FV4005 vs T54 | 183mm HESH Simulation | Overpressure & Armour Piercing Simulation
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 лют 2025
- The 183mm HESH of the FV4005 was designed to knock out any soviet tank of the 40's and 50's with a single hit. The massive 72kg HESH projectile had enough explosive mass to perforate around 75mm of steel, while being able to create spalling through plates exceeding 200mm thick with its shockwave effect.
While it was designed in response to the IS heavy tanks, their design meant that only the scabbing effect would be present, hence a target with an exposed hull roof was chosen to show both the HESH and HE overpressure effects. The simulation represents an impact on the turret cheeks, but to increase accuracy and reduce computational time, the model was made symmetric.
The amazing T54 artwork in the thumbnail is credited to: @Tank Encyclopedia
TO NOTE: The video was broken into 2 simulations to maximise the accuracy of both effects. No diagrams could be found of the L1 hesh so the design used is a scaled up version of the L43A1 HESH projectile. Some shrapnel and fragments are not shown as element deletion is used.
Material properties, armour, and projectile geometries were all taken from literature:
[1] RHA: core.ac.uk/dow...
[2] Air: osf.io/f8awq/d...
[3] RDX: www.researchga...
[4] L43A1: www.militaryim...
[5] T54 Armour: imgur.com/rW4Moq8
[6] Lethal Pressure Levels: www.sccm.org/g...
Abaqus FEA was used with a Coupled Eulerian-Lagrangian model, with Johnson-Cook material properties for steel, ideal gas for air, and JWL for RDX.
The added analysis is, in my opinion, quite a nice addition. Sometimes it can be a bit hard to judge what precisely is going on as someone with minimal knowledge of how these sims work.
Hesh go boom
Tank no go vroom
Hesh impact simulation done simple
Oh brother……🤐
@number7red619 i mean its worth guessing its a 1/2 chance he could get it right
Also considering that there is no spin on the shell and its not a perfect model the results would prob be worse for the poor t54 crew, one of the late IS series might have been a better test since afaik it was the threat of those heavy tanks that made the british army consider producing such a monsterous gun and the 120mm they ended up using.
Yes it would be worse, as things like optics, gun/turret drives, hatches, tracks etc not being included which would have been damaged. A simulation with an IS tank wouldnt have been able to show overpressure effects as there isnt much of an exposed hull roof.
Out of curiosity, how would spin affect the results? Thanks! Also hai SY, love you
@@A407RAC the more the plastic explosive is in contact with the armour the more damage it does. And spin makes it spread out more when it hits a target, and so does more damage
@@jacobkingsford5209 perfect explanation, thank you most kindly my got sir! Your name befits you King.
@@SYsimulations это тупиковый путь развития. Вы&бы порекомендовали 305 mm или авиабомбу. Поэтому стали развивать кумулятивные снаряды и динамическую защиту.
Its Good to see you back again with the simulations! (:
And can you test the 183 HESH with a tank with ERA? It would be interesting for me to see how the ERA performs.
Godd ..boy
its not HESH,its 🅱️ *ESH*
I don’t really know, but I predict that ERA is highly effective against HESH. HESH mainly relies on physical contact with armor to transmit shockwave into thhe armor, and ERA might prematurely detonate the round, making it just about as effective as a normal HE round.
Although, I could be wrong.
I like these 🅱️ESH simulations
haha yes
🅱ESH
yeah, it really 🅱️ashes in the tank's armour.
What does the b stand for
@@Astro_Zed HESH is the BESH
Can you create a simulation of my parents getting back together? Thanks!
Just Pray to JESUS, Miriam and St. Joseph for that to happen..
maybe
fluid simulations are much simpler than marriage. good luck.
@@rw9737 not only to pray but of course, to also follow His wills
Are you sure you exist within that simulated world?
Your simulations are so comprehensive and informative, you've done our good for our hero 183mm 🅱️ESH
I saw a test result of a 105mm High Explosive Plastic (HEP --US term for British HESH) against a heavy log barricade directly in front of and close to an armored car (thin armor, of course) with a 37mm (?) gun turret.
First was a shot using a regular impact-nose-fuzed HE round, which blew a small hole in the logs and displaced a couple of logs around the impact point, but no damage to the car.
