Tank explosion

[[TW]Wilsonam]

Well, the PIII's cannon and the T70's cannon certainly aren't 75/76 mm. My point was that often enough it could be difficult to tell when a tank is knocked out because you are killing crew members or destroying equipment, not blowing the turret off.

You can usually tell you've hit, can be harder to tell if you've penetrated. If the enemy catches fire, burns, explodes it is indeed nice and obvious. But if all you've done is kill the driver you do have the dilemma: is it dead or not? It may just be stopped while they shift personnel around. And hard to see wisps of smoke at 800 metres! So - do you engage another target or pump a couple more into this one? Tactics are still evolving in-game. Rigth now, if faced with multiple threats, I'm inclined to switch targets if it stops moving/firing. If it starts up again, I'll have to go back and finish it off...

 

[Tiger2]

Wilsonam I am overawed by these details!

 

[kainhall]

you know thows slabs of steal welded on the sides of a m4 shermans?

that was used to uparmor the gas tanks (rear) and ammo holders of the tank.

if hit there it would either burn (fuel hit) and explode the ammo. or jsut explode.

if it burns first the crew was able to get teh hatches open to try to get out, thsi would lessen the overpressure......no flyign turrent.

but if a HEAT round was used, it would set it on fire and kill the crew with teh overpressure of the roudn it self. the tank would burn, a few seconds (instant to 2 min depending on where hit and how mutch flames) untell it exploded with the hatches closed.....turrent flys off.....

i think they should burn and mabey do some small minor explosions (single roudns of ammo going off) before a large explosion. then wait a few min (2 or 3) and the model dissapreers.


i think on maps where the tanks are limited (2 tigers vs 5 t34s) the destroyed models should not dissappear. if you die on a street....your SOL but a same size tank or bigger will be able to push it out of the way. or 2 smaller tanks!

 

[kainhall]

also, i have to say

now that im at home and not behidn the schools sonic wall.......

that real life video of the panther geting shot was the saddest thing i have ever seen.

the round hit the soft spot, right under the main hull, mabey hitting the hull MG gunner. in the last 5 secodns or so teh flames flicker and i think a crew man was trying to get out.

the germans could not get out unless the tank was on fire. a M5 76mm AT gun shelled a panther 22 some times with white phorphus rounds before it finaly went up in flames.

sad, the germans were bad, but not all germans

 

[bluey]

if a HEAT round was used, it would set it on fire and kill the crew with the overpressure of the round it self. the tank would burn, a few seconds (instant to 2 min depending on where hit and how much flames) until it exploded

For the most part HEAT warheads left tanks pretty much intact except for a small black hole that got nicknamed the widows kiss, in fact it was common for the Russians to send the tank back into service with a new crew.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

From memory (i.e. without churning through), the key ones are:

Bird, Lorrin Rexford & Livingston, Robert D, World War II Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery [Second Edition, with Errata], Overmatch Press, 2001

The above is based on a pile of other works, but is the single most outstanding work on WWII armor penetration for gamers.

German Steel Armour Piercing Projectiles and Theory of Penetration, British Intelligence Objectives Sub-Committee (BIOS), Final Report No. 1343, September 1945, Classified “Secret”

German Tank Armour, British Intelligence Objectives Sub-Committee (BIOS), Final Report No. 653, Undated – probably late 1945, Classified “Secret”

German Tank Armour, Final Report No. 653, Item No. 18, British Intelligence Objectives Sub-committee (BIOS), ~1946, Classified “Secret”

The last 3 were created by the Brits, joining the sprints into Germany after the victory and "interviewing" every German expert they could run to earth. One of them (pretty sure it is the first one) has senior German scientists indicating the crap performance of the bursting charges. This was evidenced to the Brits in the raw data used in tests to determine limit velocities - the requirement for "penetration intact" was note that the round was "intact", but had a side note that most of the time the bursting charge failed to detonate - this was in tests on later 75 and 88mm ammo.

