencing interface defeat, transitions from rigid to eroding penetration and velocity thresholds, and so on.  I'll share the various things I ran across in the hopes it will prove useful.  In no particular order:
 
CTH hydrocode predictions on the effect of rod nose-shape on the velocity at which tungsten alloy rods transition from rigid body to eroding penetrators when impacting thick aluminium targets
 
Abstract:


Design of hard-target penetrator nose geometry in the presence of high-speed, velocity-dependent friction, including the effects of mass loss and blunting
 
Abstract


 
INTERIOR AND TERMINAL BALLISTICS OF 25g LONG ROD PENETRATORS
 
Introduction:



Investigation of Oblique Penetration I: The Effects of Penetrator Leading End Shapes on Unyawed and Yawed Impacts
Abstract



TERMINAL BALLISTICS TEST AND ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR THE PENETRATION MECHANICS BRANCH
 
Introduction:


 
Penetration of 6061-T6511 aluminum targets by ogive-nosed VAR 4340 steel projectiles at oblique angles: experiments and simulations
Abstract



The Effect of Nose Shape in Long Rod Penetration
(link to free PDF download)
Abstract:


 
This one seems related to the one below, so I included it more for completion's sake and informative purposes. 
 
Comparative Study of Nose Profile Role in Long-Rod Penetration
Abstract:


 
Honestly I'm not sure this is very relevant.  It seems more about eroding-penetrator processes and mushrooming vs non-mushrooming.  But it's also about EM guns specifically, so it was worth mentioning.
 
Interface Defeat of Long-Rod Projectiles by Ceramic Armor
Abstract:


 
This is mostly about interface defeat in general vs ceramics, but there is a bit in there about nose shape.  So nose shape may be a factor here.
 
Interface defeat studies of long-rod projectile impacting on ceramic targets
 
Abstract:


 
Analysis of the Noneroding Penetration of Tungsten Alloy Long Rods Into Aluminum Targets
Abstract



 
This one seems to be more about rigid penetration, but its also about about LRPs. Worth noting for that 'transitional' aspect I mentioned and the fact nose shape has a huge impact in rigid penetration.
 
Modeling Threshold Velocity of Hemispherical and Ogival-Nose Tungsten-Alloy Penetrators Perforating Finite Aluminum Targets
Abstract

I don't think you're going to get a neat, single answer for all of this.  Penetration is very complicated even when you focus only on rigid OR eroding regimes.   APFSDS occupy a transitional region between those two, meaning it is likely to be even more complex. 
 
For example I did more digging by changing search parameters.  One thing I turned up came from army-guide and this interesting point:
 


 
Completely unsourced but it shows a the potential for multiple factors at work.    I've found sources that allude to nose shape influencing interface defeat, transitions from rigid to eroding penetration and velocity thresholds, and so on.  I'll share the various things I ran across in the hopes it will prove useful.  In no particular order:
 
CTH hydrocode predictions on the effect of rod nose-shape on the velocity at which tungsten alloy rods transition from rigid body to eroding penetrators when impacting thick aluminium targets
 
Abstract:


Design of hard-target penetrator nose geometry in the presence of high-speed, velocity-dependent friction, including the effects of mass loss and blunting
 
Abstract


 
INTERIOR AND TERMINAL BALLISTICS OF 25g LONG ROD PENETRATORS
 
Introduction:



Investigation of Oblique Penetration I: The Effects of Penetrator Leading End Shapes on Unyawed and Yawed Impacts
Abstract



TERMINAL BALLISTICS TEST AND ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR THE PENETRATION MECHANICS BRANCH
 
Introduction:


 
Penetration of 6061-T6511 aluminum targets by ogive-nosed VAR 4340 steel projectiles at oblique angles: experiments and simulations
Abstract



The Effect of Nose Shape in Long Rod Penetration
(link to free PDF download)
Abstract:


 
This one seems related to the one below, so I included it more for completion's sake and informative purposes. 
 
