Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I occasionally play this mental game where I imagine describing, let's call it the Schwer-mittel panzerkampfwagen 44 "Cougar", to the typical wehraboo.   "It had a low profile, only 10cm tal

from physical version of Mittler Report issue on KF41 Lynx (low-res scans are posted on htka.hu forum)   So, I've made couple of comparisons, to the best of my ability

A Dingo 2 of the Belgian army was hit by a pressure-activated IED consisting of about 30 kg explosives. The vehicle was part of a German-lead convoy, several German vehicles narrowly missed the IED be

2 hours ago, SH_MM said:


Yes, apparently the museum at the Australian army facility at Puckapunyal.

 Australian Army Tank Museum, Puckapunyal, Victoria - just down the hill from the School of Armour. There’s a M113A1 on the hill up to gunnery wing that’s also been cut in half, just without the interior. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully understand the ideas behind the design of the Leopard-1 , but Im still on the opinion that in a war this immensely thin armor would have led to massive casualties... But thankfully, it remains a question if the designers were right or wrong with this concept. Still, it was definitely far better than M-47 or M48A2 which had problems with penetrating the armor of soviet tanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Clan_Ghost_Bear said:

Hey Fellas,

on Page 33 of this document on the AGS competition, a bid from Thyssen-Henschel is reported as the "TH-459L". Any clues on what this might be?


Forecast International's old report on the TH 495 mentions an AGS version in the section "variants":


Six- or Five-Wheel Chassis
TH 495 Reconnaissance Vehicle. This member of the TH 495 family is armed similar to the mechanized infantry combat vehicle.

TH 495 Armored Combat Vehicle. Also called the TH 495 Armored Gun System, this proposed vehicle would mount the Rh 105, 105 millimeter tank cannon, probably in the 105SLR reduced recoil form.


I don't think that they ever made an AGS prototype, but the six-wheeeld TH 495 prototype was fitted with two different medium caliber turrets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
3 hours ago, heretic88 said:

What was the advantage of this turret over the old cast one? Besides increased room for the crew of course.


Armor protection...


2 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Ease of production?


Casting a turret is a lot easier, if you have the facilities to do so (which West-Germany had).

Link to post
Share on other sites

But armor is still in the ridiculous category. The only real improvement is better protection vs 100mm APHE frontally. It is totally vulnerable to just about anything else. Even the 100mm APHE protection doesnt make much sense, because 3BM8 APDS was hardly new that time... Also, in 1973 the 3BM20 APFSDS was already in service.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, heretic88 said:

But armor is still in the ridiculous category. The only real improvement is better protection vs 100mm APHE frontally. It is totally vulnerable to just about anything else. Even the 100mm APHE protection doesnt make much sense, because 3BM8 APDS was hardly new that time... Also, in 1973 the 3BM20 APFSDS was already in service.


Still amazed at how lightly armoured the Leopard 1 - of any variant - is. There is a Leopard AS1 turret that was subjected to an unscheduled ballistic “test” by a 105mm service sabot round held in storage in Wodonga. Sadly, pics were not permitted. 


Apparently, the AS1 aren’t lasting nearly as long as forecast as hard targets. Further discussions revealed that the life projections were based on how long the Centurion Mk.5/1s lasted. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, SH_MM said:

RE: Leopard 1A3 turret armor... we discussed this already. It provides similar protection to the M60A1 turret (unless you believe SteelBeasts' incorrect older armor schemes).

How exactly?
I don't think it provides 350mm or thereabouts against KE.


That's what a lot of the M60A1 turret has, atleast from a frontal attack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The M60A1's turret is 200-254 mm thick cast steel with a hardness of 220-240 HB, that isn't going to provide 350 mm protection vs KE...



According to Soviet evaluations of captured M60A1 tanks (probably gained via the Middle East) the frontal turret armor thickness ranges from 150 to 180 mm thick armor sloped at 22 to 30° in the vertical plane or 95 mm sloped at 35° horizontal and 55° vertical angle in front of the rangefinder. That is less than 220 mm of cast steel armor, which then again will provide 10-20% less protection than rolled armor steel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

The M60A1's turret is 200-254 mm thick cast steel with a hardness of 220-240 HB, that isn't going to provide 350 mm protection vs KE...