Second was a HEP round. No more logs except the bottom layer bolted directly into the ground. I didn't even see a piece of the other logs in the picture of the still-undamaged armored car from the front.
Third, another HEP round into the front upper hull of the car. The turret was still in the picture, but torn off and on the ground several yards behind the car body. The front of the car hull was blown completely away and opened up like a tin soup can with a large fire-cracked detonated inside of it. There was some other pieces, including one front wheel, a few yards behind the car off to one side. Light armor does not help against this kind of projectile at all.
HESH is extremely overrated and misunderstood.
Light armor wouldnt help against any kind of projectile fired from a tank gun. There is very good reason why HESH never really caught on and is currently being phased out. Its application is extremely limited, and in a modern setting its far less effective than MP rounds currently in use. It was made out of the idea that HE does sufficient damage to heavy armor that is otherwise very difficult to penetrate. It kinda works in theory but not really in practice. In practice the effect on a tank between a regular HE and HESH is virtually the same and is almost entirely limited to external damage. When it comes to barriers, regular HE with a relative modern fuze, is actually far superior. HESH will always invariably detonate on the surface. HE can be set to detonate with a delay (something we've been doing since WW1), which would allow it to penetrate into or through a fortification or wall and detonate in it or behind it. Something HESH cant do and something all modern HE-MP rounds are made to do.
The idea that HESH is good at blowing holes in walls for breaching is also false. Breeching HE rounds use the impact-delay function to detonate inside the barrier. Likewise this makes HESH rather awful at destroying fortifications, its always a surface detonation, which does next to nothing to the structural integrity of any half-decent fortification. Thats why no one uses HESH. Only the British did, just as they stuck to the rifled gun. Reality has finally caught up with them and all the fanboys who know next to nothing about weapons are crying because the Brits are done putting blind nationalism over common sense and science and are switching to L55.
@@rolandlee6898 Against homogenous armour HESH works quite well, but since we have moved on to composite layered systems they are largely ineffective against (modern) tanks. It's not designed for breaching walls but sending shockwaves through it creating spalling and damage on the inside of the target, including concrete structures. It was originally designed for concrete structures and fortifications and is why it has been used for so long.
HESH always dentonates on the surface if the object is rigid enough to deform the projectile and set off the fuse. It will go through a thin skinned vehicle like any HE projectile. A standard HE round will not penetrate reinforced concrete much before it detonates anyway, and the shockwave energy is not transferred to the target efficiently. By spreading the contact area for the explosive, more energy can be imparted from detonation into the target. (EDIT: This is why HESH is more effective at an angle because it spreads out over a larger area.)
MP (multipurpose) are a form of heat round not primarily used for tanks but light anti vehicle/personelle/material uses instead of standard HE rounds, since the Abrams tank only carries 40 rounds of ammunition. MP rounds are less effective anti fortification rounds than HESH but MP are good enough for most purposes.
The question is not how effective HESH is but do you need an anti-fortification round on an MBT which requires a specific rifiled gun and you have limited ammo space to work with? Generally no. But for specialised anti-fortification vehicles yes.
@@Bordpie Im well aware of the principle. Im saying HE/MP rounds do the same in most cases. HESH was an interesting idea but has very little actual benefit.
It will do nothing to any reasonable concrete structure that a HE/MP wouldnt do just as well. Any concrete structure intended to protect from heavy fire will be at least 1 meter thick. A HESH round exploding on the surface will do practically nothing. In fact a delayed impact HE will cause substantially more damage than HESH as it will penetrate into the wall and detonate within it. And it will actually produce superior spalling effects in this scenario as well (which is not a reliable factor btw, spalling decreases exponentially as the thickness of the target increases).
There is no literature that would demonstrate that HESH is or was any more effective than standard HE at anything whatsoever. There is plenty of evidence to suggest programable fuzes on HE/MP is a far superior option
@@rolandlee6898I’d expect HEP rounds to transfer a great deal more shock into what they strike due to the way the plastic explosive deforms onto the target. This should make it useful for knocking down structures or blowing large holes into light armor or concrete. IE, fortifications.while there are times that a timed warhead detonating inside is optimal, HEP, or HESH, can provide a means of actually demolishing fortifications that HE struggles to while still having effective terminal effects on people inside said fortifications. It is a niche role, as modern tanks shouldn’t be especially vulnerable to HEP, but it is real. It’s also a round that we really don’t understand all that well compared to say, HEAT munitions.