I've never read any complaints from the tank gunners in the field, far as I can remember. But who cares if the charge explodes if the enemy tank is dead ?

Come to think of it, in this one (from memory):

Memorandum No. 262: Observations on Tank Casualties, Army Operational Research Group, Roehampton, March 1944, Classified “Secret”

... there are specific comments that, although there are plenty of examples of intact penetration, there is almost zero evidence of bursting charges exploding - which seems to surprise the officers running the study.

My guess would be that, should a 75mm or 88mm round penetrate a tank's armor close to intact, the bursting charge wouldn't be needed anyway - the energy and resulting destruction from the projectile clattering into the interior, bouncing/shattering would do more than enough damage!

I have the first book by Livingston & Bird, but I can't find any mention of the bursting charges failing.

As for the last reports, I believe I've read those (they tested German 50mm ammo as-well right?) , and AFAIK the tests were conducted against plates thinner than 30mm, in which case the bursting charges would never detonate.

The BdZ fuzes designed for 75mm & 88mm AP shells from 41 onwards were designed to detonate only if subjected to a deceleration force posed by the equivalent of 30mm of RHA at the medium combat range of the specific gun.

i.e. the German BdZ fuzes meant for AP shells of 75mm & 88mm would only detonate against armor of 30mm or more from approx. 1,000 meters onwards. Moving closer would increase the amount of armor needed to generate the necessary deceleration force upon the projectile to ignite the fuze.

AP projectiles of smaller caliber obviously required less armor to detonate (less armor needed to generate same deceleration), and according to British tests against 20mm armor IIRC, the bursting charges in German 50mm AP shells worked like a charm, whilst 88mm AP shells fired against the same armour failed to detonate = the armor simply didn't pose the 88mm shell enough resistance for the bursting charge to detonate.

In short the problem of the bursting charges in larger caliber German guns not detonating doesn't seem to be because of a faulty fuze design, but rather because Allied tanks in the west were much softer skinned than what was initially predicted by the Germans. The appearance of tanks such as the KV-1, Matilda & Churchill tanks is probably what led the Germans to believe this. This seems to be backed up further by the fact that the fuzes by all accounts worked extremely well against the more heavily armored Soviet tanks in the east.

 

[Susi]

And will these explosions be modelled? Yup.

!!!! Woot, this make me even more
confused about TWI's publicity policy.

First you talk 70 minutes on Crosshair
about all the same which have been seen
on videos.

And everybody were like
"You didn't miss anything"

And then you relase info which will make every
single tech/realism geek to piss on their pants.
As a side note in some suggestion topic.

 

[[TW]Wilsonam]

I have the first book by Livingston & Bird, but I can't find any mention of the bursting charges failing.

As for the last reports, I believe I've read those (they tested German 50mm ammo as-well right?) , and AFAIK the tests were conducted against plates thinner than 30mm, in which case the bursting charges would never detonate.

The BdZ fuzes designed for 75mm & 88mm AP shells from 41 onwards were designed to detonate only if subjected to a deceleration force posed by the equivalent of 30mm of RHA at the medium combat range of the specific gun.

i.e. the German BdZ fuzes meant for AP shells of 75mm & 88mm would only detonate against armor of 30mm or more from approx. 1,000 meters onwards. Moving closer would increase the amount of armor needed to generate the necessary deceleration force upon the projectile to ignite the fuze.

AP projectiles of smaller caliber obviously required less armor to detonate (less armor needed to generate same deceleration), and according to British tests against 20mm armor IIRC, the bursting charges in German 50mm AP shells worked like a charm, whilst 88mm AP shells fired against the same armour failed to detonate = the armor simply didn't pose the 88mm shell enough resistance for the bursting charge to detonate.

In short the problem of the bursting charges in larger caliber German guns not detonating doesn't seem to be because of a faulty fuze design, but rather because Allied tanks in the west were much softer skinned than what was initially predicted by the Germans. The appearance of tanks such as the KV-1, Matilda & Churchill tanks is probably what led the Germans to believe this. This seems to be backed up further by the fact that the fuzes by all accounts worked extremely well against the more heavily armored Soviet tanks in the east.