I've seen that and the one other document, but I've seen good counter arguments backed up with measurements on the real thing, I'm still mostly on the fence, though I think it's hard to argue with physical thickness measurements.

I was actually talking to several people that were "working" on trying to figure out what the M60A1 turret's protection really is, I'll ask them for some more specifics.


Still, it would seem odd to me that the M60A1 with it's ~10t higher weight would only achieve the same (rough) protection as the leo 1 on t he turret....

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so looking further at that document, I don't really get how they come to the conclusion that the hull is vulnerable to 100mm AP at 750m for the M60A1, same with the figure for the normal M60.

To me they seem practically immune to 100mm AP even at PB, not even taking into account the poor performance of AP(CBC) against slopes compared to APDS or APFSDS.

Seems to me they overestimated the USSR AP, or they were talking about APDS, but that doesn't seem likely.


As for the hardness, IIRC the early M60s had that, but the later ones had better steel in the ~260BHN region.

I'm by no means knowledgeable on these tanks though, it just seems odd to me and doesn't quite line up with other things I've seen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Xlucine said:

Only 5 degrees of protection for the welded leo 1 turret? That's very narrow, M60 and chieftain were +/- 22.5 degrees IIRC

Well, it is like 10t lighter than those and has substantially thinner armour plates.

Still OK for what it was designed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also do not forget the soviet evaluation about M-60A1 protection. They clearly state that from head on, the M-60 is fully immune to even 115mm APFSDS...

"От бронебойно-подкалиберных снарядов танковых пушек калибра 100, 122 и 115 мм лобовые проекции танка защищены следующим образом:

·       башня - при курсовых углах обстрела ±30° – с дистанции более 3000 м ; при 0° – при стрельбе в упор;"


Measurements fully support this, mantlet LOS thickness is more than 380mm in most areas. Yes it is cast armor, but even with a very pessimistic 80% value, its still above 300mm.


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

  • Similar Content

    • By SH_MM
      Found a few higher resolution photographs from the recent North Korean military parade. We didn't have a topic for BEST KOREAN armored fighting vehicles, so here it is.
      New main battle tank, Abrams-Armata clone based on Ch'ŏnma turret design (welded, box-shaped turret) and Sŏn'gun hull design (i.e. centerline driver's position). The bolts of the armor on the hull front is finally visible given the increased resolution. It might not be ERA given the lack of lines inbetween. Maybe is a NERA module akin to the MEXAS hull add-on armor for the Leopard 2A5?
      Other details include an APS with four radar panels (the side-mounted radar panels look a lot different - and a lot more real - than the ones mounted at the turret corners) and twelve countermeasures in four banks (two banks à three launchers each at the turret front, two banks à three launchers on the left and right side of the turret). Thermal imagers for gunner and commander, meteorological mast, two laser warning receivers, 115 mm smoothbore gun without thermal sleeve but with muzze reference system, 30 mm grenade launcher on the turret, six smoke grenade dischargers (three at each turret rear corner)

      IMO the layout of the roof-mounted ERA is really odd. Either the armor array covering the left turret cheek is significantly thinner than the armor on the right turret cheek or the roof-mounted ERA overlaps with the armor.

      The first ERA/armor element of the skirt is connected by hinges and can probably swivel to allow better access to the track. There is a cut-out in the slat armor for the engine exhaust. Also note the actual turret ring - very small diameter compared to the outer dimensions of the turret.
      Stryker MGS copy with D-30 field gun clone and mid engine:

      Note there are four crew hatches. Driver (on the left front of the vehicle), commander (on the right front of the vehicle, seat is placed a bit further back), gunner (left side of the gun's overhead mount, next to the gunner's sight) and unknown crew member (right side of gun's overhead mount with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher mounted at the hatch). The vehicle also has a thermal imager and laser rangefinder (gunner's sight is identical to the new tank), but no independent optic for the commander. It also has the same meteorological mast and laser warner receivers as the new MBT.
      What is the purpose of the fourth crew member? He cannot realistically load the gun...
      The vehicle has a small trim vane for swimming, the side armor is made of very thin spaced steel that is bend on multiple spots, so it clearly is not ceramic armor as fitted to the actual Stryker.

