Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Jagdika

About Waffentrager’s “Type 5 gun tank” post

Recommended Posts

  This is an article simply to show you guys here how Waffentrager is a faker. The original article  ( https://www.weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309404213101531682050) was written in Chinese and Japanese. For better understanding I will translate and edit the article and post it here. 

  And I must tell you why I want to reveal this shit: Long time ago I found many sayings from Waffentrager’s blog which I had never heard of, so I turned to my Japanese friend and IJA tank researcher Mr.Taki and asked him to confirm a few of them. In the end it turned out that none of Waffentrager’s article is true. I once argued with him and he not only failed to give out his reference but also deleted my replies! I’m very angry!

 

  Now let’s get started.

 

  At the very beginning I recommend all of you who opened this post to take a look at Waffentrager’s original article, that will help you understand what I’m debating.

 

  Here is the link to the original article: https://sensha-manual.blogspot.jp/2017/09/the-ho-ri-tank-destroyer.html?m=0  

 

  In China we need to use VPN(aka “ladder-梯子” or “the scientific way of browsing the Internet-科学上网” in Chinese)to open that link above so at first I post out Waffentrager’s original post in the form of screenshots in my article. I’ll skip that here.

 

135238iudbfcn7wbghxb4h.jpg

 

Fig.1: I will skip his original article.

 

  Now, I had raised my first question here: Please take a look at the screenshot:

 

135239q8p9y7lk7pjk47mm.jpg

 

Fig.2: My first question

 

  In the original article, Waffentrager insisted that the Type 5 gun tank was built in July, 1944 and fully assembled in August. It was also put into trials at the same time.

 

135239r335kj5qkktpqqk5.jpg

 

Fig.3: Waffentrager’s original article.

 

  But, is that true? Let’s have a look at the Japanese archive:

 

135239jmvwwwwmw031wzj0.jpg

 

Important Fig.4: Archive code C14011075200, Item 4

 

  Notice the part with the red, this is the research and develop plan for the Japanese Tech Research center in 1943, and had been edited in 1944. ◎砲100(Gun-100) is the project name for the 105mm gun used by Type 5 gun tank. The column under it says: “Research a tank gun with 105mm caliber and a muzzle velocity of 900m/s”. This means that the gun had just begun to be developed and from the bottom column we can know that it was PLANNED to be finished in 1945-3[完成豫定 means ”plan to be finished” and 昭20、3 means ”Shouwa 20-3”. Shouwa 20 is 1945 in Japan (you can wiki the way for Japanese to count years I’m not going to explain it here)]

  Next let’s move on to the Type 5 gun tank itself, here is the Japanese archive:

 

135239t9s91lx0s4uqhl1q.jpg

 

Important Fig.5: Archive code C14011075200, Item 7

 

  “新砲戦車(甲)ホリ車” is the very very first name of Type 5 gun tank, it should be translated into:”New gun tank(A), Ho-Ri vehicle”. “ホリ” is the secret name of it. Still from the column we can easily know that Ho-Ri was also planned to be finished in 1945-3. But under that column there is another one called:”摘要(Summary or outline)”, in this it says:”砲100、第一次試作完了昭和19、8”, In English it is: “Gun-100, First experimental construction(prototype construction) finished in Shouwa 19-8(1944-8)” What does it mean? It means that in 1944-8, Only the 105mm gun used by the Type 5 gun tank was finished! If the Ho-Ri tank itself was finished why it was not in the 摘要 column? So how could an unfinished tank mounted the prototype gun? Waffentrager is talking bullshit.

Also from Mr.Kunimoto’s book, he gave the complete schedule of the 105mm gun, here it is:

 

135239hwi4skwr43bfu33j.jpg

 

Important Fig.6: Kunimoto’s schedule

 

  “修正機能試験” means ”Mechanical correctional test”, it took place in 1944-8, this matches the original Japanese archive(though this chart was also made from original archives). At that time the gun had just finished, not the tank.

