Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

TokyoMorose

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    219

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Everything posted by TokyoMorose

  1. TokyoMorose
    Nah, they'll be in the FV432.
  2. TokyoMorose
    How could it possibly be 'safer'? The Jaguar was not designed for maximum efficiency - it was designed to strike a balance between capability and low cost. There are several subsystems and design features that were chosen specifically for cost and logistics/maintenance reasons.
  3. TokyoMorose
    You can find 95-25 and 95-26 publicly available. It does not specify multiple grades in terms of any physical, ballistic, or chemical properties. The specs listed in that image are the sole acceptable bounds.
  4. TokyoMorose
    Compare with data from http://btvt.info/5library/vtp_1953_bronja_m26_m46.htm - in particular this chart. DEF STAN 95-25 grade castings have hardly changed material formulation and quality from WW2 era US castings. Which the Soviets lambast heavily in that piece.
  5. TokyoMorose
    The quality for DEFSTAN 95-25 CHA is really impressively poor, it's on par with that used for making the pattons.
  6. TokyoMorose
    Getting rid of hydraulics is nice, and a certain safety feature. But it doesn't necessarily imply better performance - the very hydraulic stabilizer of the M1A2 was consistently called out for praise as the best stabilizer in the Greek trials (the electric system on Leo 2 improved being #2 ahead of the electric systems on LeClerc and CR2).
  7. TokyoMorose
    I just cannot get over how the Redback has that large, and totally unprotected and un-cooled exhaust right up front.
  8. TokyoMorose
    Well sure, the magical funtimes of the 90s when they can cancel everything everywhere because we've reached the end of history and major war will never happen again (right, Fukuyama?) were never going to last and a lot of people active then were furious at the peace dividend, but politicos and a good chunk of brass were confident that their late 80s hardware would be all that would be needed for the foreseeable future. Heck, some western armies went as far as doing things like outright shutting down their armored units due to a lack of possible use (in the view of the time.) That said, pour one out for the XM2001. Wouldn't need to be bothering with this XM1299 work, and the LV-100-5 would have made it into production for the never-ending Abrams family.
  9. TokyoMorose
    What a trainwreck, WCSP dead and now quite possibly Ajax dead. This is some brilliant procurement.
  10. TokyoMorose
    It should be noted, the US *has* exported DU rounds in the past - even some 829A3s were exported. The lack of DU exports and the existence of the KE-W line seems to be reluctance from the importing nation, not a fundamental refusal to sell DU rounds to close allies.
  11. TokyoMorose
    It would be remiss to not note that the T-43 turret wasn't even new! It was a mild reworking of the T-34M turret developed by Kharkovites before the war started.
  12. TokyoMorose
    Gee it's awfully funny that all of the personal combat logs whine about panzerfausts, and German records recall there being literally hundreds of them in the AO - but the fact that they didn't report the losses as being to them must mean it never happened. And yes, the losses to fausts were so low that the Soviets didn't improvise bedspring armor in a desperate attempt to do something against them, and that the soviets most certainly didn't bother capturing and reverse engineering them. Not at all. I think it is far more likely someone on the soviet side simply messed up (records are hardly faultless on any side!) with recording the losses rather than all of the combat logs being wrong and the hundreds of panzerfausts in the area apparently doing absolutely nothing despite being in a perfect situation. And yes, Norge's *nominal* AT assets are quite sad. But given the condition of the battlefield I would bet money at least some bigger AT guns were attached to them ad-hoc from other battered units. Nobody records every ad-hoc attachment, look at the utter mess of ad-hoc formations during Bagration and Zitadelle - these are well known to exist but their exact composition is never going to be fully known.
  13. TokyoMorose
    See, I get the feeling that just like Critical Mass - you only read bits and pieces. If you read the whole comment chain, there were other units that likely had AT guns attached - in particular the Norge PanzerGren regiment. Which does have organic AT in their TO&E, and probably had supplementary AT attached (largely because as the German army slowly disintegrated, attaching stragglers from wiped out units to surviving ones was extremely common.) Also I highly doubt that with over 600 panzerfaust in the area, that they did little damage. Soviets spend time whining about panzerfausts, and we know from German records that about 1,300-,1400 men armed with at least 600 panzerfausts were in the area. The whole crux of the argument rests on the soviets saying "projectile impact" - but who is to say the local Soviet commander didn't count Panzerfausts as projectiles? They certainly are projectiles.
  14. TokyoMorose
    For one the turret stock is 22 - which both the official documents and captured examples show, 2 racks of 11. Furthermore, while the official claim was 86 (where in gods' name did you get 84?) rounds stowed - examination of actual, captured field issue tanks shows that the standard fitting was in fact 70. It would seem that not all of the official racks were actually issued, probably for ergonomic reasons. And yes, I will happily take what was found issued in tanks over what they say they will have issued any day. TO&E doesn't magically change based on short-notice intel, and the German intelligence apparatus was notoriously insufficient in any case. How would this German unit *know* they were about to get slammed by nothing but armor and not some other mix of forces, and thus load only AP? How do you propose that the artillery managed to penetrate the drive sprocket covering the final drive housing and the final drive housing itself without also penetrating the sides of the tank and causing more direct issues? The total LOS thickness on the sides to strike the final drives is roughly 40mm thick give or take a few mm. And from the front, it'd have to penetrate both the track and the housing for a pretty similar LoS. You also seem, in your wanking of frontal armor here, to wantonly ignore Hoak directly whining in the report that the armor was frequently penetrated by anti-tank *and* tank fire. While simultaneously 100% trusting him that it was totally the arty that blew up his final drives.