      The tank destroyer variant of the same Stryker MGS copy fitted with a Bulsae-3 ATGM launcher.

      Note that there is again a third hatch with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher behind the commander's position. Laser warning receivers and trime vane are again stand-out features. The sighting complex for the Bulsae-3 ATGMs is different with a large circular optic (fitted with cover) probably being a thermal imager and two smaller lenses visible on the very right (as seen from the vehicle's point of view) probably containing a day sight and parts of the guidance system.

      Non line-of-sight ATGM carrier based on the 6x6 local variant of the BTR, again fitted with laser warning receivers and a trim vane. There are only two hatches and two windows, but there is a three men crew inside.
      There are a lot more photos here, but most of them are infantry of missile system (MLRS' and ICBMs).
    • By Monochromelody
      Disappeared for a long period, Mai_Waffentrager reappeared four months ago. 
      This time, he took out another photoshoped artifact. 

      He claimed that the Japanese prototype 105GSR (105 mm Gun Soft Recoil) used an autoloader similar to Swedish UDES 19 project. Then he showed this pic and said it came from a Japanese patent file. 
      Well, things turn out that it cames from Bofors AG's own patent, with all markings and numbers wiped out. 

      original file→https://patents.google.com/patent/GB1565069A/en?q=top+mounted+gun&assignee=bofors&oq=top+mounted+gun+bofors
      He has not changed since his Type 90 armor scam busted. Guys, stay sharp and be cautious. 
    • By LostCosmonaut
      Backstory (skip if you don't like alternate history junk)
      The year is 2239. It has been roughly 210 years since the world was engulfed in nuclear war. Following the war, the United States splintered into hundreds of small statelets. While much knowledge was retained in some form (mostly through books and other printed media), the loss of population and destruction of industrial capability set back society immensely.
      Though the Pacific Northwest was less badly hit than other areas, the destruction of Seattle and Portland, coupled with the rupturing of the Cascadia Subduction Zone in 2043, caused society to regress to a mid-19th century technology level. However, in the early 2100s, the Cascade Republic formed, centered near Tacoma. The new nation grew rapidly, expanding to encompass most of Washington and Oregon by 2239. The Cascade Republic now extends from the Klamath River in the south to the Fraser River in the north, and from the Pacific roughly to central Idaho. Over time, the standard of living and industrial development improved (initially through salvaging of surviving equipment, by the late 2100s through new development); the population has grown to about 4.5 million (comparable to 1950 levels), and technology is at about a 1940 level. Automobiles are common, aircraft are less common, but not rare by any means. Computers are nonexistent aside from a few experimental devices; while scientists and engineers are aware of the principles behind microchips and other advanced electronics, the facilities to produce such components simply do not exist. Low rate production of early transistors recently restarted.
      The current armored force of the Cascade Republic consists of three armored brigades. They are presently equipped with domestically produced light tanks, dating to the 2190s. Weighing roughly 12 tons and armed with a 40mm gun, they represented the apex of the Cascade Republic's industrial capabilities at the time. And when they were built, they were sufficient for duties such as pacifying survivalist enclaves in remote areas. However, since that time, the geopolitical situation has complicated significantly. There are two main opponents the Cascade Republic's military could expect to face in the near future.
      The first is California. The state of California was hit particularly hard by the nuclear exchange. However, in 2160, several small polities in the southern part of the state near the ruins of Los Angeles unified. Adopting an ideology not unfamiliar to North Korea, the new state declared itself the successor to the legacy of California, and set about forcibly annexing the rest of the state. It took them less than 50 years to unite the rest of California, and spread into parts of Arizona and northern Mexico. While California's expansion stopped at the Klamath River for now, this is only due to poor supply lines and the desire to engage easier targets. (California's northward advanced did provide the final impetus for the last statelets in south Oregon to unify with the Cascade Republic voluntarily).
      California is heavily industrialized, possessing significant air, naval, and armored capabilities. Their technology level is comparable to the Cascade Republic's, but their superior industrial capabilities and population mean that they can produce larger vehicles in greater quantity than other countries. Intelligence shows they have vehicles weighing up to 50 tons with 3 inches of armor, though most of their tanks are much lighter.