Comparative Study of Nose Profile Role in Long-Rod Penetration
Abstract:


 
Honestly I'm not sure this is very relevant.  It seems more about eroding-penetrator processes and mushrooming vs non-mushrooming.  But it's also about EM guns specifically, so it was worth mentioning.
 
Interface Defeat of Long-Rod Projectiles by Ceramic Armor
Abstract:


 
This is mostly about interface defeat in general vs ceramics, but there is a bit in there about nose shape.  So nose shape may be a factor here.
 
Interface defeat studies of long-rod projectile impacting on ceramic targets
 
Abstract:


 
Analysis of the Noneroding Penetration of Tungsten Alloy Long Rods Into Aluminum Targets
Abstract



 
This one seems to be more about rigid penetration, but its also about about LRPs. Worth noting for that 'transitional' aspect I mentioned and the fact nose shape has a huge impact in rigid penetration.
 
Modeling Threshold Velocity of Hemispherical and Ogival-Nose Tungsten-Alloy Penetrators Perforating Finite Aluminum Targets
Abstract

I don't think you're going to get a neat, single answer for all of this.  Penetration is very complicated even when you focus only on rigid OR eroding regimes.   APFSDS occupy a transitional region between those two, meaning it is likely to be even more complex. 
 
For example I did more digging by changing search parameters.  One thing I turned up came from army-guide and this interesting point:
 


 
Completely unsourced but it shows a the potential for multiple factors at work.    I've found sources that allude to nose shape influencing interface defeat, transitions from rigid to eroding penetration and velocity thresholds, and so on.  I'll share the various things I ran across in the hopes it will prove useful.  In no particular order:
 
CTH hydrocode predictions on the effect of rod nose-shape on the velocity at which tungsten alloy rods transition from rigid body to eroding penetrators when impacting thick aluminium targets
 
Abstract:


Design of hard-target penetrator nose geometry in the presence of high-speed, velocity-dependent friction, including the effects of mass loss and blunting
 
Abstract


 
INTERIOR AND TERMINAL BALLISTICS OF 25g LONG ROD PENETRATORS
 
Introduction:



Investigation of Oblique Penetration I: The Effects of Penetrator Leading End Shapes on Unyawed and Yawed Impacts
Abstract



TERMINAL BALLISTICS TEST AND ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR THE PENETRATION MECHANICS BRANCH
 
Introduction:


 
Penetration of 6061-T6511 aluminum targets by ogive-nosed VAR 4340 steel projectiles at oblique angles: experiments and simulations
Abstract



The Effect of Nose Shape in Long Rod Penetration
(link to free PDF download)
Abstract:


 
This one seems related to the one below, so I included it more for completion's sake and informative purposes. 
 
Comparative Study of Nose Profile Role in Long-Rod Penetration
Abstract:


 
Honestly I'm not sure this is very relevant.  It seems more about eroding-penetrator processes and mushrooming vs non-mushrooming.  But it's also about EM guns specifically, so it was worth mentioning.
 
Interface Defeat of Long-Rod Projectiles by Ceramic Armor
Abstract:


 
This is mostly about interface defeat in general vs ceramics, but there is a bit in there about nose shape.  So nose shape may be a factor here.
 
Interface defeat studies of long-rod projectile impacting on ceramic targets
 
Abstract:


 
Analysis of the Noneroding Penetration of Tungsten Alloy Long Rods Into Aluminum Targets
Abstract



 
This one seems to be more about rigid penetration, but its also about about LRPs. Worth noting for that 'transitional' aspect I mentioned and the fact nose shape has a huge impact in rigid penetration.
 
Modeling Threshold Velocity of Hemispherical and Ogival-Nose Tungsten-Alloy Penetrators Perforating Finite Aluminum Targets
Abstract

I don't think you're going to get a neat, single answer for all of this.  Penetration is very complicated even when you focus only on rigid OR eroding regimes.   APFSDS occupy a transitional region between those two, meaning it is likely to be even more complex. 
 