 

  Next is this paragraph from Waffentrager’s article:

 

135240d61uh1ga1rfvfvll.jpg

 

Fig.7: Weighing 35 tons

 

  From the archive above(important Fig.5) we can learn from the second large column”研究要項(Research items)” that Ho-Ri was only PLANNED to be 35 tons, and maximum armour thickness was PLANNED to be 120mm, not was. Waffentrager is lying, he used the PLANNED data as the BUILT data. I will post out the correct data below later to see what Ho-Ri is really like when its design was finished.

 

135240cku7x7qkkbx7gqbe.jpg

 

Fig.8: 全備重量-約三五屯(Combat weight-app.35t), 装甲(最厚部)-約一二〇粍(Armour, thickest part-app.120mm)

 

  At this time, some of the people might inquire me that:”Maybe the Type 5 gun tanks were really finished! You just don’t know!” Well, I will use the archives and books to tell these guys that they are totally wrong. None of the Type 5 gun tank was finished.

  Always let’s look at Waffentrager’s article first. He said that a total of 5 Ho-Ri were completed.

 

135240me2m2jnbznorzk8s.jpg

 

Fig.9: Waffentrager said 5 Ho-Ri were completed.

 

 He also put an original Japanese archive(C13120839500) to “enhance” his “facts”.

 

135240tq4zic904f0cm54l.jpg

 

Fig.10: Waffentrager’s archive

 

  Everyone can see the”ホリ車,1-3-1” in the document, and someone might actually believe that 5 Ho-Ri were actually built. But they are wrong! Waffentrager is cheating you with “only a part of the original document”! Here is what the original archive really looks like:

 

135240z74o8f4gpo6f9m8h.jpg

 

Important Fig.11: Archive code C13120839500, Item 7

 

  “整備計画” is “Maintenance plan” in English, again it was PLAN! The whole plan was made in 1944-12-26. I don’t actually know how Waffentrager can misunderstand this, maybe he doesn’t even know Japanese or Chinese!

 

135241j40rr6v9oiszagmh.jpg

 

Important Fig.12: The cover of the same archive, “昭和十九年十二月二十六日” is 1944-12-26” in English.

 

I have other archives to prove that Ho-Ri were not finished as well:

 

135241h84h7cntcv88z7kz.jpg

135241p8oo8bh7oh9ohlo7.jpg

 

Important Fig. 13 and 14: Mitsubishi’s tank production chart made by the American survey team after the war ends.

 

  From the chart you can only find out Type 4 and Type 5 medium tanks’ record. There is no existence of Type 5 gun tank Ho-Ri, or the”M-5 Gun Tank” in the chart’s way.

 

  Except for the archives, many books written by Japanese also mentioned that Type 5 gun tank were not finished:

 

135241ekwr8tj8kn3wxjzx.jpg

 

Fig.15: Kunimoto’s record.

 

  “二〇年五月完成予定の五両の終戦時の工程進捗度は、やっと五〇パーセントであり、完成車両出せずに終戦となった。” In English it’s: “When the war ended, the five Ho-Ri planned to be finished in 1945-5 had finally reached 50% completion. No completed vehicle were made when the war ended.”

 

  Here is another book written by Japanese with the help of former IJA tank designer, Tomio Hara:

 

135242s6ixa59qrrp6s9rm.jpg

 

Important Fig.16: Tomio Hara’s book

 

“完成をみるには至らなかった” Again he emphasized that the tank was not finished. Also when Ho-Ri’s design was finished its combat weight was raised to 40 tons, not the planned 35 tons. It was only powered by one “Modified BMW watercooled V12 gasoline engine”, rated 550hp/1500rpm. In Waffentrager’s article he said later a Kawasaki 1100hp engine were installed, but obviously that’s none sense. There was really existed a Kawasaki 1100hp engine but that is the two BMW V12 engine(Same engine on Type 5 gun tank or Type 5 medium tank) combined together for Japanese super-heavy tank O-I use. It will take much more room which Ho-Ri do not have.

 

135242uv3vbmfmkb3f1s64.jpg

 

Fig.17: O-I’s engine compartment arrangement. There’s no such room in Ho-Ri for this engine set.