At it’s prime, especially in Israel’s various wars, HESH proved quite effective.
@@josepetersen7112 It wouldnt transfer more shock. Actually less. A HE with delay would be fully embedded in the wall before detonating, resulting in a higher contact surface area, more pressure and less material between the explosion and the other side of the barrier and thus higher change of breaking through. Pressure always goes the path of least resistance, an in the case of HESH thats away from the target, not into it, making you rely only on the shock front propagation to do damage, which is is not reliable and the effectiveness of that depends on the amount of explosive and properties of the material. The idea that spreading it thin makes it more effective is false. What squashing in HESH is for is to make direct contact with the surface, not to spread as thin as possible, thus allowing the shock front to directly transfer into the target. But that is a very unreliable, inefficient and inconsistent mechanism if you want to do damage.
Simple illustration of the difference - putting explosives onto a rock, smear it as you please, and expecting the shock alone to break it or drilling a hole and putting it into the rock? Which one does more damage to the rock? You will quickly realize that the volume and geometry of the charge when putting it into the rock is a far more effective method, even in terms of shock transfer.
HESH was a neat idea, but was never effective or better at anything, thats why it never was used by anyone that didnt use a British gun (which itself was trash as well). It made no sense. Brits stuck with it for the same reason they stick to other nonsensical things - national pride and straight up BSing themselves into acceptance and delusions of long gone grandeur.
And when it comes to light armor, again, most HE rounds (and their fragmentation) will easily penetrate most light armor and/or cause behind armor effects on contact detonation, and/or cause significant damage to render the vehicle inoperable. As would HESH, but HE/MP is more versatile than HESH... so why would anyone use HESH? Well, they wouldnt - hence they didnt, anywhere, ever.
FV4005 itself demonstrates to what levels of absurdity you had to go make it effective.
I think you need to simulate the spin of the rifling for these HESH rounds. The spin plays a part in the effectiveness of HESH
did u mean BESH?
@@GooberNumber69420 HESH *
@@raidenthememer4360 *BESH
Hey can you do Centurion mk 3's 105mm HESH against T-54s? In the Yom Kippur war, the Israeli Centurions used HESH shells against Syrian T-54s. Although I am not sure whether they were Centurion Mk 3 or 5, I'd love to see 105 or 120mm HESH shell effect on Syrian T-54s ( if I have got the facts right).
Neither the Mk3 nor the Mk5 had a 105mm gun though, but i'm pretty sure the Israelis did have 105mm Centurions, just not sure which model it was.
@@rifraf276 you're right. Neither the Mk 3 nor the Mk 5 had 105mm guns. They had the 84mm 20 pounder gun. I think it was Centurion mk 10 which was armed with 105mm Royal Ordnance L7A1 gun. I am pretty sure there other variants with L7A1 gun too.
@@namespacestd131 mk 5/2 I believe is the first mark to have it.
The Centurions used by Israel in the Yom Kippur war were the “Sho’t kal” versions upgraded with the 105mm gun and a Continental diesel engine.
@@namespacestd131 In 1973 all IDF Centurions were armed with the 105mm.
I love these full models with overpressure and having both turret and roof armor penetration modeled
Good to see you again!
Thank you for your content, as always!
I would love to see some battleship type shells vs battleship type armour, see how different big guns would have sized up against different countries premier armour
You wouldn't even need the shrapnel to render that T54 entirely unusable and I kinda find that mind blowing.
The shockwave from the 183 was so strong that it shattered the armour. If you are sitting in that turret, it would be even more mind-blowing.
@@kerbodynamicx472 literally mind-blowing.
This new format with the added descriptions is awesome man !
This is some next level stuff, its amazing to see have a glimpse into how these work
Even mostly inacurate or near by indirect hits would be a mobility kill
have you heard about hitboxes?
Have you heard of sex?