      The expected frontlines for an engagement with the Californian military would be the coastal regions in southern Oregon. Advancing up the coastal roads would allow California to capture the most populated and industrialized regions of the Cascade Republic if they advanced far enough north. Fortunately, the terrain near the border is very difficult and favors the defender;

      (near the Californian border)

      The other opponent is Deseret, a Mormon theocratic state centered in Utah, and encompassing much of Nevada, western Colorado, and southern Idaho. Recently, tension has arisen with the Cascade Republic over two main issues. The first is the poorly defined border in Eastern Oregon / Northern Nevada; the old state boundary is virtually meaningless, and though the area is sparsely populated, it does represent a significant land area, with grazing and water resources. The more recent flashpoint is the Cascade Republic's recent annexation of Arco and the area to the east. Deseret historically regarded Idaho as being within its sphere of influence, and maintained several puppet states in the area (the largest being centered in Idaho Falls). They regard the annexation of a signficant (in terms of land area, not population) portion of Idaho as a major intrusion into their rightful territory. That the Cascade Republic has repaired the rail line leading to the old Naval Reactors Facility, and set up a significant military base there only makes the situation worse.
      Deseret's military is light and heavily focused on mobile operations. Though they are less heavily mechanized than the Cascade Republic's forces, operating mostly armored cars and cavalry, they still represent a significant threat  to supply and communication lines in the open terrain of eastern Oregon / southern Idaho.

      (a butte in the disputed region of Idaho, near Arco)
      As the head of a design team in the Cascade Republic military, you have been requested to design a new tank according to one of two specifications (or both if you so desire):
      Medium / Heavy Tank Weight: No more than 45 tons Width: No more than 10.8 feet (3.25 meters) Upper glacis / frontal turret armor of at least 3 in (76mm) LoS thickness Side armor at least 1in (25mm) thick (i.e. resistant to HMG fire) Power/weight ratio of at least 10 hp / ton No more than 6 crew members Primary armament capable of utilizing both anti-armor and high explosive rounds Light tank Weight: No more than 25 tons Width: No more than 10.8 feet Upper glacis / frontal turret armor of at least 1 in thickness Side armor of at least 3/8 in (10mm) thickness Power/weight ratio of at least 12 hp / ton No more than 6 crew members Primary armament capable of utilizing both anti-armor and high explosive rounds  
      Other relevant information:
      Any tank should be designed to operate against either of the Cascade Republic's likely opponents (California or Deseret) The primary heavy machine gun is the M2, the primary medium machine gun is the M240. Use of one or both of these as coaxial and/or secondary armament is encouraged. The secret archives of the Cascade Republic are available for your use. Sadly, there are no running prewar armored vehicles, the best are some rusted hulks that have long been stripped of usable equipment. (Lima Tank Plant ate a 500 kt ground burst) Both HEAT and APFSDS rounds are in testing. APCR is the primary anti-armor round of the Cascade Republic. Either diesel or gasoline engines are acceptable, the Cascade Republic is friendly with oil producing regions in Canada (OOC: Engines are at about a late 1940s/early 50s tech level) The adaptability of the tank to other variants (such as SPAA, SPG, recovery vehicle, etc.) is preferred but not the primary metric that will be used to decide on a design. Ease of maintenance in the field is highly important. Any designs produced will be compared against the M4 Sherman and M3 Stuart (for medium/heavy and light tank), as these blueprints are readily available, and these tanks are well within the Cascade Republic's manufacturing capabilities.  
    • By Sovngard
      Meanwhile at Eurosatory 2018 :
      The Euro Main Battle Tank (EMBT), a private venture project intended for the export market.

  • Create New...