canambridge. yes it did. Im not trying to flame mr philips. Or indeed insult his intelligence. We are just having a general discusion. it has...
Besides that comment is refering to rha. AS "Specification I.T.90 for cast armour of all thicknesses2 There is no difference in resistance of...
your not reading what im posting. and im not trying to offend you. The website and my source do not contrdict each other. your just not reading it...
http://63.99.108.76/forums/lofiversion/ ... t2248.html "Armor resistance is based on T/D ratio, flaws, cast deficiency relative to rolled armor...
"But Churchill front full was 150mm, not 102mm. The BHN of plates of differing thickness will be somewhat different. " no it doesnt. read the...
"British armour specifications are expressed more generally than for other nations. They were actually based on resistance to penetration tests...
1. he planned to use dempsy army which was not significantly commited. 2. the sufficent number of planes for the airborne were availble as he was...
btw the thickness to diameter ratio is not to be confused with overmatching of the incoming projectile. Its the ratio between a thickness of a...
its refering to the armour of the tiger tank. so british and german armour quality were essentialy the same. so my calculations are correct....
taken from WO 185/118, DDG/FV(D) Armour plate experiments an offical ww2 war office file. "The hardness of the plates in the range 60–102mm...
sorry then. you must have commented on something else. Just an interesting note, in normandy the m-10 76mm round could only pentrate the...
monty only asked for a few days to plan. The original operation would of been a small size about one third. so it clealy would not have taken...
true but then the churchill had the best performence in normady out of all allied tanks. And was just as capable at attacking bunkers if not more so.
http://www.freeweb.hu/gva/weapons/briti ... s_veh.html thats my source. qouting livingston and jentz. And by infrastrutre i meant internaly...
not a problem. us apcbc was of a poor manufacture compared to other nations. if you check british gun tables on the most part british capped...
plus only about 300 jubo's were made. compared to about 6,000 churchills.
but the britsh cast armour was of a higher quality. The churchill armour was cast and had a bhn of 293-332. so an average of 312. cast armour...
well the 17 pounder couldnty penetrate the panther glacias with apcbc , with a single hit. I mentioned the lower hull(nose) and turret and...
bump! No capped rounds were made to defeat fha, a well made capped round i,e british projectiles did incrase penetration v sloped armour. Also...
partly yes. but also its engine whilst only 350 bhp created alot of torque. it was created for driving through trench's. Its suspension was set as...