Годное моделирование. Осталось добавить в расчёты влияние броневого подбоя на улавливание вторичных осколков.
183мм превратит любой танк а мусор. Даже если это не БОПС. Сварные швы все полопаются.
@@voviy333 Шов на Т-55 прочнее основной брони.Да и попасть из 183-мм орудия в танк...А больше одного выстрела оно сделать вряд ли сумеет...
The High Explosive Spongecake, chocolate and Hazelnut shell (HESH).
Depending on the tank, I wouldn't be surprised if a near miss would be enough to kill with overpressure. Its mad how powerful that shell is.
I don't know about overpressure, but it's quite probable it would be a mobility kill if it hit close enough to the tracks
A near miss wouldn't even cause a concussion. Armor is great at resisting and dissipating high explosive pressure. HESH relies almost entirely on a perfect direct impact hit in order to function properly. If the impact is at a great angle, against the thick armor of the T-54, it wouldn't do anything more than leave a scruff mark. If the armor was thin (
@@johnhighway9397 its 17kg of RDX. You just need to get it in the right postcode!
When I say near miss, I mean near. I don't mean dropping the shell 50 yards away, I mean it's about 2 or 3 feet away. I would imagine a thinly armoured vehicle like a BMP or a BTR70 would not take kindly to 17kg of exploding Playdough going off a couple of feet away.
@@samspeed6271
My good sir, this is not a generic high explosive shell, it's HESH. If you "miss" and hit the ground next to a tank, most of that shell's explosive energy will be directed into the earth. An infantryman might be killed if he's standing next to it, but a tank or APC won't even notice.
We aren't putting 17kg of RDX into a box and detonating it. We are directing the explosion towards what the shell is hitting, similar to a shaped charge.
@@johnhighway9397 that is indeed true, a hesh round would direct most of the energy into the ground, however I believe that this shell in particular has enough residual energy to at least damage a light armored vehicle if close enough, like probably 1 meter away
The analysis is great. Have you ever considered doing a voice reveal? You would have interesting points to go over that are more difficult in only text. Alao love your content man
when I opened the FV4005 in war thunder and wanted to check the damage done to the T-54
Just so you understand, the impact force of the 183mm (without explosion, literally just the force of the shell smacking into the tank) is roughly the equivalent of 24kg of tnt. Literally the shell force is about as powerful as the explosion that comes after the fuse.
Him: makes highly detailed bullet simulator
Me: “bullet go brrrr”
It would be cool to see the position of crew members and different components of the tank so we can better understand what’s going on
"Yea but where the fuck are we gonna find something to shoot it from"
FV4005: hey
It takes out the turret with spalling, and though the driver avoids that, just the pressure takes care of the driver. HESH is truly fearsome.
It’s good to remember that overpressure doesn’t necessarily need to kill the crew to knock them out. It can still rupture eardrums and that kind of stuff
They test fired a few of these at a Conqueror tank and even hits that never defeated the armour pretty much wrecked all the equipment inside the vehicle!
What I would love to see is a simulation of the pressure effect of an APHE shell detonating inside a tank.
As was shown in testing, the bursting charge does not significantly increase the damage from fragments, as the shrapnel travels along the same line as the hull/shell fragments. This would imply that the bursting charge was not very useful.
And yet, all nations bar Britain used them throughout the war, despite such shells being more complex to produce, have less penetration and are more likely to shatter.
My hypothesis is that the overpressure from even a small amount of HE-filler, such as is found in a 75mm shell, creates a very powerful pressure effect when detonated in an enclosed space like a tank compartment.
I would guess it would be fatal for the crew, but even if is not, it would burst eardrum and cause concussion for sure, thus putting the tank out of action.
It would be great to have that tested.
I don't think it's that the charge isn't powerful, the issue is the charge has to be surrounded by such a thick mass of steel as only a steel shell of very high mass can still punch through armour. High explosives in fact impart a huge amount of energy to this mass of steel but because the mass of steel is so much greater than the mass of a thin walled howitzer shell the fragments are at a relatively low velocity but energy is still huge. Also the timing has to be REALLY good despite extreme deceleration, if it detonates too soon it spoils penetration, too late and it doesn't really increase the cone of fragmentation.