 

  And last here are the other questions I asked

 

135242b3zedq3kqzl3k4yg.jpg

 

Fig.18: Other questions I asked

 

  I have already talked about the questions regarding C13120839500 and the engine. As for the gun with 1005m/s muzzle velocity, the Japanese never planned to make the 105mm gun achieve such a high velocity because they don’t have the enough tech back then. Also from the archive C14011075200(important fig.4) the 105mm gun was designed only to reach about 900m/s.

 

  So, after all these, how did Waffentrager replied? I will post out the replies from my E-mail(because he deleted my replies on his blog).

 

135243xijj4b0aztai64ij.jpg

 

Fig.19: Waffentrager’s first reply

 

He kept saying that my archive is not the same as his and he is using his own documents. I didn’t believe in these shit and I replied:

 

135243y4ge6999vg3vpgvv.jpg

 

Fig.20: My reply

 

  Last sentence, the Ho-Ri III he was talking about is fake. There are only Ho-Ri I(The one resembles the Ferdinand tank destroyer) and Ho-Ri II(The another one resembles the Jagdtiger tank destroyer). He even photoshoped a picture:

 

135244sr8x5g3vw1rryb13.jpg

 

Fig.21: Waffentrager’s fake Ho-Ri III

 

135244vca9lh7laxaehcy4.jpg

 

Fig.22: The real Ho-Ri I and the base picture of Waffentrager’s photoshoped Ho-Ri III in Tomio Hara’s book. Many same details can be seen in Waffentrager's fake Ho-Ri III

 

  The 4 variants of up-armoured Type 3 Chi-Nu medium tank is also fake, I will post his original article and the confirmed facts I got from Mr.Taki by E-mail.

 

135244gtkg3tu37uui5ycu.jpg

 

Fig.23: 4 models of up-armoured Chi-Nu by Waffentrager

 

135245gn48wcw54zwli4nw.jpg

 

Fig.24: Mr.Taki’s reply

 

  Waffentrager used every excuses he could get to refuse giving out the references, and finally he deleted my comments. What an asshole!

 

135245ifghz9v2lzpr3koj.jpg

 

Fig.25: Our last “conversation”

 

135245f89jal9zzr5dfaa3.jpg

 

Fig.26 He deleted my comment.

 

  So, as you can see, Waffentrager is really a dick. He is cheating everybody because he think that we can’t read Japanese. Anyway I still hope he could release his reference and documents to prove me wrong. After all, I’m not here to scold or argue with somebody, but to learn new things. Also if you guys have any questions about WWII(IJA) Japanese tanks, feel free to ask me, I’m happy to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what this whole fiasco is about, because I followed none of it, but I really appreciate the fact that you made a very detailed, documented, and easy to read post on the subject. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to the same debate on the WT forum:

 

Personally I'll keep the same attitude than this guy on Reddit until the issue settle down (Especially since I can't read Chinese nor Japanese):

 

[–]Jpz. E100 plsStingerRPG 62 points il y a 15 heures 

Reading the original post in Chinese(Hongkonger here), while the sources are somewhat believable, I would advise NOT to take any sides until the whole picture is clear or resolved. What stuns me is that Mai's own sources being used against him/her.

It was very obvious that the guy who wrote the post was somewhat hostile against Mai in the opening paragraph where a slang for Koreans was used, with the overall tone being hateful. But whatever.

I read the whole thing and I'll be frank, neither side is to be trusted at current situation. Best of us commoners to steer clear. I don't have a clue on who's right or wrong but it's best to leave the fighting to the folks in question.

Share this post


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

Link to the same debate on the WT forum:

 

Personally I'll keep the same attitude than this guy on Reddit until the issue settle down (Especially since I can't read Chinese nor Japanese):

 

[–]Jpz. E100 plsStingerRPG 62 points il y a 15 heures 

Reading the original post in Chinese(Hongkonger here), while the sources are somewhat believable, I would advise NOT to take any sides until the whole picture is clear or resolved. What stuns me is that Mai's own sources being used against him/her.