  15. TokyoMorose
    I apologize for reading the Tiger B as JT (I was very, very tired) - not that the Tiger B was known for having really any better mobility. And if he, good boy that he is, was following orders by this point in the war - his Tiger B wouldn't be carrying much more ammo than a JT. With the turret stowage verboten, he gets only 48 rounds per tank. And since this is a *tank* unit and not a *TD* unit, it means that a good chunk of his ammo is gonna be HE which is not going to do much to the IS-2s frontally to say the least. And even with 48 rounds of AP, with every shot a killing hit, *you still don't have enough ammo for all of the kills he claimed*. This is far and away the logically hardest argument in favor of him talking shit - it is physically impossible for them to have knocked out more tanks than they had ammo for. And yes, Artillery can cause immense problems - often of the 'oh god the front plate caved in' sort the ML-20 was famous for. But you'll note he didn't claim artillery knocked out the tanks, just that somehow it only broke track links and final drives. Track links are somewhat understandable as pressure and shrapnel from near bursts can blow off links - but the final drive is such a tiny target that is covered from most angles that nobody else in the war recalls final drives being destroyed by arty to be an issue. You don't even see other Panther/JgPanther units trying to blame arty for their final drives exploding.
  16. TokyoMorose
    Because, as I stated in my sarcastic suuuure line, the final drive is a very small target (and it's only exposed from some angles!). You'll note other armies have a conspicuous lack of 'oops all our final drives were hit by arty what a shame'. So either the man is bullshitting as to why the final drives broke, or the allies are actually putting their very best marksmen on artillery teams - with strict orders to aim only for final drives. It's rather comparable to exclaiming that the enemy was scoring nothing but headshots on your infantry. You'd think the Germans would realize that it's a wee bit unlikely that Karl and Ko destroyed *more tanks than they carried ammo combined*. Seriously, each JT carries 40 rounds at 100% stowage. Where did the ~30 extra kills come from, repeatedly limping into them with the JT's famous agility? Thankfully, we have the soviet combat logs - Körner was ran over in a few hours, and they don't even bother to record meeting the vehicles in their logs. They spend more time whining about Panzerfausts. https://www.tankarchives.ca/2014/05/cheating-at-statistics-7-korner-conjurer.html
  17. TokyoMorose
    My reply in that interview would be a very dry and sarcastic - "Well BAE thinks a warmed over bradley is good enough, how could we possibly not at least match that?".
  18. TokyoMorose
    See, I have never understood why spool sabots weren't cast (metal) / molded (for a resin sabot) with an internal hollow. APFSDS rounds are quite pricey things, and you would think that the extra cost of making them hollow wouldn't be much compared to the weight savings. In ballistics, much like rocketry, every gram counts.
  19. TokyoMorose
    And for reference, here is Noak's commentary from the later period. Final drive and track failures come back with a vengeance (yes, I'm suuure all of your final drives, the tiny targets that they are were miraculously hit by enemy artillery and that is why they failed).
  20. TokyoMorose
    Why yes, I do. Lets open it up. Nothing to suggest the incident in October 28th was anything but an above-average batch. Final drive complaints come back when fighting with the 654th picks back up in November.
  21. TokyoMorose
    Yes, the old ring sabots were a lot smaller due to material choices for the penetrator and the use of full bore fins, but on the contrary they were made usually of mild steel - an extremely weight-inefficient material, and they had to cover a wider bore (so wider if not as long). I would think that the use of mild steel and a wider sabot would more than make up for the sabot length difference, given the strength/weight ratio of laid-up composites versus mild steel.
  22. TokyoMorose
    Oh, I am aware of the limitations of soviet APFSDS and Sabot design - it's just that it beggars belief that ye olde soviet metal sabots had a better mass fraction despite the shorter rods and the fin situation. The Soviet ones were not made of a particularly weight-efficient material, having been primarily chosen for manufacturability and durability. I also didn't criticize the 130mm Sabot having such a high mass fraction as that thing is still in development, works at unprecedented pressures, and has a notably wider bore. I am not sure how to square that with the numbers above from AMPTIAC given the ~4.4kg sabot mass of 829A1.
  23. TokyoMorose
    I know all about the issues of parasitic mass and the like, 35% just seems to be a very high mass fraction for a modern 120mm (obviously, bore size plays a huge role in 'proper' sabot mass fraction) sabot made using a composite material. Old Soviet 125mm metal sabots had a *superior* mass fraction (approx 30-31%), with a wider bore requiring a larger sabot. For what it is worth, the sabot mass fraction is ~20% of total projectile (Sabot + Rod) mass on 829A3. (Approx 2 kg sabot, calculated from the 4.4kg sabot of 829A1 plus AMPTIAC's numbers of Sabot weight savings generation over generation. 829A2 Sabot was 35% lighter than 829A1's Sabot, and 829A3's Sabot is 30% lighter than A2's.)
  24. TokyoMorose
    If the DM53 wastes 35% of its total energy on the Sabot, the ammunition team needs to be rounded up and fired.
  25. TokyoMorose
    That's possible, but according to Rheinmetall the Rh-M-120 L/55A1 is already a 15MJ muzzle energy gun (technically 14.95MJ, taken from the known 13MJ launch energy of DM-53 out of the L/55 and adding 15% to meet Rheinmetall's claimed 15% energy increase). You would have to lose over 15% of your muzzle energy to have a 13MJ impact energy with a 15MJ shot out of the L/55A1 - and in what circumstances is an APFSDS going to lose 15% of its energy mid flight? I would wager they don't lose 10% of their energy mid flight (other rounds are much draggier and lose more, but energy isn't really important for non-KE rounds).
×
×
  • Create New...