The British had been in the fight the longest and had bitter experience of shells detonating too soon so spoiling penetration, I think this caused an institutional aversion that they just couldn't shake off. And they were forced to use shells without HE filler and found - in practice - that they seemed to work far better than theory would suggest. One reason for this is the success of fire on tanks is generally determined by how many shots it takes to ignite the tank's ammunition and overpressure (while very deadly to crews) is far less likely to ignite the ammunition.
Also, the British war capacity was probably the most stressed of all the allied powers, it just did not have the size or scale the US or even Soviet production, so adding extra steps like a HE core for their anti-tank ammunition was a substantial cost for them. The USSR had production woes but it was far more an organisational challenge, the Brits just did not have much capacity and needed to cut every corner they could get away with cutting.
A HE charge is nice to have, but you can just get away with not having it.
You are overestimating the power of the explosive filling in an APHE or APCBC-HE shell. The German 75mm APCBC shell only had a 19 gram bursting charge. That would not hurt anyone's eardrums, it was the same explosive power as a German 20mm cannon shell. The Sherman 75mm APCBC shell had 66 grams of TNT filling, which is about the equivalent of an American pineapple hand grenade. It would create shrapnel but not overpressure because their is many places in a tank that are not air tight, like the bow gunner area and turret area. The American 90mm APHE round however had 0.44 pounds of explosive filling, which is the equivalent of an American 60mm HE mortar shell exploding inside the tank. That would cause many casualties
@@chadmysliviec8449 I'm not sure you understand how much power is in those measly 19 grams of HE filler. It is enough to shatter a hardened, and quite thick, block of steel for one. That's a LOT of power, and thus a lot of noise.
Have you ever played with firecrackers? Or fired a handgun or rifle? Both of those are only a few grams of explosive, and not even high-explosive, and both can cause permanent hearing injuries when in the open. And like I said , that's only maybea fouth the amount of a significantly less powerful, and thus loud, explosive than in a bursting charge. I guarantee that if you fire a 7.62 or 5.56 nato round inside of a tank you will at the very least completely deafen and disorient the crew. Hearing injury seems pretty much inevitable and ruptured eardrums is definitely on the table. Because the tank doesn't have to be perfectly airtight to amplify the effect of a blast. A mostly enclosed box, which the tank is, even with a hole in the armour and a hatch open, is more than sufficient to severely amplify the blast.
Very nice and detailed simulations, would be cool if you can do a video of an APFSDS shell vs bmp's highly angled upper front plate
See his S-tank simulations
"Crew knocked out!"
Does T-54 have podboy (antiradiation and spalling protection) or it's added in later models?
It was added in the T-55A varaint.
Yeah T-55A
In this case it won't help
@Thomas Vavrusco we asked about spall liner of T-54/55 series not that sorry
Not sure, if that was suggested before but I wonder how effective a 50-250kg bomb (half the weight in TNT) would be against a medium tank of the second WW2 with 30-45mm of side armor, with or without upper hull sponsons. Tiger and Panthers were apperently destroyed by 75mm HE shells hitting below the sponsons, penetrating the sponsons floor armor.
I guess side skirts could protect a tank from that happening but might also help to protect the thin armor from the overpressure of a nearby explosion.
Can you do one with HESH against modern NERA and the RHA+textolite composite used on some Soviet MBTs
I overlook the fact of overpressure and spalling a lot, it still blows my mind that you dont neccessarily need to penetrate the armour, just give it a big enough blast to rip the back of it up
The HESH round always seems so brutal!
Nowadays it's obsolete against modern ballistic protection.
@@rafulrichkovalesky-royek2050 launches it above the mantlet*
New sub i almost watched all of your videos!
I was reading Zaloga's book Osprey Vanguard # 29 on the M47 and M48 Patton tank pg:30. and even though its not well know mostly they go on about the only American tank battle in Vietnam between PT76 tanks there was another acording to him. Quote from the book: The only other armoured vehicle confrontation in Vietnam occurred later in the war when an M728 Combat Engineer Vehicle mangled an NVA T-54 at close range with a single round of 165mm anti-bunker ammunition. Now I believe him he reads all the archives to make his books but don't understand why its not on Wiki. With this vid I can imagine pretty much the same thing happening with the M728 165mm anti bunker ammunition.
