T-62 vs Tiger I | Can Tiger stop APFSDS? | Armor Penetration Simulation 

I DIDN’T EXPECT THAT. It barely penetrated the tiger.

@@Спойлерщик in my opinion it didn't barely penetrated it, it completely penetrated the armor but no heavy after damage, if the round didn't hit the sloped part of the armor i think it will go through the armor

@@nilihcrevo9820 of course it would. But I didn’t expect it to be depleted so fast that almost nothing except pieces of Armor entered the hull

So... This mean the ammo cant pen the tiger P?

@@nilihcrevo9820 Does the shooting distance affect the penetration, so how many meters or kilometers is the shooting distance in this video?

well. Speed increases energy quadratically while mass just increases it linearly. Though mass is required to keep momentum

its only 100 mm, the other 2 are zimmerit

E=1/2mv^2 Increasing mass still provides more energy but raising velocity exponentially increases penetration of a projectile

@@schullerandreas556 I think it’s not really about kinetic energy, as an APHE (which obviously has way less penetration) fired from the same gun would have the same kinetic energy as an APFSDS. Why, because the kinetic energy comes from the propellant’s explosive energy; and the propellant stays the same. Given the same gun and propellant, which means same kinetic energy, a lighter, faster round penetrates better than a heavier, slower round

@@ariq4209 at "short" distances that is true. At long distances the heavier round retains more of its energy. Thats why APDSFS penetrators have become longer and longer. To add more mass. To get more penetration and maintain it at long ranges. Thy could have added more or betzer propellant and they do, but a gun breach can only resist a certain amount of pressure. Also its not as simple as euating the enegy of the propellant. A lot is lost in the form of heat. But lets say we neglect that. Next would be distribution of the force on the surface of impact. The same energy on a smaller surface makes penetration easier. Thats why APDSFS are better than APCR shells even though the velocities are comparable. One just ditches the sabot while the other one travels with its soft shell around the penetrator till the surface of the target. One is sub calibre when hitting the target (50-60mm Diameter) while the other is full calibre(100-125mm) distributing the force on a larger area.

Yeah they need alot of rest rn

It did not exactly went through, but it created spalling that could still wound the Driver. However it it hit the 102mm Plate instead of the heavily sloped Plate first, it would have gone through like a Warm Knife through Butter.

@@VeganerHippie I see a hole forming in the final seconds of the simulation. Are you telling me the driver survives that? No way. It may not go further in, into the fighting compartment, but the driver should be dead or dying.

@@pirig-gal According to the simulation that big chunk of spall moves at around 200m/s and if it hits the driver hes probably dead, youre right. If only the tiny spalling hits him its still gruesome, but i dont think it guarantees death.

@@VeganerHippie Suppose so. This was pretty much the perfect case for the Tiger. And its still did this much.

@@VeganerHippie Considering a plug of armor was moved from it's original spot into the vehicle, I'd say the round went through the tank more than just some spalling.

*HEAVY BREATHING*

The collab we never knew we needed.

*maus shell vs vanatorul de care armor*

**HISTORICAL ACCURACY INTENSIFIES**

Sounds interesting i like both channels

This is not modern APFSDS, this is actually one of if not the oldest APFSDS rounds. Its only made of steel, and the rod is quite short. Compared to modern long tungsten or depleted uranium rods, this round is actually quite poor. Despite that, it could kill any western tank in the world at over 1km (2+ in most cases) when it was introduced in the early 1960s. In fact despite being steel it was similarly effective to 105mm tungsten APDS that was newly in service at the time in the west.

@@kobeh6185 wasn't it's effective flat penetration in the range of 300mm?

@@jimbothegymbro7086 depends on the distance. Supposedly steel APFSDS projectiles were capable of over 230mm of penetration at 2000 meters, which according to a lot of penetration tables (table to table vary) is fairly similar or better to tungsten APDS projectiles fired by variants of the 105mm L7.

@@kobeh6185 i forgot to read the title lol

You have to realize that the tiger has a thin ass front plate

@@Phantom-bh5ru It does not at all, it simply was not designed for defense against these kinds of weapons. Homogeneous armour is very poor against kinetic rounds

@@Phantom-bh5ru Tigers front plate is 102mm RHA. Which was actually thick for its time.

@@BeKindToBirds AP rounds count as kinetic rounds dont they?

@@LordOfChaos.x I suppose they are a type of kinetic round but they are very distinct and different from modern kinetic penetrator darts. A direct evolution in a way though, always trying to get more velocity out of AP rounds lead to rounds that require a sabot they are so small and narrow

Yes

Yes

it takes forever to simulate, but I guess you can always rent a supercomputer.

@@juusolatva or steal...

@@MetallGecko1 that's highly illegal

Thought you were talking about the IS8 with the yamato but damn that Stuart, that's insane

I like so he can do this and read this comment

I don't think you can over pen a Stuart with a shell that can't even fit inside the tank

Dude the Stuart would bounce the shell with no spawling

@@Sebb-hc1il Not even a scratch, it's armor is way too thick for the Yamato to pen

it's the angle that did it sabot rounds are too hard so handle uneven impacts without shattering, that's why some standard rounds have caps and ballistic caps

@@jimbothegymbro7086 This is also an early steel penetrator, which if I’m not mistaken are much more likely to shatter than modern materials

@@tonedeaftachankagaming457 you're correct you get less bang for your buck in terms of weight and size with steel penetrators than the more modern tungsten carbide and depleted uranium rounds of the same calibre

@@jimbothegymbro7086 WC would be a worse material to make rod out of than just steel. It likely would snap in the barrel if you launch it at AP projectile speed. The reason this specific rod does badly against angle is not because it is too hard. It is simply because the geometry of the projectile. You can make steel rod in a similar dimension like the modern rod, and they would perform better than the older fat short steel rod of the same weight. Of course W alloy and DU alloy would still perform better with a similar geometry due to better mechanical property all around when compare to steel.