It was very obvious that the guy who wrote the post was somewhat hostile against Mai in the opening paragraph where a slang for Koreans was used, with the overall tone being hateful. But whatever.

I read the whole thing and I'll be frank, neither side is to be trusted at current situation. Best of us commoners to steer clear. I don't have a clue on who's right or wrong but it's best to leave the fighting to the folks in question.

And if anyone from SH feels like dying on that sword, well, they will almost certainly have backup.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In case some of the netizens on WT forum and Reddit doubt my source of reference, I will post them out here.

All the original archives I used are accessible for the public can be found in the Japan National Archive center's website here: https://www.jacar.archives.go.jp/aj/meta/reference 

And here is the two archives mentioned by both Waffentrager and me:

C14011075200: https://www.jacar.archives.go.jp/aj/meta/image_C14011075200?IS_KIND=RefSummary&IS_STYLE=default&IS_TAG_S1=d2&IS_KEY_S1=C14011075200& 

C13120839500:https://www.jacar.archives.go.jp/aj/meta/listPhoto?NO=1&DB_ID=G0000101EXTERNAL&ID=%24_ID&LANG=default&image_num=6&IS_STYLE=default&TYPE=PDF&DL_TYPE=pdf&REFCODE=C13120839400&CN=1

And books I used:

134758hxpzsgnsc9x4xf8v.png

134758c0rx2hbgptlxxsbr.png

134759zymv23ql21n3aftz.png

134759g4i4c1fmanacy4ez.png

134800lp7g9y7bggs15pe3.png

 

134759w1jjyztujbfsoh1i.png

 

Many documents and archives regarding WWII Japanese tanks have already been public viewable, there is always someone don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well being that both hardcore WT/WoT forum posters and pretty much all of Reddit in general (not just the WT section) have a pretty big reputation of being home to some of the biggest autistic basement dwelling horsefuckers on the English speaking web, I wouldn't worry to much about being attacked here by that demographic. Also thanks for more writings.

 

Funnily enough, it was never really Waffentrager that bothered me though, It was the fact he was too connected to Daigensui/Sumeragi that always raised questions though. (if you need to ask who that is, spare yourself the mental agony of finding out.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, EnsignExpendable said:

Back when I was posting on the WT forums I had a guy tell me that "not penetrated" actually meant "penetrated" in one of my Russian documents because his East German friend said so.

 

I remember that, Sun_Leader or something like that right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I remember is getting R/O'd by an honest-to-Goebbels Austrian Nazi moderator at Wart Chunder who had Austrian Nazi crap all over its profile.

 

And that was the last day I played Wart Chunder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From now on I will not go to the WT forum or Reddit to argue with some "People with extreme political correctness and will never focus on the article itself and right or wrong". My point is , you can't trust what one has said just because "he is so right and acting gentle so even if he don't post out the original source or reference I will still believe him". That is immature. I have post out my reference, the books I've used, and I have translated the most important part to English. So what else should I do to prove I'm on the right side? I'm really angry with that. There is not that much archives and documents are still unavailable for the public, for me that is just an excuse. Even if it is not public viewable why not post out the title, or where it was stored? Which cabinet in the shelf? I can't understand some people's logic and view of correctness there in Reddit or WT forum. I know I am the right one.

Also someone from Reddit doubt why I post out this critical article 4 months later, the reason is very simple: I post it out immediately in a Chinese website similar to Reddit when Waffentrager deleted my comment and no one response. After 4 months I have acquired enough archives and documents to prove him wrong, so I post out my entire article. For those guys on Reddit: Please, use your brains to think, use your logic to analyze! If you can't read Japanese, why not try to learn it? Or why not use the translator?  Is that so hard for you? The net is so highly developed there are always some methods for you to understand Japanese and what the archives have said! Knowledge and studying change a person! We Chinese are not as stupid as some of the people think. Yes, we have restrictions, but we also have methods and ways to break restrictions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Jagdika said:

For those guys on Reddit: Please, use your brains to think, use your logic to analyze!

 

That's impossible, you're literally asking Reddit users to use tools they straight up don't have.