I said I was doing it from memory

But interesting stuff there - can you remember the sources? The fuzes failing vs. "lighter" armor has a ring of common sense to it, although I'm surprised that reasoning wasn't mentioned by the Germans interviewed by BIOS.

@kainhall: over-pressure wasn't an issue back in the 1940s. The lack of damage from HEAT rounds was the main reason that the Brits didn't introduce a HEAT round until far more recently. If the super-heated plasma jet doesn't impact anything useful (equipment or personnel), then it doesn't do too much damage. However, the counter to that argument is that anything it DOES hit will be "toast" (ho ho). As for KE rounds - I've never seen any suggestion that rounds of the period generated any significant over-pressure. Plenty of accounts of 88mm rounds punching in one side of a Brit tank and passing clean through the other side without causing any damage at all...

As for open hatches preventing the turret from blowing off in a catastrophic explosion - I doubt it, although it would allow a percentage of the blast pressure wave to dissipate.

 

[kainhall]

in a super high pressure envirment, liek a tank when the ammo lights up, the smallest leak is going to vent a TON of pressure.

like a small hole in a car tire. the tire explodes becsue its trying to force 50 PSI through a small hole, the rubber cant take it so it makles new holes so it can AKA blowing the tire.

thats not quite accurate, but its a good similarty.


the tank ahs to pressure up before it goes BOOM. the hatches would definatly add some releif. if i build PSI at 50 units a second, but release it at 55 units per second, im fine.

but if the safty valve (hatches) only release 25 units a second. and hte tank can onyl handel 100 untis a second, in 4 seconds its going to pop.

make seconds into microseconds and you have a tank.


it would be very cool even if slightly unrealistic for a critical hit (75 mm KWK 44...panthers gun...think it was a 44. mabey 43 L/48) to the ammo compartment or fuel tanks should pop it open. jsut for the LOL I OWNED YOU factor. but a lessor hit would jsut kill it.


also think the tanks should jsut be knocked out, no fire, no explosion. usually the turrent would be disabled or the drive units (m4 chermans were in the front, could be hit but the tank still would be fine) stopign the tank. that way its not "shoot at it untell you see fire" style tank hunting.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

I said I was doing it from memory

But interesting stuff there - can you remember the sources? The fuzes failing vs. "lighter" armor has a ring of common sense to it, although I'm surprised that reasoning wasn't mentioned by the Germans interviewed by BIOS.

It has been a while since I researched the topic, but I'll see what I can dig up.

Additionally I talked to a British military ordnance & explosives expert about these rounds, and according to him the German BdZ fuzes definitely were/are a lot more sensitive and effective than the Allied ones used during the same period. So much so infact that he doubted one ever would've failed to fuze if it hit anything as solid as tank armour. Also he warned that if you ever find one you should immediately contact the police, and by no means even as much as try to move or let alone touch it. The bomb squad will arrive and they will blow it on the spot. (This is also listed in todays' EOD manuals)

Through my research I also learned that a significant number of Panzergranaten supplied to frontline units actually often were without any fuze or bursting charge, and sometimes not even the tracer assembly.

Anyway Michael Rausch was of invaluable help to my research, and he would definitely be the right man to ask for further information on the BdZ fuzes. The Germans carried out some very thurough testing with these fuzes, establishing the minimum requirements for a successful detonation at any given range.

What seems quite clear however is that a lot of the big German guns were sometimes abit too powerful for their own good, punching through allied armour so effortlessly that their projectiles often never experienced the deceleration force required to trigger the fuze.

 

[RiccardoTheBeAst]

Wilson, a quick question: will tanks remain in their last position after being knocked out? (except some explosions that can change tanks status)

Because, if you see fire and/or explosion then you will think "ok, knocked out tank".

