Bronezhilet

You want them to impact them at about the same time as to not give him time to react. But that doesn't even matter if you can't get them to hit in the same place in the first place. Both projectiles are so ballistically dissimilar it's hilarious. Lets just quickly compare the data of two projectiles I have a bunch of data of, M829A1 and M830. Lets say you have everything dialed in so that they should hit the same thing at 3 km, but lets say you...: calculated crosswinds wrong, it's 10 m/s more than you thought. The impact point of M829A1 shifts by about 1 meter, the impact point for M830 shifts 16 meters. calculated the wrong muzzle velocity, it's 20 m/s more than you thought. The vertical impact point of M829A1 shifts by about 0,5 meters, for M830 it's 2,8 meters. used a wrong expected amount of drag, it's 5% less than you thought. The vertical impact point of M829A1 shifts by about 10 centimeters, for M830 it's 3 meters. Lemme rephrase that last one, for only a 5% decrease in drag, M829A1 will still hit the target, but M830 overshoots the target by about... 76 meters.

Yeah no. ~30mm autocannons have what, a muzzle velocity of around 1000-1100 m/s? Tank guns are at least 1500 m/s with way superiour external ballistics. I mean, the long rod penetrator has about the same diameter while being at least ten times as heavy. Getting the two types of projectiles to hit in the same place at range will be a timing nightmare. That is, if the autocannons can even reach the required distance in the first place. At 4 kilometers your autocannon rounds are practically falling out of the sky from misery, but 120 mm APFSDS will still be going at a happy 1400+ m/s.

@XDrake https://mega.nz/#!19N3VbbY!tSb2gj4Ms9Lzk__m7tSVna2CNqdMu4twjIiU_pF2Wa0 "Theoretical Study of a Diesel-Filled Airtight Structure Unit Subjected to Shaped Charge Jet Impact" by Gao et al Enjoy.

The best way to deal with Damian is to let him roast himself:

I guess Turkey just got quite a bit larger.

@Ramlaen just an FYI, the BTS8 PELE round has about the same drag coëfficient as normal 125mm HEAT.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-46245686 ARA San Juan has been found

And now: Drawings, so you can actually make the thing!

Oh I see how it be.

If I drive for 26 hours I've driven to Italy... ...and back. Or I've ended up in in St. Petersburg.

I find it interesting that a lot of people, especially in the EU, seem to forget/ignore just how gigantic the USA actually is. For me a one hour drive is a long drive because that means I'm either halfway across the country, or I've driven into Germany.

Y'all are playing WoT again and yet here I am, playing Armored Whorefare.

It's almost like admins can do admin stuff.

https://www.amazon.com/Capital-Ships-Imperial-Japanese-1868-1945-ebook/dp/B00R85ORKO/ Turns out that the Musashi's 28 knots top speed was in shallow water. Whoopsy daisy, there goes @Peasant's argument.

Much like the Yamato.

Fucking destroyed.

Can't find anything. But nice try at trying to steer the conversation, my dude. If the reports don't state it's in shallow water, then neither can you.

You keep repeating the shallow water meme, but where in the fuck did you get it from? I've been looking for a while for sources on it, but I can't find anything. Only thing I can find is that the New Jersey sailed at 35.2 knots for 6 hours straight. So you're saying that it found a 390 km long stretch of shallow water at exactly the right depth?

Running at 35.2 in shallow water for 6 hours straight?

The Yamato reportedly achieved 28.05 knots during overload power and 27.61 at official trail power. Iowa achieved the 32.5 knots in actual battle. In machinery trails the Iowa reached 35.2 knots. So what are we going to compare, trail speeds or combat speeds? Either way, the Yamato is getting stomped.

Where did you get the 27 knots for the Yamato and the 30 knots for the Iowa?

You want to turn without rolling? Good luck in a dogfight, my dude!

The test pilot of the Akutan Zero about the Zero:

Ah yes, it's much better to plunge in the ocean than to get home. Are you perchance British? Because that's British thinking. The Brits were looking for a good self sealing fuel tank during World War 1, but after the war added the requirement of it being crash proof as well. So all designs submitted were not only tested for self sealing capabilities, but were also dropped from a tower. And due to basic physics existing all of them burst on impact and as a result were discarded for failing the requirements. And thus goes the story of how the United Kingdom went to war without self sealing fuel tanks. Yes, people died because of that stupidity.