T-10M vs M103 | BR-472 | Armor Penetration Simulation 

Well, that wasn't an APDS,just an AP

that's a witness plate to show the spalling on the other side of the plate if there is any, that way it isn't just a "oh it seems to have deformed and cracked but how bad is the spalling or is there any?" It's more of a you know there is spalling and how bad it would be by looking at how severely the plate is damaged

@@TheGooberOfGoobs He obviously knows that, he wants spall liners simulated in an example, he knows the plate is just a witness plate.

@@ThatZenoGuy ah, so a 'witness plate' is what it's called

@@EthanDyTioco Yep, that's what it's called. Basically serves to find out 'what happens on the OTHER side of the armor'.

Sometime after ww2, cuz I’m assuming they saw how much that would just yeet the crew

He elready made a video with the Iowa vs an 18 inch shell

Lol its highly angled. Nothing impressive

ooh yes me too

It depends on the projectile, plate thickness, plate material, plate angle, and plate spacing

Single block is generally much more effective against projectiles, can't comment on heat type projectiles.

how much spacing will make a huge difference. a few mm won't do much to most shells except HESH, HE, and maybe HEAT. Over a meter can destabilize most kinetic rounds to some degree and would cause most APHE to detonate between the 2 layers. Putting it at an angle will amplify this effect.

Totally stupid idea, HESH, unless a very large caliber, is useless aggainst anything disposing layered armour

Or maybe even 183mm HESH?

@@petrmelichar3565 let me introduce you to my friend the pressure wave

FV4005 vs something

@@petrmelichar3565 you don't know anything about pressure, uh

Like the whole pistol?

@@_Admin_01. i Hope so.

@@_Admin_01. Y E S

@@saschakruger3576 sadly he didn't specify the velocity

Even 3mm of mild steel would stop à 45acp out of a pistol. You can look for youtube videos with mild steel plates vs pistol calibers

There is next to no chance that a second shot would hit the same place.

It does not need to hit the same exact place again,it can hit the general area and with already weakened plate,something would give in

I mean, after ww2, tanks saw the highest amount of development because: 1: the was war over they didn't need to rush designs 2: more time could be spend testing 3: it was seen that tanks will become the future of combat so they put even more funding into them

@@MrTrool323 nah it wouldn't Why do you think he simulates only such small piece of armor, it's because anything further has next to no influence on penetration

Hi! That's true... Thought the same. Crew is paralised for a moment... They don't can operate... Meanwile the T10 set the second shot... BAM! GAME OVER! It would be the same other way around...

Seems like an anachronism. Pz.IIIs were upgraded with long 50mm gun only after the BoF. Doing a simulation of Matilda or a KV-1 against long 50mm would be more appropriate.

@@peasant8246 But the Pz III in 1940 was not doing any damage to the B1 with its 37mm... so what is wrong with testing the upgraded version? Also some of the B1 survived the not so good for france year 1940.

@@Bialy_1 From that point on they were used only by the Wehrmacht and the Vichy France forces, so they wouldn't be in danger of being shot at with the german 50mm gun. I say a more interesting test would be the Somua S35 against the german 75mm L/24 gun AP shell.

At 1 km, the t10 had only minor flight depression

At 1000m, the angle of fall for this projectile is less than one degree.

Not to mention it’s striking the turret cheek, not the upper front plate. Even if it did have significant drop after 1km it wouldn’t make the impact more perpendicular

Then again, it would strike it at one degree, not at minus 20 or smth

They should just put a bunch of water melons in front of tanks, after passing through about half a dozen, a round similar to this will deflect considerably and may even miss the tank altogether. (Somewhere there's a RU-vid video of a big Russian gun hitting a line of watermelons....the way they influence the round's trajectory is pretty amazing.)

its 60 degrees, of course it won't penetrate

Standard 90 with t33 go throught out to over 900m.

Higher muzzle velocity due to the longer barrel. Higher chamber pressure is probable, but I have never verified it.

Ansys

Actually i don't think spalling was ever mentioned as a consequence of brittle armor in late war german tanks. Fracturing, however, was

@@konstantinriumin2657 well fracturing and spalling go hand in hand that is the problem of high hardness steel. But to be fair if your tank gets cracked like an egg you have bigger problems than spalling

@@hamaru7642 "Half of front plate spalled into crew compartment! We really should have invested in spall lining"

Witness plate is exactly how irl testing determine what happen when stuff goes flying. In this sim, the spall is of relitively minor consequences. They are very small particle that likely get absorb by devices like pipes, wire, controls, optics, etc. Whatever reach the first crew member (and probably the only crew member) will likely inflict minor injury for the most part.

Probably

Good question

Why lol

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 go object 268 vs tiger II upper front plate from 500m

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 because it’s epic

You don’t have to

Just a thought

Still waiting for my chipmunk at light speed against Yamato armor..

He's still alive and loading that gun he might have superficial injuries but that about it.

@@gotanon9659 really depends where the fragments hit, they are still shards of metal going very fast if it’s hit in the face or eyes he is not going to be having a good day. If it hits him in the leather or protective jackets they wear he may be fine. It certainly depends.