For example I did more digging by changing search parameters.  One thing I turned up came from army-guide and this interesting point:
 


 
Completely unsourced but it shows a the potential for multiple factors at work.    I've found sources that allude to nose shape influencing interface defeat, transitions from rigid to eroding penetration and velocity thresholds, and so on.  I'll share the various things I ran across in the hopes it will prove useful.  In no particular order:
 
CTH hydrocode predictions on the effect of rod nose-shape on the velocity at which tungsten alloy rods transition from rigid body to eroding penetrators when impacting thick aluminium targets
 
Abstract:


Design of hard-target penetrator nose geometry in the presence of high-speed, velocity-dependent friction, including the effects of mass loss and blunting
 
Abstract


 
INTERIOR AND TERMINAL BALLISTICS OF 25g LONG ROD PENETRATORS
 
Introduction:



Investigation of Oblique Penetration I: The Effects of Penetrator Leading End Shapes on Unyawed and Yawed Impacts
Abstract



TERMINAL BALLISTICS TEST AND ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR THE PENETRATION MECHANICS BRANCH
 
Introduction:


 
Penetration of 6061-T6511 aluminum targets by ogive-nosed VAR 4340 steel projectiles at oblique angles: experiments and simulations
Abstract



The Effect of Nose Shape in Long Rod Penetration
(link to free PDF download)
Abstract:


 
This one seems related to the one below, so I included it more for completion's sake and informative purposes. 
 
Comparative Study of Nose Profile Role in Long-Rod Penetration
Abstract:


 
Honestly I'm not sure this is very relevant.  It seems more about eroding-penetrator processes and mushrooming vs non-mushrooming.  But it's also about EM guns specifically, so it was worth mentioning.
 
Interface Defeat of Long-Rod Projectiles by Ceramic Armor
Abstract:


 
This is mostly about interface defeat in general vs ceramics, but there is a bit in there about nose shape.  So nose shape may be a factor here.
 
Interface defeat studies of long-rod projectile impacting on ceramic targets
 
Abstract:


 
Analysis of the Noneroding Penetration of Tungsten Alloy Long Rods Into Aluminum Targets
Abstract



 
This one seems to be more about rigid penetration, but its also about about LRPs. Worth noting for that 'transitional' aspect I mentioned and the fact nose shape has a huge impact in rigid penetration.
 
Modeling Threshold Velocity of Hemispherical and Ogival-Nose Tungsten-Alloy Penetrators Perforating Finite Aluminum Targets
Abstract

What I could find: 
Jacketed Long-Rod Penetrators: Problems and Perspectives
 
 
Though that is about Jacketed Penetrators, it seems it may still apply to regular APFSDS.  Given it cites Rosenberg and Deckel you might look at their work 'Terminal Ballistics' for more information. 
 
Possibly more useful is this: 
 
The Effect of Nose Shape on Depleted Uranium (DU) Long-Rod Penetrators
 
I apologize for not quoting any of this, but its a 66 page non searchable PDF, and I'm not sure that you can just select parts without reading the whole thing for context since it's specifically about LRP and nose shape for DU rounds (some tungsten is mentioned.) 
 
Also of possible interest are these reddit posts.  I'm not sure how 'good' it is since we're talking War Thunder (I'm as wary of that as I am of WoT based research) but I figure I'd include it for completeness sake and potential for discussion: 
 
APFSDS the Science of Ricochets
 
How tip shapes affect APFSDS performance on sloped armour
 
I also believe that most APFSDS don't operate fully in the eroding (hydrodynamic) regime and would slow down on impact anyhow.  So rigid penetration effects may apply (nose shape does matter quite a bit there).
 
Lastly because it may be of interest to someone materials which may be of interest but may not be relevant to the discussion:
 
Penetrator strength effect in long-rod critical ricochet angle
 
Interaction between High-velocity Penetrators and Moving Armour Components
 
PENETRATION OF METALLIC PLATES BY KINETIC ENERGY PROJECTILES
 
The Relation Between Initial Yaw and Long Rod Projectile Shape after Penetrating an Oblique Thin Plate

What I could find: 
Jacketed Long-Rod Penetrators: Problems and Perspectives
 
 
Though that is about Jacketed Penetrators, it seems it may still apply to regular APFSDS.  Given it cites Rosenberg and Deckel you might look at their work 'Terminal Ballistics' for more information. 
 