Your answer: the 9mm (small enough for pistol bullet) couldn't penetrate infantry helmet & ww1 tank plate. But the helmet can be if you close enough, but the tank you must have some more bullet bigger and stronger than 9mm bullet

Last frame shows a slug of about 30mm in diameter about 100m/s.

I'm trying Javelin, but it's extremely troublesome

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 Nice. Can't wait for simulations like these, because I watch the Russian - Ukraine war with great interest since day one.

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 Large Size, tandem warhead and possible ERA plus a number of other issues I'm not aware of I imagine.

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 Would be cool to see if combination of roof cage and era can stop javelin

@@TwixSvK roof cage is pointless against Javelin unless there is some stupidly large distance between it and the main armor, like 2-3m. (also it's coming down at quite an angle, so the cage would have to extend quite a bit over the sides) It works on RPGs because it prevents the contact igniter from working correctly, a Javelin will detonate the way it's supposed to regardless of what it crashes into. A high-enough vertical cage would counter the NLAW though.

Modern rod are great at dealing with angle.

It's going really really fast, it'd probably still destroy the front plate

@@jintsuubest9331 this one is an older sabot since it's made of hardened steel and not Tungsten carbide or Depleted Uranium, that's probably why it shattered

@@jimbothegymbro7086 I says nothing about this specific sim. I was referring to op blanket statement of rod not doing great against angle.

I7-10850 32GB RAM

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 Nice, thank you!

It would’t do anything.100mm D-10T isn’t powerful enough.In fact there is almost zero tanks with AP rounds from 1940s that can penetrate Tiger II’s UFP.

The fragments of the dart are deflected away at about 10°, relative to the surface of the plate, with enough distance between the plate and the turret ring they will fly high enough to not be a threat to the turret ring.

@@peasant8246 hiwever the abrams s ufp has beetween similar to more slope if I remember, so, deflection might go less upward

@@gamecubekingdevon3 True. I'm still hopeful the designers have accounted for this.

@@peasant8246 well, abrams entered service in 79, suggesting rhe ReD was in rhe 70s (and we also know that, like his german counterpart, the léopard 2, he used some of the lessons learned with mbt70 ) so, would be interesisng to know if at that time, the US knew about soviet APFSDS s incidence against higly sloped rha. Anyway, this kind of thing is why o think that designing frontal glacis with the same pattern as soviet MBT would have been a better idea (as the driver port +the lfp are weakspots, but they are small enough that hitting them reliably would only be realistic in the context of a video game)

In ballistic, that's not what overmatch means. Also, he did many sim with large caliber projectile against highly angled thin armor.

@@jintsuubest9331 oh, I just went for the "more popular" meaning of overmatch lol. Gonna have to search a bit more for these videos then, I thought there weren't any! Thx

@@buscadiamantes1232 His backlog of vid is like 1min each. Just sit down with a coffee or something and you can probably finish everything in like 30min.

What properties? It must have a similar impact resistance as the maraging steel, since the cap has been abandoned. Fofanov indicates maraging steel Tankograd indicates 35Kh3NM steel. For 125mm 3BM9 60KhNM "maraging steel". Same for 115mm 3BM4. I thought it was a mistake and it should be 60KhNM for 3BM6, 35Kh3NM for 3BM4. Is there a better source available?

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 Fofanov gave right grades of steels. I mistook 60HNM with 40HNM because 60HNM is quite rare in comparison to 35HNM. But speaking about properties: - 60HNM - YS: 690 MPa, UTS: 1050 MPa, elongation at fracture: 15% - 35HNM properties are similar to 60HNM - meanwhile 35HGS used in cored penetrators - YS: 1275 MPa, UTS: 1620 MPa, elongation at fracture: 9% But coming back why they're not maraging grades. Maraging steel contains very little carbon (

@@Zadlo14 Ok. By the way, I saw two versions of the BM6. With and without a cap. Do you know if the same steel was used?

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 I think that's the same steel

@@Zadlo14 I would also have another question. Are you able to confirm that 125mm bm42 caps are tungsten alloy?

YEAA GOT GAIJINED

LOL it can pen 96 mm in point blank with just APCBC or APCR would do a couple 100s

this

Hull slope get throught at around 500m

Which plate?

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 pretty sure hes taling about the one that received the initial impact

Yes

Then nope, it wouldn't bent or something. It's too thick compared to the apfsds. There is video with 38mm Abrams plate with further contact points

Given the right circumstances, there are probably less than 10 vehicle 17 pounder cannot get throught. And 17 pounder can get throught any modern mbt, again given the right circumstance.

The website Tankograd actually goes over how slat armor actually protects vehicles. I recommend you go there to read up on how it works. Long story short though, cage armor works specifically to exploit a design flaw in the RPG-7 warhead to stop the rocket from detonating. A detonation away from the vehicle body would still generate significant damaging effects and penetrate all but the heaviest armor, and the overhead cages seen on Russian tanks are extraordinarily marginal and would not defeat an NLAW or Javelin missile through the same mechanism that defeats RPG-7s

Just so you know, you got "c"mixed up with "s". Should be "diSintegrated" and "inSide". Good luck bruv 👍

Also, horrible should be horrifying in this case.

Slice right throught. Doesn't matter which one.

Yeah, but with very little energy left. An apfsds round kills solely through kinetic energy, since it has no explosive charge, unlike heat shells.