LOL, i was going to write "because if a knocked out tank -that is not burning- will assume its default knocked out position (as in OST) then you will immediately see if the tank is killed or not, and any doubt-situation will be removed." but......everything like "HP system" (as in OST) it was removed in HoS, right?

Thanks

 

[[TW]Wilsonam]

There are likely to be indications that a tank is done in - just may be hard to figure out at long range!

And if you have a contact for Herr Rausch, PM me - I believe he has documents that I don't

 

[Colt .45 killer]

There are likely to be indications that a tank is done in - just may be hard to figure out at long range!

And if you have a contact for Herr Rausch, PM me - I believe he has documents that I don't

Goody!

I was hoping all tanks wouldent have the obvious destroyed model swap of RO OST. yee've made my day!

 

[hockeywarrior]

Wow awesome answers by Wilson on this one.

This all makes me wonder: what physically happens to tanks that are "scuttled" by their crews? Do they explode? Do they start burning? Or do they just disappear?

 

[kainhall]

im so glad tripwire uses valve... and not the other way arround.

last time i looked for HL2 EP3 info was liek a year ago, so i fugured some new stuff should be out........there is no new info.

at least tripwire TELLS people whats in the game, and keeps very few parts of the game secrert. a suprise every one in a while is nice, but bad supprises are not!

thanks wilson and tripwire.

AND !!!!!!! im so freaking excited to see non burning/model swaped knocked out tanks.

there was a sherman in hte ardeens that was along, he park for the night along a road, and put his 75mm to a far down possition. that nigth he could hear germans walking buy saying "ka-put" and not even caring.

im going ot sue this tactic in HOS if it allows it. would be epic! sure a single inf can get behind the lines, BUT 60+ TONS OF STEEL!!!!! o the damage i could do with a tiger!

 

[Flanker15]

Great :IS2: info in this thread, thanks devs!

I have my own little question: Will the shrapnel (and turret) from exploding tanks pose a threat to nearby infantry?

 

[Baine]

Well we sure know that being in a tank is probably worse than being infantry and using the tank as cover.

I'd rather be in the open than in a big metal oven that is the number 1 target to every enemy out there.
I don't even want to think about how some of those tankers lost their lives.

 

[timur]

also, I hate to be an annoying addition to the forum inquisition here, TWI, but I have a question:

How long will downed tanks remain "down"? I recall a rather akward moment in ROOst involving using a burning tank for cover....until it suddenly dissapeared leaving me vulnerable in the middle of the enemy feild, crouching with a satchel. Lets just say that didn't go well

 

[Baine]

One question Wilsonam, if a tank is moving and is hit, let's say he killed the driver at fullspeed, will the tank stop immediately or will it keep going?
Same for a shot that sets the tank on fire, the tank will keep moving right?

I'm just worried about tanks stopping immediately after being hit to blow up. A tank going fullspeed shouldn't stop to blow up, but rather blow up going full speed and then slowing down as a wreck.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Yesterday I started reading some German tank crew accounts from the battle of Kursk and I remembered this thread. What I fell over in these accounts was that according to several German gunners the BdZ fuzes on their armour piercing projectiles would none other than guarantee the complete destruction of an enemy tank if the projectile managed to penetrate. So according to the people who used them, the BdZ fuzes again seem to have worked just as they should.

In addition to this, German tank crews seem to explain the exact same effect after a successful penetration of Soviet tanks, and that is either: 1) The tank exploded right away or 2) The tank burst into flames right away.

This strongly indicates a high success rate for the activation of the German bursting charges.

So I hope for the sake of historical accuracy that the British results for the 75 & 88mm guns against 20mm armoured plates, insufficient for detonating the BdZ fuzes, won't have the devs of RO2 diminish the obvious effectiveness of German AP bursting charges in action. The tests conducted with the 50mm rounds, where 20mm was enough to detonate the fuzes, clearly demonstrated that the fuze design worked like a charm, as does actual field usage of the 75 & 88mm projectiles as pr. crew testimony.