Possibly more useful is this: 
 
The Effect of Nose Shape on Depleted Uranium (DU) Long-Rod Penetrators
 
I apologize for not quoting any of this, but its a 66 page non searchable PDF, and I'm not sure that you can just select parts without reading the whole thing for context since it's specifically about LRP and nose shape for DU rounds (some tungsten is mentioned.) 
 
Also of possible interest are these reddit posts.  I'm not sure how 'good' it is since we're talking War Thunder (I'm as wary of that as I am of WoT based research) but I figure I'd include it for completeness sake and potential for discussion: 
 
APFSDS the Science of Ricochets
 
How tip shapes affect APFSDS performance on sloped armour
 
I also believe that most APFSDS don't operate fully in the eroding (hydrodynamic) regime and would slow down on impact anyhow.  So rigid penetration effects may apply (nose shape does matter quite a bit there).
 
Lastly because it may be of interest to someone materials which may be of interest but may not be relevant to the discussion:
 
Penetrator strength effect in long-rod critical ricochet angle
 
Interaction between High-velocity Penetrators and Moving Armour Components
 
PENETRATION OF METALLIC PLATES BY KINETIC ENERGY PROJECTILES
 
The Relation Between Initial Yaw and Long Rod Projectile Shape after Penetrating an Oblique Thin Plate

What I could find: 
Jacketed Long-Rod Penetrators: Problems and Perspectives
 
 
Though that is about Jacketed Penetrators, it seems it may still apply to regular APFSDS.  Given it cites Rosenberg and Deckel you might look at their work 'Terminal Ballistics' for more information. 
 
Possibly more useful is this: 
 
The Effect of Nose Shape on Depleted Uranium (DU) Long-Rod Penetrators
 
I apologize for not quoting any of this, but its a 66 page non searchable PDF, and I'm not sure that you can just select parts without reading the whole thing for context since it's specifically about LRP and nose shape for DU rounds (some tungsten is mentioned.) 
 
Also of possible interest are these reddit posts.  I'm not sure how 'good' it is since we're talking War Thunder (I'm as wary of that as I am of WoT based research) but I figure I'd include it for completeness sake and potential for discussion: 
 
APFSDS the Science of Ricochets
 
How tip shapes affect APFSDS performance on sloped armour
 
I also believe that most APFSDS don't operate fully in the eroding (hydrodynamic) regime and would slow down on impact anyhow.  So rigid penetration effects may apply (nose shape does matter quite a bit there).
 
Lastly because it may be of interest to someone materials which may be of interest but may not be relevant to the discussion:
 
Penetrator strength effect in long-rod critical ricochet angle
 
Interaction between High-velocity Penetrators and Moving Armour Components
 
PENETRATION OF METALLIC PLATES BY KINETIC ENERGY PROJECTILES
 
The Relation Between Initial Yaw and Long Rod Projectile Shape after Penetrating an Oblique Thin Plate

Posting more stuff I find on the internet that may be of interest:
THE THEORY OF HIGH SPEED GUNS
 
Abstract


 
In other words really fast guns that aren't railguns. 
 
INTERIOR BALLISTICS OF GUNS
 
Preface


 
Optimisation of small arms defeat via dynamic jacket removal (pdf download link) 
 
Abstract


 
Ballistic protection efficiency of composite ceramics/metal armours
 
Abstract


 
Ballistic resistance of high hardness armor steels against 7.62mm armor piercing ammunition
Abstract


 
Impact dynamics of tool steel penetrators
 
From the introduction:


 
Perforation resistance of five different high-strength steel plates subjected to small-arms projectiles
 
Abstract


 
Ballistic behavior of high hardness perforated armor plates against 7.62 mm armor piercing projectile
 
Abstract


 
The Mechanical Metallurgy of Armour Steels
 
Abstract



 

Oh sure.   That's also why it's like a wiki:  as a starting point for research it's great because it can consolidate alot of information into an easy-to-access place.  It's just the time needed to sift through it to determine how much of it may or may not be accurate that can be problematic.
 
