Conqueror vs E100 side | tungsten carbide APDS
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 жов 2023
- Simulation of Conqueror tank projectile hitting E100 hull side armor
120mm L1 (Tungsten Carbide core APDS) at 1400 m/s
vs
75 mm skirt + 120mm side armor at 25 degrees
120mm Ordnance QF gun (L1) muzzle velocity - 1463 m/s, 1400 m/s at 0.7 km - Наука та технологія
I knew there'd be no way in hell this shot would perforate.
Yeah, the round is high hardness tungsten so it shattered on the outer layer. Cool to see it in motion though :)
Nope. High-velocity fragments hit the actual hull side and caused spalling. @@quitreadingmyname7615
That angle that the projectile hit was so perfect I bet it has a value much higher than 75mm and just absolutely took most of the projectile's energy. The shell was following the curve which didn't help as it just encountered more thickness as it tired to get through.
About +130mm at this angle to completely stop the conqueror's APDS.
An issue with carbides is that they tend to be strong but brittle, this one of the reasons why they shifted from tungsten carbide over to tungsten alloy for sub caliber penetrators.
the damage of the spalling on the inner armored side plate is scary…
These are just the side skirts btw, the crew would prb have more armor inside protecting them from the stallings. That won’t stop the crew from experiencing shockwaves and deafness from the impact though.
Have you ever considered using a cutting plane down the center plane during your renders? I feel like that would be very helpful in visualizing the effects of nonpenetrating shots as well as partial penetrations and even some full penetrations
in this program the cross-sectional view is very buggy
What kind of program?@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174
Was that spall a bug or did that shallow hit seriously cause so much spalling?
there is a small crack in the inner part of the armor and that is where the few fragments came from
@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174
I see, thanks for clearing that up
@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174Unrealistic , the armour must be out of glass to create shrapnel from that little hit . Just fragments of that APDS round hit that plate , penetrated not even 50% .
@@5co756 What does "light hit" mean? People believe that Soviet "big" guns caused spalling of German armor. Do you think that a cloud of several kilograms of tungsten at enormous speeds will transfer less energy to the armor?
@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 You said it right , people believe this . 😅
And the biggest junk of metal thumbling around that hit the plate was at about 350m/s , not really at enormous speeds . I'm surprised it made it that far , but the spalling is just unreal . There's a short 75mm AP round heavier and faster than this tungsten fragment btw .
It's actually interesting that shattered shell eroded the second plate almost half way through.
kinetic energy, people often forget that shattering does not disappear the core, it only changes its form.
The E100 was not intentionally designed the fight narrow subcaliber projectiles, but thats highly effective.
The 75mm skirt is thick enough to serve as a destabilizing plate, and once the projectile has a lot of pitch and yaw from that initial angular impact, it's penetration is much lower due to not just reduced velocity but the much greater cross section presented to the main side armor.
Can you please do Conqueror vs IS-7 sloped side armor? In the 50s tank industry around the world started deteriorating in favor of armored pillboxes that had little to no actual armor against contemporary anti-tank means
Wow, E100 surprised me
Now do Maus versus the average European bridge.
I always loved the E-100 for those side pannels its a very cool and smart idea to add armor. The pure thickness makes this honestly rival some cold war spaced armore layouts which this is of course as well. It should defeat most chemical penetrators and even most AP/ APDS rounds i would love to see how a early or low callibet APFSDS performs against it
And it adds a ton of weight to the vehicle due to the 75mm thickness
@@LordEladan not like they cared about weight while building this anyway
Tis nothin but scratch.
The war thunder shots are cool. We want to hold Gaijin accountable for their crimes of scamming us.
Kind of a weird sim to go for again. Would it be an easy pen if it hit on the less-angled bit of the 75mm skirt? I'd have thought that'd be more of a will-it-or-won't-it sim.
if it hit the less angled skirt part it would probably break into maybe few big pieces, but there are also tracks lower down.
How good of an assumptions is the grounding around the impact site on the spaced armor? I'm curious what affect the armor being cantilevered may have, if any.
It would be interesting to see this but instead with the Cheiftans 120mm APDS
I saw the Conqueror at Kubinka tanks museum... Its gun is HUGE
Hydrogen atom but %999999 speed of light
could you simulate LOSAT round?
Damn the E100 sideskirts alone are 75mm thick???! Plus rounded.
In war thunder the whole entire armor plating would just fell off😂
I mean, from what ive saw from alot of simulations, APDS doesn’t really struggle when it comes to sloped armor, from what I’ve seen British APDS shots do seem to break up a-lot whenever initially penetrating.
I expected not to penetrate but still, amount of energy of these shrapnels is astonishing.
The power of spaced armor vs. tungsten carbide.
well it did even better than i expected...
btw, do you think that the 486mm flat pen is accurate on this round at point balnk range from war thunder?
From what I remember primary UK documents also rate the gun in the 400mm range when it comes to flat plates, so I think it might be plausible.
I think so and it could be checked, but I need a target with 450mm of armor
@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 can't you just make a block of that thickness?
@@o-hogameplay185 there will be no fun. Conqueror vs armor block?
I was thinking about some kind of battleship
There's a part of the Obj. 279's turret which is 460mm thick CHA, If i'm not mistaken it's below the trunion or next to it, and it's kinda flat.
Impressive, but have you tried jelly beans at mach 10? 😄
Type 94 37mm AT gun vs T-26 gun turret front at 500m. It should penetrate but I want to see the after-armor effects.
Or Type 1 47mm AT gun vs M4 Sherman side at 250m
WE BARELY EVEN SCRATCHED THEM
That is one thick side armor
would it be interesting to simulate anti-tank mines?
