• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Interesting Tiger Page

moeity

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 19, 2006
1
0
Found a page with some good reading about the Tiger I. http://fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1.htm

I found this part extremely interesting...

Penetration Table 03: T-34/85, JS-122.

Tiger I vs. T-34/85 | T-34/85 vs. Tiger
Front: Turret 1400 m | 500 m
Mantlet 400 m | 0 m
DFP* 100 m | 300 m
Nose 100 m | 200 m
Side: Turret 2200 m | 1600 m
Superstructure 2100 m | 1600 m
Hull 3500 m | 2900 m
Rear: Turret 3200 m | 1600 m
Hull 2100 m | 1500 m

* DFP = Drivers Front Plate
Source : JENTZ, Thomas L.; Germany's TIGER Tanks - Tiger I and II: Combat Tactics; ISBN 0-7643-0225-6

The Tiger should have no problems penetrating sides and turret at anything under 1000m, while the T34/85 should have problems penetrating front Tiger hull at anything over 400m. Read further for description of overmatched rounds vs sloped armor.

Theoretically, the higher the muzzle velocity, the more penetration any kind of AP round would have, all other variables remaining constant. In real World War Two tank combat, however, other important variables intervened, such as the thickness to diameter (T/d) coefficient, which means that the higher the diameter of any given round relative to the thickness of the armor it is going to strike, the better the probability of achieving a penetration. Furthermore, if the diameter of the armor piercing round overmatches the thickness of the armor plate, the protection given by the inclination of the armor plate diminishes proportionally to the increase in the overmatch of the armor piercing round diameter or, in other words, to the increase in this T/d overmatch. So, when a Tiger hit a T-34, the 88 mm diameter of the Tiger's round overmatched the 45 mm glacis plate of the T-34 by so much that it made no difference that the Russian tank's glacis was inclined at an angle of 60 degrees from vertical.

"Armor obliquity effects decrease as the shot diameter overmatches plate thickness in part because there is a smaller cylindrical surface area of the displaced slug of armor which can cling to the surrounding plate. If the volume which the shot displaces has lots of area to cling to the parent plate, it resists penetration better than if that same volume is spread out into a disc with relatively small area where it joins the undisturbed armor. Plate greatly overmatching shot involves the projectile digging its own tunnel, as it were, through the thick interior of the plate. It was found experimentally that the regions in the center of the plate produced the bulk of the resistance to penetration, while the outer regions, near front and rear surfaces, presented minimal resistance because they are unsupported. Thus, an overmatched plate will be forced to rely on tensile stresses within the displaced disc, and will tend to break out in front of the attacking projectile, regardless of whether the edges cling to the parent material or not. Plate obliquity works in defeating projectiles partly because it turns and deflects the projectile before it begins digging in. If there is insufficient material where the side of the nose contacts the plate, stresses will travel all the way through the plate and break out the unsupported back surface. The plate will fail instantaneously rather than gradually".


"You can angle the armor any way you want, and beyond a certain point of shot overmatching plate, the obliquity will cease to be relevant. In fact, at certain conditions of shot overmatching plate, the cosine rule is broken and the plate resists less well than the simple cosine relationship would predict (LOS thickness is greater than effective thickness). The above only applies to WWII era AP and APC/APCBC, and WWII sub caliber ammunition. The long rod penetrators of today are greatly overmatched but they bring so much energy to the plate that they penetrate by "ablation" in which both projectile and armor behave like fluids. Hollow charge also enters the field of fluid dynamics, with a very thin jet penetrating overmatching armor with ease, regardless of obliquity" (Robert Livingston; excerpts of a response to a question posted on the old "Tanker's Forum (Heavy Metal Website)", back in 1998).
 
Well people tend to make those comparisons becaue the Tiger's most frequent enemies were the T-34 variants.


I agree though that on a purely technical levle, it is silly to compare tanks of different classes.


But for combat, the odds of the T-34 and Tiger meeting were high, as oppossed to Tigers fighting JS2s, for example.


On the other hand, considering there was only a total production run of about 1300 Tigers, from the Russian perspective they would be more inclined to think of a Panzer IV G/H/J as the primary opponent, or later in the war, the Panther.
 
Upvote 0