 

Just don't worry about them, you actually have an audience here (and people who read here who will spread it) that actually have to ability to think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Jagdika said:

From now on I will not go to the WT forum or Reddit to argue with some "People with extreme political correctness and will never focus on the article itself and right or wrong". My point is , you can't trust what one has said just because "he is so right and even if he don't post out the original source or reference I will still believe him". That is immature. I have post out my reference, the books I've used, and I have translated the most important part to English. So what else should I do to prove I'm on the right side? I'm really angry with that. I can't understand some people's logic and view of correctness there in Reddit or WT forum. I know I am the right one.

Also someone from Reddit doubt why I post out this critical article 4 months later, the reason is very simple: I post it out immediately in a Chinese website similar to Reddit when Waffentrager deleted my comment and no one response. After 4 months I have acquired enough archives and documents to prove him wrong, so I post out my entire article. For those guys on Reddit: Please, use your brains to think, use your logic to analyze! If you can't read Japanese, why not try to learn it? Or why not use the translator?  Is that so hard for you? The net is so highly developed there are always some methods for you to understand Japanese and what the archives have said! Knowledge and studying chances a person! We Chinese are not as stupid as some of the people think. Yes, we have restrictions, but we also have methods and ways to break restrictions.

I doubt the folks here belongs to the average reddit users. Thanks God!
But since it seems like there is some kind of personal cult around her and logic is no argument for these people. Sadly I lacked the popcorn while I scrolled through reddit but what happend there was really bullshittery at it`s finest.
People argued with such a zeal against points where even Mai stated totally different things than in her original articles because "she jumped to the wrong conclusions". Her fiercest proponents are totally stalker material propably manga invested (sry there might be rare exceptions) halfwitted teenagers jerking of to Mais twitter profile. :wacko: I get triggert by such people.
"But Gajin employs er so she must be totally credible!!11!!" :AHDOTCOM:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Khand-e said:

Just don't worry about them, you actually have an audience here (and people who read here who will spread it) that actually have to ability to think.

 

3 minutes ago, Jägerlein said:

but what happend there was really bullshittery at it`s finest.

 

I really appreciate both of you for standing by my side. Reddit is really a stink hole. People there will never pay attention to the main topic and always get lost in some other shits. I never post articles or submit comments on foreign forums or sth like Reddit before. I'm getting used to these. And I will pay more attention on my selection of words from now on. Some words which is not a big problem in China might results in huge personal attacks out of China. Jesus.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Jagdika said:

From now on I will not go to the WT forum or Reddit to argue with some "People with extreme political correctness and will never focus on the article itself and right or wrong". My point is , you can't trust what one has said just because "he is so right and acting gentle so even if he don't post out the original source or reference I will still believe him". That is immature. I have post out my reference, the books I've used, and I have translated the most important part to English. So what else should I do to prove I'm on the right side? I'm really angry with that. There is not that much archives and documents are still unavailable for the public, for me that is just an excuse. Even if it is not public viewable why not post out the title, or where it was stored? Which cabinet in the shelf? I can't understand some people's logic and view of correctness there in Reddit or WT forum. I know I am the right one.

Also someone from Reddit doubt why I post out this critical article 4 months later, the reason is very simple: I post it out immediately in a Chinese website similar to Reddit when Waffentrager deleted my comment and no one response. After 4 months I have acquired enough archives and documents to prove him wrong, so I post out my entire article. For those guys on Reddit: Please, use your brains to think, use your logic to analyze! If you can't read Japanese, why not try to learn it? Or why not use the translator?  Is that so hard for you? The net is so highly developed there are always some methods for you to understand Japanese and what the archives have said! Knowledge and studying change a person! We Chinese are not as stupid as some of the people think. Yes, we have restrictions, but we also have methods and ways to break restrictions.

those weaboos only believe things they want to believe

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

  • Similar Content

    • By Akula_941
      Anti-air bobcat design to take away driver's hearing in maximum efficiency

      SH11  155mm SPG


    • By Sturgeon
      Let's say you're developing a tank with a unique (AKA non-historical) gun for one of our competitions here on SH. It would be nice to have an idea of the size of the gun, its shells, and what their performance both in terms of shell weight and velocity but also penetration, wouldn't it? Well, fortunately there is a way to do this with reasonably accurate results using your solid modeling software and some free to use browser tools.