Some of the info can be a bit dated tho. Some of the Schilling stuff the energy sidearms page you linked to uses is also decades old Usenet posts lol. 
 
If you're interested in more of Luke's recent stuff you should look up his game stuff.  He improved some of his ideas from the Laser Death Ray site:  here's his home page  you can access Vergeworlds and his GURPS house rules there. 
 
As an attempt to be more informative I'll also post some info for the Solid State Heat Capacity Laser.  It's still CW I believe as opposed to pulse lasers (repetitive or otherwise) but it's interesting because it seems to be the closest we've gotten so far to a true 'Luke Campbell' style laser (It's close to his newer 'pulse laser' idea though, which you'll find mentioned on his Vergeworlds/GURPs rules)
 
https://lasers.llnl.gov/science/photon-science/directed-energy/sshcl
 
https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/245418.pdf
 
https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/241387.pdf
 
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/244988141_Solid-State_Laser_High-Energy_Laser
 
https://str.llnl.gov/str/April06/pdfs/04_06.2.pdf

Oh sure.   That's also why it's like a wiki:  as a starting point for research it's great because it can consolidate alot of information into an easy-to-access place.  It's just the time needed to sift through it to determine how much of it may or may not be accurate that can be problematic.
 
Some of the info can be a bit dated tho. Some of the Schilling stuff the energy sidearms page you linked to uses is also decades old Usenet posts lol. 
 
If you're interested in more of Luke's recent stuff you should look up his game stuff.  He improved some of his ideas from the Laser Death Ray site:  here's his home page  you can access Vergeworlds and his GURPS house rules there. 
 
As an attempt to be more informative I'll also post some info for the Solid State Heat Capacity Laser.  It's still CW I believe as opposed to pulse lasers (repetitive or otherwise) but it's interesting because it seems to be the closest we've gotten so far to a true 'Luke Campbell' style laser (It's close to his newer 'pulse laser' idea though, which you'll find mentioned on his Vergeworlds/GURPs rules)
 
https://lasers.llnl.gov/science/photon-science/directed-energy/sshcl
 
https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/245418.pdf
 
https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/241387.pdf
 
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/244988141_Solid-State_Laser_High-Energy_Laser
 
https://str.llnl.gov/str/April06/pdfs/04_06.2.pdf

Some random recoil impulse figures.  This stuff is interesting/important if you want to deal with guns from the back end rather than the front end, I find. 
 
Fire out of Battery Test results - a discussion of soft recoil/Fire Out of Battery recoil mitigation technologies (In the quest to put bigger guns on lighter frames)   It provides a number of Ogorkiewicz ratio figures for various armored vehicles (ratio of tank gun recoil impulse to its mass.  Rule of thumb  is 900 ns/ton as I recall)  



 
Here is the list of 105mm 120mm and the Sheridan's 152mm gun:
 
https://imgur.com/a/MtAyVok
 
Designer's Dilemma - recoil, what to do with it?  Covers towed/field artillery rater than sPG:
 
155mm towed gun figures:
 
https://imgur.com/a/7bCBkzm
 
Also a bit on FCS and tank guns, it includes a few interesting tidbits like recoil force and energy comparisons between 120mm and 140mm guns:
 
DOD: DEVELOPING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGIES LIST SECTION 9: GROUND COMBAT SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY
 


 
It's about 15 years old by now, but its still interesting. 

I know @LostCosmonaut  had a thread about radiation thresholds and others have mentioned Nukemap, but I did run across this which may be of interest during one of my attempts to indulge my obsession with 50s era atomic army silliness (Blame Fallout):
 
Casualty Estimation for Nuclear and Radiological Weapons
 
The focus seems mostly on possible terrorist devices, but it mentions tactical stuff too.   It goes without saying it's very NATO centric as well. 

I know @LostCosmonaut  had a thread about radiation thresholds and others have mentioned Nukemap, but I did run across this which may be of interest during one of my attempts to indulge my obsession with 50s era atomic army silliness (Blame Fallout):
 
Casualty Estimation for Nuclear and Radiological Weapons
 
The focus seems mostly on possible terrorist devices, but it mentions tactical stuff too.   It goes without saying it's very NATO centric as well. 

