"Hetzer" (Jagdpanzer 38) Armor Quality, allegedly 50% the value of RHA?

[critical mass]

I suppose You mean "the latter" (APBC)?
Within certain limits, both had their advantages. A well made and soldered on cap (not crimped or screwed onto the projectile nose!) assists in high obliquity impact. But this depends a lot on the terminal velocity. Generally, if You opt in for relatively low to moderate terminal velocity (550-600 m/s and below), APBC is superior, if You intent for higher velocity than 600-650m/s, You will need APCBC, or better even, subcalibre.

[ThatZenoGuy]

whether or not Warthunder relates to this is not relevant. At leas to me. They are a gaming enterprise and should be free to do whatever they want.

Well, they are supposed to be historically accurate, so stuff like that always needs to be under consideration. ;D

I believe the Soviets used APHE far into postwar, such as the Object 279?

On a similar note, the people that make Combat Mission feel the same way.

I see T34/85, using 1945 ammunition, poke holes through Panther glacis at 1000 meters and a side angle to boot. This is apparent in a scenario titled "The Myth of Invincibility'! The designers clearly have a bias IMO.

1000 meters!? Wasn't the Panther's glacis resistant to non-1945 122mm munitions?

[Yoozername]

1000 meters!? Wasn't the Panther's glacis resistant to non-1945 122mm munitions?

LOL! I would complain, but who would listen? My question is...If they can't even get WWII armor/penetrations realistic; Why would anyone think their Modern Armor modeling is any good at all? They used to have quite the forum with very good posters. Now? Eh, not so much.

The Soviets considered the 85mm and US 76 mm to be about equal in AP performance. Certainly there is easily available testing by the Allies against the Panther with 76mm weapons.

Empirical evidence suggests that JagdPanzer 38 glacis penetrations seemed to be rare. Side armor cracking in big jagged holes, and even bending away are apparent. Much like the highly sloped StuG upper armor, the angle is affording some protection.

My take is that the "Hetzer" designers just had to accept the minimum side protection against 20mm and ATR attack. IMO, it is sort of a Super-Marder more so than a "StuG'.

[ThatZenoGuy]

1000 meters!? Wasn't the Panther's glacis resistant to non-1945 122mm munitions?

LOL! I would complain, but who would listen? My question is...If they can't even get WWII armor/penetrations realistic; Why would anyone think their Modern Armor modeling is any good at all? They used to have quite the forum with very good posters. Now? Eh, not so much.

The Soviets considered the 85mm and US 76 mm to be about equal in AP performance. Certainly there is easily available testing by the Allies against the Panther with 76mm weapons.

Empirical evidence suggests that JagdPanzer 38 glacis penetrations seemed to be rare. Side armor cracking in big jagged holes, and even bending away are apparent. Much like the highly sloped StuG upper armor, the angle is affording some protection.

My take is that the "Hetzer" designers just had to accept the minimum side protection against 20mm and ATR attack. IMO, it is sort of a Super-Marder more so than a "StuG'.

Yeah its obvious the Hetzer's design is more to be a mobile anti-tank gun, a defensive weapon where you expect an attack from the front. Rather than the Stug, which was designed for assaults and assisting infantry.

[Peasant]

The Soviets considered the 85mm and US 76 mm to be about equal in AP performance. Certainly there is easily available testing by the Allies against the Panther with 76mm weapons.

Thats because soviets mostly tests the guns at 0° and 30° obliquity. The soviet 85mm is superior in penetration to the US 76mm gun in any other situation other than an attack of thick armour at low obliquity, and even then not by much.

For example, the US 76mm is completely powerless against Panther's lower glacis while the 85mm is able to defeat it at most combat ranges.

[Yoozername]

The Soviets considered the 85mm and US 76 mm to be about equal in AP performance. Certainly there is easily available testing by the Allies against the Panther with 76mm weapons.

Thats because soviets mostly tests the guns at 0° and 30° obliquity. The soviet 85mm is superior in penetration to the US 76mm gun in any other situation other than an attack of thick armour at low obliquity, and even then not by much.

For example, the US 76mm is completely powerless against Panther's lower glacis while the 85mm is able to defeat it at most combat ranges.

I said the 85mm penetrated the upper hull, at a thousand meters, and also at a side angle btw.

Seems tehe Soviet 85mm is more powerful than the US 90 mm?

[Peasant]

I said the 85mm penetrated the upper hull, at a thousand meters, and also at a side angle btw.

Seems tehe Soviet 85mm is more powerful than the US 90 mm?

I'm not sure whether you are referring to the video game or to real life scenario but I was talking about the latter. I'm not interested in whatever crimes against historical accuracy some game developer has committed to earn their money.

[Yoozername]

I said the 85mm penetrated the upper hull, at a thousand meters, and also at a side angle btw.

Seems tehe Soviet 85mm is more powerful than the US 90 mm?

I'm not sure whether you are referring to the video game or to real life scenario but I was talking about the latter. I'm not interested in whatever crimes against historical accuracy some game developer has committed to earn their money.