This guy is the 🅱️ESH
Keep up the great videos like this
I love those plastic explosive crumpets, they're downright devastating
wow GREAT VIDEOS!!! but I would like to hear sound effects, for greater realism
Great work as always, I was wondering if you could be convinced to do a simulation of HEAT and HE hitting builds, to show the difference in effect on such targets. Particularly a comparison of M830 HEAT vs 3OF26 HE-FRAG.
I have no idea what application is this, how do they simulate this or how accurate is the simulation, but i still enjoy the vids...
So the driver is splattered and the turret crew are minced...
Reduced to a pink paste
if there are some shrapnels inside turrets "likely" to injure crew, you could add note like: btw this small piece of shrapnel is going 50m/s or so
This is so awesome!
Conclusion: Any surviving crew member are likely temporarely disabled due to involuntary bowel movement.
"Big Bada Boom" -- Leeloo "The Fifth Element"
Stalin :D
This is so cool, but I'm sorry that I just can't stop chuckling every time the High Explosive Expanding Milk kills a tank
I reckon that much explosive can even dislodge the turret depending on the impact position/angle.
Can you change the material properties of the algorithm/equation behind the simulation?
Can we see one with Naval Shells? Like 406mm MK7? Would be super cool to see the absolute power of a 2 ton battleship shell
Naval HESH? ...
I like the idea, but... what's your dealer of your getting high medicine?
@@worldoftancraft lol, no I meant like MK8 APCBC. The channel doesn’t just do HESH with their software, they have a lot on APFSDS. Don’t know if it’s designed for the sheer power of battleship shells but would be cool to see.
Amazing stuff appreciated
can you do MAUS 128mm gun APCBC against M1 Abrams upper plate surely this would be interesting for me
Can you make one of the conqueror HESH hiting a T-62 turret, i like your videos btw.
You can create simulation of steel helmet vs 9mm or bigger ?
Интересная модель расчётов. Вот только в танковом бою побеждает тот кто раньше цель увидел…
Dan tank powerfull .....
Except the FV4005 operates well beyond the range of it's intended targets.
could you do M103 120mm AP vs T-55 turret or hull?
@marton titi The ashes of the KV2 hit the heart of its designer.
@marton titi KV-2 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KV-2
Why does this not model the hull roof armor? Wouldn't that be the mist vulnerable to caving in since it's so thin and so close to the explosion?
great channel.
Can you simulate something similar: 75mm M48 HE exploding after hitting the turret base, under the mantlet, of an early Panther tank? i wanna know if it will be enough to break the 16mm hull top plate and injure the driver.
While hesh from the FV4005 stage 2 is interesting you should do one for other british vehicles like the conquerer heavy tank and the mk 5 Centurion onwards which used a 105mm.
What do you use to run these simulations? Is it like an application, or editing?
Check out what Finite Element Analysis is, and Abaqus software. 5 years in college will do the trick, as starters.
WG logic. "WE DIDN'T PENETRATE THEIR ARMOR" having 0 effect on the crew lmao
go play a real game aka WT :P
@@louisdancie7729 i dont even play WoT or WT anymore lmao
HE splash can still injure crew members. Especially from artillery. In fact I have a replay saved where I was playing the Rinoceronte and my driver got killed by artillery splash that did 0 damage.
Alternate title: How to turn foreign people into mashed potatoes
Turned that turret crew into a fine red paste
how about some classical music for the backgrounds?
183mm is HUGE. I know of no anti-tank gun nearly that large. A projectile that large moving at 750 meters/sec, even if filled with inert metal such as lead or bismuth, would knock the crap out of any tank I have ever heard of.
you wanna know of an anti-tank gun that big? 183mm QF L4A1.
@@airplanemaniacgaming7877 Is this REAL or something from a game. If REAL, it is absurdly huge. Otherwise, it is just a toy.
@@DavidFMayerPhD look up the FV4005. It was real.