Been delayed with stuff but I've wanted to post this.  Actually I'm surprised I've never seen anything in detail about this before, because it's an interesting topic.  (IF there IS a topic on this I apologize and it can be merged there.)  
 
ETC tech is something you probably hear about if you hang out on tank, military or gun forums.  Especially if Railguns or coilguns are mentioned.  Or 'next step' in gun design like 140-152mm guns.  There's lots of information out there if you look and you discover just how diverse it can be.
 
I'm sure most people are aware that Wikipedia has a article on ETC tech and as far as Wiki articles go it's decent.  But the person who worked on it in the past also wrote an article on ETC for the Nationstates draft room.  It's old but still good.  So despite the origins it's still useful (the writer was also a member on Tanknet IIRC.  Take that as you will.) 
 
In Jane's Technology of Tanks, Ogorkiewicz also commented about ETC:
 
 
Ogorkiewicz also discusses the concept in Tanks: 100 years of evolution:
 
 
One realization from this is ET/ETC technology is quite diverse and can be confusing.  One of the better sources covering that concerned Rheinmetall research into a German 120-140mm (courtesy of Wayback because the original source fell to link rot):
 
Link to image of Rheinmetall ETC classifcations
 
 
On the amateur experime which discusses ET/ETC stuff in detail too.   If you prefer the more 'hype' side of things, ETC was also tied to the Future Combat Systems - a link some people may recognize:
 
 
As you can see, ETC is evolutionary  not revolutionary like EM guns.  It takes existing technology and builds on it:  You can settle for improving propellant ignition (minimizing electrical cost) or add electricity to boost performance (up to the 'pure' ETC idea)   You can also utilize the technology on Liquid propellant and possibly even Light Gas guns - it stacks quite nicely with other ideas.  You can even use it with a bigger caliber.  This is part of the ETC charm.
 
Further information on ETC stuff can be found here:
 
AN END-TO-END MODEL OF AN ELECTROTHERMAL CHEMICAL GUN
 
Electro-Thermal Chemical Gun  Technology  Study
 
Both of these are articles I like, but there's more stuff:
 
Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Technology Weaponization Issues
 
Electrothermal-Chemical Gun Systems  Utilizing Novel Electric Solid Propellants
 
And of course DTIC is a wealth of ETC stuff:
 
(direct pdf links):
Overview on the  German R&D Programs on ETC  Gun Technologies for Main Battletank  Weaponization
 
ELECTROTHERMAL-CHEMICAL PROPULSION AND PERFORMANCE  LIMITS FOR THE 120-MM, M256  CANNON
 
And some dtic links to ETC stuff that requires download:
 
Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Propulsion with High Loading Density Charges.
 
Ballistic Analysis of Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Propellant.
 
Trade-Offs in Performance Enhancement of Solid-Propellant (SP) Electrothermal-Chemical Guns.
 
Sturgeon's House user sevich also posted a link to a useful ETC document off ditc  here
 

Been delayed with stuff but I've wanted to post this.  Actually I'm surprised I've never seen anything in detail about this before, because it's an interesting topic.  (IF there IS a topic on this I apologize and it can be merged there.)  
 
ETC tech is something you probably hear about if you hang out on tank, military or gun forums.  Especially if Railguns or coilguns are mentioned.  Or 'next step' in gun design like 140-152mm guns.  There's lots of information out there if you look and you discover just how diverse it can be.
 
I'm sure most people are aware that Wikipedia has a article on ETC tech and as far as Wiki articles go it's decent.  But the person who worked on it in the past also wrote an article on ETC for the Nationstates draft room.  It's old but still good.  So despite the origins it's still useful (the writer was also a member on Tanknet IIRC.  Take that as you will.) 
 