I am referring to actual data that applies to the simulation described. You stated something about another situation that had not much to do with it. Perhaps you thought it was apropo? Or made you feel smart? But now you are saying you don't care? Ok. Go make a graph about something.




Impacts from firing at the front armour with an 85 mm D-5 gun. No penetration was achieved at even point blank range.

https://warspot.ru/11907-strashnee-koshki-zverya-net

[Peasant]

I am referring to actual data that applies to the simulation described. You stated something about another situation that had not much to do with it. Perhaps you thought it was apropo? Or made you feel smart? But now you are saying you don't care? Ok. Go make a graph about something.




Impacts from firing at the front armour with an 85 mm D-5 gun. No penetration was achieved at even point blank range.

I've posted data about 85mm gun defeating panther's LFP at 1000m range before. Go look it up if you want. I don't like your tone so I'm not gonna continue this conversation. Bye.

[Yoozername]

Ok. Let me check if I need to do that... Do I need info on 85 mm penetrating LFP of Panther right now?....OK, no I don't...done. Thanks anyway.

[ThatZenoGuy]

IIRC the Panther D and A had thicker LFP, which could be resistant/immune to shoddy soviet shells. But the G and F had thinner plates there, which would make them more vulnerable.

[Peasant]

IIRC the Panther D and A had thicker LFP, which could be resistant/immune to shoddy soviet shells. But the G and F had thinner plates there, which would make them more vulnerable.

The document lists 65mm at 55° viewtopic.php?p=2268389#p2268389

[ThatZenoGuy]

IIRC the Panther D and A had thicker LFP, which could be resistant/immune to shoddy soviet shells. But the G and F had thinner plates there, which would make them more vulnerable.

The document lists 65mm at 55° viewtopic.php?p=2268389#p2268389

That'd result in a plate some 120mm or so thick, coupling how shells lose effectiveness on slopes and I'm not really believing an 85mm can penetrate that at 1000m, unless the Panther's armor was kinda 'meh', or the shell was of good quality.

The 50mm lower plate of the Panther G/F though, that I could believe being penetrated.

[Peasant]

That'd result in a plate some 120mm or so thick, coupling how shells lose effectiveness on slopes and I'm not really believing an 85mm can penetrate that at 1000m, unless the Panther's armor was kinda 'meh', or the shell was of good quality.

The 50mm lower plate of the Panther G/F though, that I could believe being penetrated.

Well, the thing is, if the target consisting of 65mm at 55° were equivalent to 120mm of vertical armour, I might've agreed with you. But it's not.

For estimating the equivalent thickness, matters not only the target qualities but also the gun+shell attacking it. Against the 85mm AP shell fired by this gun 65mm/55° would be equivalent to much less than 120mm, somewhere between 100-110mm/0°. These are thicknesses it can reliably defeat at up to 500-1000m. Key words being "reliably" and "defeat", by changing their exact definition you can get very different interpretation of results.

Since it made a hole in the armour at 1000m range (or, actually, with striking velocity equivalent to that for this shell at the distance of 1000m) this gun didnt completely defeat it though, as it managed to only make a hole less than diameter in size, without entering inside, indicating the effective thickness somewhere above what it can reliably "defeat" at that distance.

This whole "Terminal Ballistics" thing is very complicated, so just take my word for it: it is perfectly plausible that this can and did happen.

[ThatZenoGuy]

That'd result in a plate some 120mm or so thick, coupling how shells lose effectiveness on slopes and I'm not really believing an 85mm can penetrate that at 1000m, unless the Panther's armor was kinda 'meh', or the shell was of good quality.

The 50mm lower plate of the Panther G/F though, that I could believe being penetrated.

Well, the thing is, if the target consisting of 65mm at 55° were equivalent to 120mm of vertical armour, I might've agreed with you. But it's not.

For estimating the equivalent thickness, matters not only the target qualities but also the gun+shell attacking it. Against the 85mm AP shell fired by this gun 65mm/55° would be equivalent to much less than 120mm, somewhere between 100-110mm/0°. These are thicknesses it can reliably defeat at up to 500-1000m. Key words being "reliably" and "defeat", by changing their exact definition you can get very different interpretation of results.

Since it made a hole in the armour at 1000m range (or, actually, with striking velocity equivalent to that for this shell at the distance of 1000m) this gun didnt completely defeat it though, as it managed to only make a hole less than diameter in size, without entering inside, indicating the effective thickness somewhere above what it can reliably "defeat" at that distance.

This whole "Terminal Ballistics" thing is very complicated, so just take my word for it: it is perfectly plausible that this can and did happen.

Unless I am mistaken, the only projectiles that can 'reduce' effective armor thickness for slopes are either massively larger diameter shells, and APFSDS projectiles. The 85mm might overmatch the 50mm plate a lot, but for a 60-65mm plate I'm just not seeing it. Especially with Soviet quality control and shell design.

Isn't there a picture on this very thread which shows non-pens to the LFP?