A crack is a simple well-understood term. Redefining it does not make it 'not' a crack.
Jentz does not elaborate.
A crack is indeed a simple and well-understood term. The question is: Would we say "Plate X is cracked", if merely the surface had a shallow crack or would we say only use that phrase if the crack went throught he entire plate at atleast one point?Michael Kenny wrote: ↑10 Feb 2019 23:41A crack is a simple well-understood term. Redefining it does not make it 'not' a crack.
The key is would such damage result in return for factory rebuild?
Let the readers decide if this is flaking or a crack.
The maximum range a 6pdr will penetrate the TIGER1 front depends on the projectile quality in question. Short range requires high striking velocity. A good quality projectile will stay intact or break up late during the perforation, while a poor quality projectile will shatter leaving only a dent.Avalancheon wrote: ↑10 Feb 2019 17:53Yeah, that definitely looks like an instance of frontal petaling. Given the T/D ratios involved, thats not so surprising. I'm guessing the 6 pdr shots were all made at close range and from 0 degree obliquity. Whats the maximum range that the 6 pdr L52 gun could penetrate a Tigers front armor? 400 meters, 500 meters?critical mass wrote: ↑10 Feb 2019 16:04Notice the presence of "petals" around all the impacts. Petals only form in very ductile failing modes of armor. This was probably aided by the penetrator geometry and quality (capped and pointed nose, enhancing ductile failing modes) as well as by the rather high ambient temperatures while staging this test (not yet within the brittle temperature range of the target material).
Since we're on the subject, I'd like to ask you a question about crew survivability. In general, CM, can it be said that spalling from non-penetrating hits is less dangerous than ductile hole growth and petaling failures?
Its a relevant question, because there was at least one instance when a 25 pounder gun knocked out a Tiger tank from the flank.
Yeah, it looks like the explosion resulted in the bursting of one of the hulls weld seams. Do you know where this picture was taken from?Yoozername wrote: ↑21 Feb 2019 05:35This image shows the effects of an internal ammunition explosion. The area has a 4 round rack for 88mm ammunition. Almost certainly there was some HE rounds there. A propellant 'explosion' would not cause this extent of damage. The blast rips away the roof and also the thin armor above the tracks. Apparently cutting the track and damaging a roadwheel. I would imagine any crew would be dead or severely wounded. This Tiger may have been low on ammunition, and it did not have extensive internal fires.