In Jane's Technology of Tanks, Ogorkiewicz also commented about ETC:
 
 
Ogorkiewicz also discusses the concept in Tanks: 100 years of evolution:
 
 
One realization from this is ET/ETC technology is quite diverse and can be confusing.  One of the better sources covering that concerned Rheinmetall research into a German 120-140mm (courtesy of Wayback because the original source fell to link rot):
 
Link to image of Rheinmetall ETC classifcations
 
 
On the amateur experime which discusses ET/ETC stuff in detail too.   If you prefer the more 'hype' side of things, ETC was also tied to the Future Combat Systems - a link some people may recognize:
 
 
As you can see, ETC is evolutionary  not revolutionary like EM guns.  It takes existing technology and builds on it:  You can settle for improving propellant ignition (minimizing electrical cost) or add electricity to boost performance (up to the 'pure' ETC idea)   You can also utilize the technology on Liquid propellant and possibly even Light Gas guns - it stacks quite nicely with other ideas.  You can even use it with a bigger caliber.  This is part of the ETC charm.
 
Further information on ETC stuff can be found here:
 
AN END-TO-END MODEL OF AN ELECTROTHERMAL CHEMICAL GUN
 
Electro-Thermal Chemical Gun  Technology  Study
 
Both of these are articles I like, but there's more stuff:
 
Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Technology Weaponization Issues
 
Electrothermal-Chemical Gun Systems  Utilizing Novel Electric Solid Propellants
 
And of course DTIC is a wealth of ETC stuff:
 
(direct pdf links):
Overview on the  German R&D Programs on ETC  Gun Technologies for Main Battletank  Weaponization
 
ELECTROTHERMAL-CHEMICAL PROPULSION AND PERFORMANCE  LIMITS FOR THE 120-MM, M256  CANNON
 
And some dtic links to ETC stuff that requires download:
 
Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Propulsion with High Loading Density Charges.
 
Ballistic Analysis of Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Propellant.
 
Trade-Offs in Performance Enhancement of Solid-Propellant (SP) Electrothermal-Chemical Guns.
 
Sturgeon's House user sevich also posted a link to a useful ETC document off ditc  here
 

Been delayed with stuff but I've wanted to post this.  Actually I'm surprised I've never seen anything in detail about this before, because it's an interesting topic.  (IF there IS a topic on this I apologize and it can be merged there.)  
 
ETC tech is something you probably hear about if you hang out on tank, military or gun forums.  Especially if Railguns or coilguns are mentioned.  Or 'next step' in gun design like 140-152mm guns.  There's lots of information out there if you look and you discover just how diverse it can be.
 
I'm sure most people are aware that Wikipedia has a article on ETC tech and as far as Wiki articles go it's decent.  But the person who worked on it in the past also wrote an article on ETC for the Nationstates draft room.  It's old but still good.  So despite the origins it's still useful (the writer was also a member on Tanknet IIRC.  Take that as you will.) 
 
In Jane's Technology of Tanks, Ogorkiewicz also commented about ETC:
 
 
Ogorkiewicz also discusses the concept in Tanks: 100 years of evolution:
 
 
One realization from this is ET/ETC technology is quite diverse and can be confusing.  One of the better sources covering that concerned Rheinmetall research into a German 120-140mm (courtesy of Wayback because the original source fell to link rot):
 
Link to image of Rheinmetall ETC classifcations
 
 
On the amateur experime which discusses ET/ETC stuff in detail too.   If you prefer the more 'hype' side of things, ETC was also tied to the Future Combat Systems - a link some people may recognize:
 
 
As you can see, ETC is evolutionary  not revolutionary like EM guns.  It takes existing technology and builds on it:  You can settle for improving propellant ignition (minimizing electrical cost) or add electricity to boost performance (up to the 'pure' ETC idea)   You can also utilize the technology on Liquid propellant and possibly even Light Gas guns - it stacks quite nicely with other ideas.  You can even use it with a bigger caliber.  This is part of the ETC charm.
 