      First, you want to have a general idea of the size and performance of your gun. For this example, I decided I wanted an optimized, high velocity 85mm caliber gun with a case about as big as the 7.5cm KwK 42 (as it happened, I ended up with a case that had significantly greater volume, but that fact is unimportant for this example). The cartridge I decided on has a 130mm wide rim and a 640mm long case, of course in 85mm caliber. My first step was to model this case in SolidWorks:


       
      You will also need to model your projectile, in this case a tungsten-carbide cored APCR round:


       
      Next, we need a bit of freeware: A Powley computer. Originally developed by DuPont engineers for small arms ammunition, the Powley computer is an accurate enough tool to use for much larger tank rounds as well! When you click the link, you'll be greeted with this screen:
       

       
      You'll note the dimensions are in inches and this thing called "grains" (abbreviated "gn"). The grain is an archaic Imperial mass unit equal to 1/7000th of a pound which is still used in the small arms field, today. Another quirk of small arms has the case capacity - a volume measurement - listed in grains as well. This is in fact grains of water (gn H2O), or the weight of water that will fill the case to the top. To find this, simply multiply the volume in cubic centimeters by 15.43 - which is also the exchange rate between the metric gram and grains mass.
       
      Finding the volume of the case is easy with a solid modeling program; simply model the interior as a solid and find the volume of that solid:


       
      Filling in my Powley inputs gives me this:
       

       
      Note that I typically use the diameter of the projectile across the driving bands for "Bullet Diameter", but it really makes very little difference.
       
      So far, though, we haven't actually produced any results. That's because our gun is well outside the bounds of DuPont production IMR powders, hence the output "Much slower than (IMR) 4831" in the lower left. So, we need to override the computer by checking the box next to the blue "Pressure" function, and typing in a pressure value in CUP that is reflective of tank guns of whatever era we are trying to represent. My tank gun is trying to represent something from about the late 1940s/early 1950s, so I'm going to use 45500 CUP EDIT: USE 41000 CUP for APCBC and 42800 CUP FOR APCR (or better yet, do your own calibration!):
       

       
      This gives me an estimated muzzle velocity of 3,964 ft/s for my L/50 barrel. Not bad! Note the outputs on the left, which tell you a bunch of fun facts about your round but aren't terribly relevant to what we're doing here today. Next, we need to put this gun's performance in terms of penetration. The way I like to do this is through comparative analysis.
       
      The first thing we need is to know to find penetration the ballistic performance of our round. We can estimate this using JBM's ballistic calculator and a few rules of thumb. When opening the calculator, the first thing you'll see is this:
       

       
      We care about basically none of these settings except BC, velocity, and maximum range. Caliber, projectile weight, chronograph distance, etc are all pretty irrelevant to us. Keep the environmental settings (temperature, pressure, etc.) set to their defaults. First, change the ballistic coefficient type from G1 to G7 using the dropdown menu. Then, change the muzzle velocity from 3000 to whatever the muzzle velocity was that was calculated by the Powley computer. Finally, set the maximum range to your desired distance - in my case 2,000 yards.

      For my round, I now have inputs that look like this:
       


      We also need to get some idea of how fast our projectile loses velocity, something we can't know for certain without actually building a real gun and test firing it - or at least without some really sophisticated simulations. However, projectiles with the same shape tend to fly the same way, and that's something we can exploit here. To figure this out, we need a graph showing us the performance of a real-life gun. Fortunately, there is a handy one for an IRL gun similar to what I'm designing, the 90mm M3 from World War II, and its M304 HVAP-T, which is broadly similar in construction and shape to my 85mm APCR projectile:
       

       
      Based on this chart, we see that the M304 should drop from its 3,350 ft/s muzzle velocity to about 2,500 ft/s at 2,000 yards. Doing a little trial and error with JBM tells me that this means the M304 has a G7 ballistic coefficient of about 1.13.
       
