- 1
can anti-air kill tanks
- Thread starter lordgreenace
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Yeah, these shouldn't make more than dents on tanks (expect Japanese ones):
Even against the Japanese ones the Browing .50 was found to be pretty much useless, and would be even more so on a truck mount. Some of the cannon-based SPGs would be an ambush threat against tankettes and possibly light tanks, but that's it.
It's Japanese "armor" that's supposed to be quite soft, not SPAA should have hard attack.
"Spalling when hit by 7.92 Mauser round" is on the very low end of armor scale.
It's Japanese "armor" that's supposed to be quite soft, not SPAA should have hard attack.
"Spalling when hit by 7.92 Mauser round" is on the very low end of armor scale.
The armour was too hard, not too soft.
Japanese armor spalling from a 7.92mm round would be due to:
1 - armor too brittle
2 - armor too thin
3 - uniformly hardened (see #1), rather than face-hardened or layered.
4 - riding mowers are not combat vehicles, even if you put armor on them.
5 - all of the above
1 - armor too brittle
2 - armor too thin
3 - uniformly hardened (see #1), rather than face-hardened or layered.
4 - riding mowers are not combat vehicles, even if you put armor on them.
5 - all of the above
12 mm "armor"? More like gun shield to me
They found that 8mm was enough to stop a heavy machine gun firing AP. The real problems only began when bazookas started showing up in numbers.
Well we were talking about 1934 ingame flak, and even 20mm guns were easily capable to penetrate most of the prewar and early tanks ( having 10-20mm armor at most ). MG´s of course were common too but not much effective vs. modern planes as well.
Even during WWI the need to upgrade Flak was seen and implemented and 40mm ( Bofors since 1932) or 37mm ( Rheinmetall 30/36/37 from ´36 ) AA-Guns were also very common divisional assets in the 30ties.
Even during WWI the need to upgrade Flak was seen and implemented and 40mm ( Bofors since 1932) or 37mm ( Rheinmetall 30/36/37 from ´36 ) AA-Guns were also very common divisional assets in the 30ties.
8mm was generally sufficient against standard small arms and light MGs, but dedicated small-caliber anti-tank rifles with tungsten penetrators were still able to punch through at not far short of normal engagement ranges. Either the tank had to sit well back and support its accompanying infantry from a distance, or else it was at serious risk of having the ventilation system supplemented by a few extra holes.
10mm and up quickly became the norm for frontal armor in several countries, but side armor was more likely to be struck at angles, increasing its effective thickness, and so remained at 8mm on a lot of AC and light tank designs. The increase in frontal protection rendered portable AT rifles ineffective in most situations, and most armies gradually phased them out.
20mm AA guns (and similar AT designs) were generally more than sufficient against pre-war light tank designs, and still more-or-less viable against a lot of pre-war mediums. As Germany discovered to its dismay, not everyone had kept the thinner armor, and German gun performance against some of the heavier French (Char B1bis) and British tanks (Churchill, Matilda) proved to be a problem.
Bazookas and Panzerfausts didn't show up until mid-war or later. Even by the end of WWI, everyone was well aware that you needed airfields to send planes up, and AA guns to bring them down.
- 2