Further information on ETC stuff can be found here:
 
AN END-TO-END MODEL OF AN ELECTROTHERMAL CHEMICAL GUN
 
Electro-Thermal Chemical Gun  Technology  Study
 
Both of these are articles I like, but there's more stuff:
 
Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Technology Weaponization Issues
 
Electrothermal-Chemical Gun Systems  Utilizing Novel Electric Solid Propellants
 
And of course DTIC is a wealth of ETC stuff:
 
(direct pdf links):
Overview on the  German R&D Programs on ETC  Gun Technologies for Main Battletank  Weaponization
 
ELECTROTHERMAL-CHEMICAL PROPULSION AND PERFORMANCE  LIMITS FOR THE 120-MM, M256  CANNON
 
And some dtic links to ETC stuff that requires download:
 
Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Propulsion with High Loading Density Charges.
 
Ballistic Analysis of Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Propellant.
 
Trade-Offs in Performance Enhancement of Solid-Propellant (SP) Electrothermal-Chemical Guns.
 
Sturgeon's House user sevich also posted a link to a useful ETC document off ditc  here
 

Been delayed with stuff but I've wanted to post this.  Actually I'm surprised I've never seen anything in detail about this before, because it's an interesting topic.  (IF there IS a topic on this I apologize and it can be merged there.)  
 
ETC tech is something you probably hear about if you hang out on tank, military or gun forums.  Especially if Railguns or coilguns are mentioned.  Or 'next step' in gun design like 140-152mm guns.  There's lots of information out there if you look and you discover just how diverse it can be.
 
I'm sure most people are aware that Wikipedia has a article on ETC tech and as far as Wiki articles go it's decent.  But the person who worked on it in the past also wrote an article on ETC for the Nationstates draft room.  It's old but still good.  So despite the origins it's still useful (the writer was also a member on Tanknet IIRC.  Take that as you will.) 
 
In Jane's Technology of Tanks, Ogorkiewicz also commented about ETC:
 
 
Ogorkiewicz also discusses the concept in Tanks: 100 years of evolution:
 
 
One realization from this is ET/ETC technology is quite diverse and can be confusing.  One of the better sources covering that concerned Rheinmetall research into a German 120-140mm (courtesy of Wayback because the original source fell to link rot):
 
Link to image of Rheinmetall ETC classifcations
 
 
On the amateur experime which discusses ET/ETC stuff in detail too.   If you prefer the more 'hype' side of things, ETC was also tied to the Future Combat Systems - a link some people may recognize:
 
 
As you can see, ETC is evolutionary  not revolutionary like EM guns.  It takes existing technology and builds on it:  You can settle for improving propellant ignition (minimizing electrical cost) or add electricity to boost performance (up to the 'pure' ETC idea)   You can also utilize the technology on Liquid propellant and possibly even Light Gas guns - it stacks quite nicely with other ideas.  You can even use it with a bigger caliber.  This is part of the ETC charm.
 
Further information on ETC stuff can be found here:
 
AN END-TO-END MODEL OF AN ELECTROTHERMAL CHEMICAL GUN
 
Electro-Thermal Chemical Gun  Technology  Study
 
Both of these are articles I like, but there's more stuff:
 
Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Technology Weaponization Issues
 
Electrothermal-Chemical Gun Systems  Utilizing Novel Electric Solid Propellants
 
And of course DTIC is a wealth of ETC stuff:
 
(direct pdf links):
Overview on the  German R&D Programs on ETC  Gun Technologies for Main Battletank  Weaponization
 
ELECTROTHERMAL-CHEMICAL PROPULSION AND PERFORMANCE  LIMITS FOR THE 120-MM, M256  CANNON
 
And some dtic links to ETC stuff that requires download:
 
Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Propulsion with High Loading Density Charges.
 
Ballistic Analysis of Electrothermal-Chemical (ETC) Propellant.
 
Trade-Offs in Performance Enhancement of Solid-Propellant (SP) Electrothermal-Chemical Guns.
 
Sturgeon's House user sevich also posted a link to a useful ETC document off ditc  here
 

A UNIFIED THEORY OF PENETRATION (U)
 
MECHANICS OF PENETRATION: ANALYSIS AND EXPERIMENT
 
 
IMPACT DYNAMICS: THEORY AND EXPERIMENT