      Now, our projectile will not have the same ballistic coefficient, due to it being a different size and mass. But, we can figure out what its ballistic coefficient would be by finding its sectional density and comparing that to the sectional density of M304. To find sectional density, take the projectile's weight in grains and divide it by the square of the projectile's diameter in inches, times 7000. So for M304, we get:
       

       


      And for my 85mm, we get:


       

       
      This means that the ballistic coefficient for an identical-shape projectile with our size and weight will be about 1.019/1.330 - or 76.6% as much - as that of the 90mm M304. That means a BC of 0.866 G7 should be approximately correct for my 85mm APCR round. Let's plug that in:


       
      And then scroll down to the bottom to click "calculate", which gives us a big ol' chart that goes out to 2,000 yards:
       

       
      O-Kay! Now we have some data. It looks like at 2,000 yards, my projectile holds about 2,800 ft/s striking velocity. It's important to note here that what we really care about isn't the striking velocity of the projectile per se, but the velocity and energy of the projectile's core. The core is what's actually doing a lot of work to the armor, so for now let's stop thinking in terms of the whole projectile, and take a look at these two cores, that of the M304 90mm HVAP, and that of my 85mm APCR round. The core of the 90mm M304 is an approximately 8 pound lump of tungsten-carbide that is about 45mm in width. My penetrator is also 8 pounds, but it's longer and thinner in proportion - just 40mm wide, rather than 45mm. This means my penetrator will penetrate more armor at a given striking velocity, and we can estimate how much more by taking the specific energy of the rounds and comparing them. That is, the energy in Joules of the penetrator alone, divided by the penetrator's diameter squared:
       

       


      So the specific energy at 2,000 yards is about 826J/mm^2. Now, we need to find out at what impact velocity the M304 penetrator produces this same specific energy. Do do that, we go backwards, using the figures for M304:
       

       

       
      Therefore, the equivalent impact velocity for my 85mm APCR round at 2,000 yards is 3,150 ft/s for the M304. That means, in theory, that the M304 would have to impact a target at 3,150 ft/s to produce equivalent penetration of RHA to my 85mm APCR striking at just 2,800 ft/s.

      Now, we head back to that chart:


       
      On the left side of the graph, we put our cursor on the line that corresponds to approximately 3,150 ft/s velocity, and follow it over until it hits the curved line that corresponds with the angle of plate we care about - arbitrarily, let's pick 20 degrees. Then, we follow that point straight down until it hits the x-axis:


       
      Therefore, we estimate that at 2,000 yards, my 85mm has just over 10 inches of RHA penetration - not bad at all for a lowly APCR round!
    • By Walter_Sobchak
      Since we don't have a thread for British and Commonwealth tanks of WWII, I thought I would start one.  
       
      Check out this manufacturers instructional video on the Crusader.
       
       
    • By Walter_Sobchak
      Since Xlucine suggested it in the general AFV thread, here is a new version of the old Tank ID thread that used to exist at the WoT forums, back before the great exodus to SH.
       
      The rules are simple.  Post a picture of some sort of AFV and everyone has to try to name what it is.  Try to avoid posting a new picture until the previous picture is identified.  Generally, the person who was first to correctly ID the picture in question gets to post the next picture, unless they want to pass.  If a picture is not ID'd in a day or two, the person that posted it should say what it is and bask in their own sense of superiority.   They should then post a new picture for the sake of keeping the thread moving.  Please, no fictional tanks, paper napkin drawings that never made it to prototype or pictures where the vehicle in question is obscured or particularly hard to see.  Also, if posting a picture of an unusual variant of a relatively common vehicle, be sure to note that you are looking for the specific variant name, not just the general family of vehicles it belongs to (for example, if I post a picture of a Panzer IV with the hydrostat drive, I would say in the post something like "What makes this Panzer IV unusual?" since everyone can ID a Panzer IV)
       
      It is perfectly ok to shame those that make spectacularly wrong guesses.  That's just how we roll around here.  
       
      I'll start 
       

×