Very nice silumation, but what you forget is balistic nylon which is used inside T54 and T55 as a last line of defense for catching fragments from solid steel armour. It has about 40mm and all tanks which we used in CzechoSlovakia was equipped by this. Im not sure if mask of canon has it too, but entire turrent and shasi was covered by this. Did you count with that?
Is this based on the FV4005 and its 183mm gun, which is predicted to be used against Soviet tanks like this?
Wow, that very cool, but what the program?
Driver/Radio Op: *crushed then fried*
Commander/Gunner/Loader: *shredded*
Не совсем так.
Броня из 2х слоев. Потому размазывание происходит на двух плоскостях. При этом слой между сдерживает тепло локально. Чтобы капля растеклась между слоями
let's have the main caliber of the battleship Iowa vs tank t-55
Can you make a video about aphe hits on 2000 Ms ???? I'm curious
Meanwhile 183mm HESH in WT couldn't pen Tiger 2's side because Tiger's track ate all damage
I’d like to see a 183 vs a modern tank like m1a2 or t90m
You said your gonna post it on friday what the heck
Can you do it also for the L7 105 guns Hesh round? Very curious about that thanks
I like how he points out, as long as the FV4005 hits a tank, it would die lmao.*Me using it in war thunder slapping people out of existence*
* hits the hull nose of a M48, knocking out both tracks and only mildly yellowing the barrel *
🥲🥲🥲🥲🥲
А есть такой-же мультик - картонные коробки VS абрамса?
Хуситы, в Ймене, показывали такое видео. Хотелось бы посмотреть анимированные подробности.
Wow cool..wht is the software
Now BMD Vs 3OF26 With impact fuse and slight delay fuse pls
What about big shells? Such for overpressure of large armor piercing explosive shell on ship compartments? In scenario of heavy cuisers or battle cruisers combat. Is it similar effect?
What about a shell with a diamond core? I wonder how it would be efficient
Given that diamond has a density of only 3.5 compared to steels 7.6 and tungsten's 19.25, I'd say it would work rather poorly....
You'd get a very expensive shell just shattering on the target.
Diamonds are hard but brittle, so it would just shatter in as much pieces as it would cost in any currency. And as the other person explained, it's low density would do zero damage to the target, regardless of the size of the shell, even on the roof of most tanks
Ok, this is the realistic hit on a T-54 but does there exist any armour thickness that would be immune to this effect, regardless how impossible to fit on an actual tank?
the blast would kill the driver but don't forget the ammo to his right hand side. if it is HE rack with with APCR, APDS, APCBC, HESH ro even HE only then it will blow the tank up, like the KV-2 in world war two that was captured on a tape filmed by a soldier from a medium long range or long range.
Oy, isn't the bottom of the shell going to fly from the turret of the tank? Explosives detonate in all directions.
Hello, cool video. Thank good man. I want see next M829A4. I want know much armor.
Wonder if IS-7 frontal plate or turret can stop this.
Who knows, but It'll definitely re der the gun useless
"Driver is unconcious!"
What about spall liner? T-55A...etc. should have boron-oxide NBC liner that doubles as spall liner like those of T-72.
Meanwhile in World of Tanks.
"screen not penetrated"
"it didnt penetrate they'r armor"
"it bounce!"
0 Damage and every crew member is intact.
we just dinged them
can you test how an already penetrated turret with a hole does if it gets hit with a HE round? will it overpressure inside or is the hole too small to affect this?
The part that is missing is the bit where the round lifts the entire turret up and backwards from the turret ring. Given that the Indians observed that with the 105mm against Pakistani M48's....
what do you use for the simulations
kinda wanna try it out
If spall is the only real threat the turret crew face, then it is impossible damage all of them. There is a big breech between the loader side and the tc/gunner side.
Is it possible to look at would the explosion be severe enough to cause projectile in the hull fuel tank stowage explode?
Spall not the simulations also showed pressure caused by the explosion which traveled through interior of tank and in the sim ripped the driver hatch open of spall didnt kill driver the pressure above his head would cause his skull be crushed
Und wie wirkt eine Hohlladung gegen Schichtpanzerung CHOBHAM??
what r u using a damn gts 450? make the symulation bigeeeer
As we've seen already, in the times in which overpressure is fatal the shrapnel would have been too