Possibly but I would have to spend several hours at the computer to make track model
Reminder that conqueror has a similar gun to the M103
The M103 also had a prototype APDS, but it was abandoned.
AP has no such problems with spaced armor.
@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174Could you maybe do this (m103 ap vs e100) next please?
@@toshibami I I could if the idea is liked
@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174i like it!
"We just dinged 'em!"
I could bet that this would break the track effectively disabling the tank.
And i knew it once again. :D
World of Tanks: Critical Hit!
Funny mustache man in his bunker: Finally, our tanks have proven nearly indestructible against enemy tanks.
Officer: *walks in and hands over a report
Funny mustache man in his bunker: What do you mean it got targeted and obliterated by a dozen B-17s? Quick, draw plans for a tank with twice the armor so it can withstand bombs too!
Probability of hitting E-100 sized target by B-17s would be negligible. You'd need entire strategic bomber force to get rid of one tank. They went through it with casemates in Normandy already, it doesn't really work.
@@czwarty7878bunker? Or casemates?
@@AKUJIVALDO casemate, bunker, whatever. Typical reinforced fire position casemate (a reinforced concrete bunker for a 50-75mm cannon) would be roughly the size of E-100 tank. The tests USAAF did showed they'd need to employ entire huge B-17 unit to have a chance of a *single* bomb actually hitting one such bunker, and it wouldn't exactly be a guaranteed kill. And we're talking about just some random stationary casemate position on Omaha, not a superheavy tank that moves around and has a platoon of Wirbelwinds linked to it at all times. Whether E-100 would be a profitable choice to employ tactically can be debatable, but it definitely wouldn't be an easy target for aircrafts like people like to imagine, that's for sure.
If you're interested more in that bombers vs bunkers topic search for "US WWII Bombers" channel here on UA-cam, they have a great video about these tests of using B-17 for bunker busting in Normandy
@Slight- sure, but they're even more vulnerable to AA and still inaccurate. 1-2% chance of hit (not even a kill) with a single SAP rocket per mission. Again requiring an entire squadron with multiple missions to have any chance of damaging the tank
Air superiority was more useful for starving enemy units by destroying trucks, trains, staff cars and disrupting transports than actually killing tanks
@Slight-
Lmao, bombing a single tank was pretty much impossible, let alone one as tough as an E-100.
The T-54's APDS?
German engineers: We put an impressive skirt armor to the side of our new tank
Tank crews: So it would be light and easy to replace,right?
Engineers:……
Tanker: Right?
user forgot to put supports on the top of the armor. so it flexes backwards
What software did you use?
Ansys
If this shell shatters against leopard 1 UFP i would not expect it to go through E100
software name?
This is why spaced armour is much effective against KE projectiles, NOT Chemical one such as ATGM and HEAT.
Now vs some early APFSDS.
Cool
Bro didn’t even fully penetrate the upper layer
Damn so the side skirt of e100 is better then the frontal turret of is7 xd there was a video of conqueror vs is7 turret it did penetrate
Regarding a recent update to warthunder, i think it would be interesting to simulate penetration values of sabot petals from various different calibres (30mm, 57mm, 105mm, and 120mm)?
PLS WHAT IS THUS WEBSITE
I thought it would penetrate no problem but I guess I was wrong.
Early APDS simply could not handle sloped armor.
I have a hard time believing that those small fragments would be able to crack that steel and cause spalling like that, even with poor steel quality.
The core hasn't evaporated, what you see are just larger fragments.
Just a little angle and that would do Absolutely 0 damage to the inside
T34(American) vs super conqueror ufp
Conquerer vs upper frontal plate of E-100 at a 5 deg side angle.
The E100 upf is untouchable by any tank kinetic weapon until the first Abrams and Leo2.
That’s the side armor? Lol.
E 100 hull > Maus hull
E 100 just needed a proper turret, not the "SHOOT ME HERE" Maus turret, and a good engine transmissiom compartment/combo to a havw a truly fearsome super heavy.
I am just talking from an engineering perspective, not talking about a war winning tank, calm down lol
From an engineering perspective both are braindead and conceptually two of the worst tank designs in history
@@outrageoussharpie4107 The execution of the brain dead tank that is the E-100 is better than the maus.
Especially considering Porsche wanting to use a hybrid system to move the tank which not only increases mass but makes use of expensive and uncommon copper. While the E-100 used a conventional drive system and its suspension system was intended to be shared across many designs. And the E-100 gave better levels of protection for at least 40 tons less mass (Unless your shooting the rear)
meanwhile the IS-7 that came out 2 years later with half the mass, 3x the speed, much better armor, and a comparable gun that was semi autoloaded: *nice try*
@@jammygamer8961 120+ tonnes is still an absurd weight for a tank, it's logistically and strategically idiotic, there's a reason noone else ever bothered with a tank that big and it isn't German ingenuity
Real engineering is about designing something to be effective within sensible constraints; the Maus and E-100 are when the engineers pretend there are no constraints.
@@outrageoussharpie4107 Yes
75mm skirt??? not 30mm???
Lol why 30
Altough the high kinetic energy on this round it is kinda weak 🧐
in WOT : everything pens E100 side unless HE/HESH/HEAT
in Wot everything is bouncing off the chieftain turret even though it should go through
Damn.
Would’ve probably broken a track maybe
😮
No wonder gaijin nerf the apds
In WT this would kill the e100 lol
Anti spoiler spall liner
Aaauughh
Thicc
THIS*
Damn, tungsten carbide cores suck against angled and spaced armour.
damn this british 120mm gun is a total joke lol
It could penetrate IS-7 turret with an ease, so definitely no.
Deutsche Ingenieurskunst :D
Putting a crap ton of steel on a tank that isn't going to go anywhere or accomplish anything isn't ingenuity
ok @@outrageoussharpie4107