@@gotanon9659 Yea i would like to see you loading the gun with a hole in any of the important veins... for example in your neck. If you are alive then your blood is under pressure so holes in your body are not good for your health and ability to move. Not to mention that the injured guy gonna have good chance for the traumatic shock...

It rise because it has to go somewhere. And the path with least resistance is "up" in this case. The simulation assume flat ground.

@@jintsuubest9331 - The angle is too steep before it contacts the armour. No dispute about once it enters, but either the angle is so extreme prior to contact. The thickness of the plate indicated suggests a head on strike against an angled plate, not a marginal impact against the outside edge of the front plates where they meet the side plates which would be to the very right edge of the crosshair centre bar.

​@@tashatsu_vachel4477 I'm not sure why the simulation has the round coming in from this angle (compared to the screen), but it doesn't matter much for what it is (what it is a simulation of exactly is stated in the description). Usually the round is kept visually horizontal in these simulations/ slightly coming down at 1 or 2 degrees. The picture of the tank and crosshair also probably more functions as a visualization tool to know what kind of shot it could've been, not an exact pinpoint accurate representation. Idk, there might have been some software related reason why it's visually orientated like this. M103 turret is kinda weird to simulate, idk if this angle is completely accurate, as the turret has a continuously variable shape (and therefore also impact angles). So a lot of scenarios are possible. From tanksgg/WT I can sorta get angles like 51 or straight to 60 degrees around that spot, but the armor is also thicker around where I get 51 degrees, etc.

@@tashatsu_vachel4477 The angle is around 55 - 0.x degree simulating the range, whatever the range table of the projectile says.

@@Wotplaya4 He just chose to play with the visual for fun sake, and probably troll people that measure stuff by eye. The crossair image is the actual impact angle he model, at least that's what all of his other sim does.

Anything become cheddar cheese when you throw them hard enough

The getting smashed indicates that it is hard and therefore brittle, if it were soft and with it ductile, it would absorb the impact with the armor by deforming and ricocheting off, which would never work. The physics principles employed to pearce armor at the time relied on the projectile been harder than the armor

Everything has been cleared up. I might add that the projectile at the rear is much softer than at the front.

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 I think a lot of people really struggle with basic material science concepts, and the terms associated with them,such as ductility, strength, hardness, yield point . Might make a nice video from which people can actually start understanding the physical processes that are been portrayed in the simulations that you run. Love the channel content, keep up the great work

I ve checked several ballistic limits with projectile condition annotation and even at an angle of 70 degrees it is practically unheard of for a armor piercing projectile to bounce as shown in movies or games. It is not a physical behavior for a material of this hardness.

a little bit

Stacking on top of each other is unlikely as that will probably blow up his computer.

I can, if you explain what you are talking about

It's not that "extreme" tho, 55-57 degrees (of course still high, but 60 degree hits are somewhat common in quite a lot of designs). When you look at the M103's turret, this was probably to be expected, unless you thought maybe it would be the (flatter) turret cheeks.

@@Wotplaya4 yeah I did think it would be the cheeks

It would go through that time

It would have ended in Russian victory

The loader/gunner has some metal pieces in his face now.

Yes

If you can find him the schematic and material specification.

he has done heat before but its very difficult to simulate. i dont know if he will do it again

Really send me a link because I only saw British HESH shell. That's different frome regular HEATFS (high explosion anti-tank fin stabilize shell) that uses molding copper as a way to kill crew members

​@@johnojeda3900 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-y50rK69Dz8M.html wasnt hard to find just search the channel name and add the word heat and its the top result

@@sneakycactus8815 thank you bud. Mmmm i see what you mean

The earth's surface layer is very complex. I don't even know how much simplification would make sense.

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 I see

low ufp?

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 Perhaps he means where the UFP and LFP meet? Where the interlocking of the plates are?

@@Wotplaya4 yes, just above the transmission but below the machine gun port

What version of the IS-2? The one with the fence or without?

@@cookiecraze1310 pzf has 200mm penn? So my question is even if theres a fence would it matter in the slightest which is2 is being used?

@@cookiecraze1310 And what Panzerfaust The 150m one has 300mm Penetration while the others have around 200mm

@@lemonhaze715 the 2 versions of IS-2 I'm referring to are the ones without an attached fence and the one with an attached fence. The fence was attached to counter HEAT shells and panzerfausts as it detonates them early, causing the jet of metal they fire to destabilise mid air before hitting the tank. Its spaced armour, so the fence does make a big difference. I'm assuming the writer wanted to see what effect the fence would have made.

@@agreeable4334 if without the fence I'm gonna assume a 200mm pen one since it's pretty obvious that 300mm of pen will go through a IS-2's side even at its thickest part.

Ansys

The rod construction is unknown and the wra sim failed due to extreme computation time.

@@jintsuubest9331 3bm59 svinets1 from Russia has a Depleted Uranium Core, I believe

Armor-piercing shells do not bounce intact. In practical conditions, the projectile will not withstand the impact intact. Check the results of any ballistic tests, NOT games or movies.

I mean that was close

@@lutscher7979 would pen if shot at the same spot again