Even if RDX is almost twice as powerfull as TNT, we are still talking about 30 grams of TNT in that round. Still a small charge compared to both US and soviet charges.
18 grams of pure RDX yes, but remember it was compressed and mixed with other ingredients, so all in all the charge was of a ~80 gram weight, roughly half that of earlier charges which were similar to the Soviet & US charges. (US TM-9-1985 manual)
The problem with the Soviet & US charges however was that the fuze design was not just outdated but it also based on a type intended for use by the Navy in much larger rounds and against the amoured belts of Battleships; and the end result was that they didn't work at all, and the British completely abandoned the use of a bursting charge in their projectiles for this very reason.
The Allies weren't alone with this problem however, the Germans had the exact same problems with their early fuzes of the same basic design, which prompted their decision to start work on an entirely new design. This led to the development of the BDZ fuze, where during the development stage the Germans also realized that the charge needed to cause the desired damage only had to be a fraction of the size first percieved, and as such they halfed the size of the bursting charges in their future AP rounds. (Note: The size of bursting charges in the early German PzGr. rounds were similar to those of US & Soviet rounds)
Talking about explosive mixtures, what did the soviets use? TNT or an other mixture?
The Soviets mainly used a TNT wax mixture, same as in their handgrenades. So they were not nearly as powerful pr. weight as the German bursting charges.
We're talking about effects on vehicle and not it's crew.
I never doubted the round's effectiveness on the crew.
Yes, and the effectivness on the vehicle was very high thanks to all the shrapnel generated, which is what started the fires and set off the ammunition.
So just to make things clear, incase you might have misunderstood: Ofcourse the bursting charge itself was never powerful enough to send a turret flying, the charge was way too small for that. It was the scorching shrapnel setting off the ammo storage, and the explosion of which, that sent the turret flying.
The KwK 36's PzrGr.39 carried a much larger (59 grams) bursting charge than the PzGr39 of the KwK 40. If it's the same explosive used in both of the rounds than the tiger's charge is more than 100 grams of TNT. Plus the 88mm round itself penetrating that is again, much bigger than the 75mm.
Whilst the bursting charge was indeed much larger, nessicated by the larger size of the round, the concussive effect was also extreme in that it could send a man flying from his commanders seat, which was completely unnecessary. The effect desired was the disintegration of the projectile inside the target mainly in the hope that these fragments would either kill some of the crew, start fires or set off the ammo storage. So all that was needed was a charge big enough to achieve this, and naturally the larger the round the larger the charge needed would be.
He says he was blown out of the turret. Was he sitting in his open TC cupola? If thats the case that is no suprise.
And what happend to his crew and his tank?
He was the commander so he was ofcourse sitting in the commanders seat in the turret copula. Two of his crew were killed immediately, whilst he himself and two other of his crew survived but were seriously injured.
As for the fate of the tank, it was a complete write off IIRC.
The firecracker thing was supposed to be a joke...
But again compared to the bursting charges that the US and soviets fielded the same time, it was closer to that. (I can't remember the size of the charge in the Sherman's 75mm.) So if the german charges work so well on allied/soviet tanks I can't even imagine what happens to a Pz IV or a PzIII after a succesful penetration/ignition of a BR350A or B
Well not much considering that the fuzes on the US & Soviet rounds didn't work, and it's the fuze which sets off the charge so
Also as mentioned the Germans had started out using large bursting charges in their AP rounds as-well, but after they had developed a fuze that actually worked, they realized that such a large charge wasn't needed and so they roughly halfed the size in future designs.
Thats interesting. When I read about the german 50mm guns everyone says that they had bad after penetration effects. What was the size of the charge?
The charge was small ofcourse, but it didn't have to be any bigger, it just had to disintegrate the projectile, that was it, because it was the shrapnel which caused the real damage.
As I said before, they over exaggerate. Yes, T-34 had a reputation for blowing up after penetrations or after burning but the chances were nowhere near 90%.
You say they exaggerate, however that is pure speculation on your part Avtomat. You weren't there, you didn't see what happened. And if it's written in AAR's, which by nature have to be accurate, otherwise they are a useless exercise, then there has to be some truth to the matter.
If the T34 burning chance was 90 percent, what was the chance of the M4A1 shermans burning out or exploding? 140%?
Well the Sherman did have a bad reputation for easily catching fire after the first penetration, but the Germans infact rarely if ever observed one exploding shortly after having been penetrated. Wet storage in later versions also helped decrease the chances of shrapnel or fires setting off the ammo storage.
What, are you trying to say that T34s burst into flames just from the spalling of their armor? Oh come on.
Whats next? A mosquito lands on the top armor and the tank combusts?
Make fun if you wish, but fact remains that as pr. German AAR's (which by nature had to accurate as otherwise they would've been useless), T-34's were usually observed bursting into flames almost immediately after the first or second hit. This tendency can be attributed to the effectiveness of the German BDZ fuzes in the east against the harder but more brittle soviet armour, as-well as the volatile nature of the Soviet ammunition storages.
The fuzes worked very well, they exploded after penetration but they didn't alway blow the tank up. They devestated the crew and disabled the vehicle but didn't always blow it to pieces or burned it
.
Again, the explosive force of the bursting charge itself (which was largely comparable to that of a handgrenade) was never enough to blow up a tank, nowhere near it. But the hot shrapnel from the explosion could, and evidently often did, set off the ammo storage which would result in an explosion that would send the turret flying.
"The 75x495mm PzGr.39 is a very good ammunition for its time, but it isn't some kind of doomsday device that just blows T-34s up like they are tincans filled with explosives."
Doomsday device ? No, esp. when not observed as working very well against the softer skinned western Allied tanks, where the thinner and softer armour didn't provide enough of a deceleration force to activate the BDZ fuze at anything but rather long ranges.
And that penetration (61-64 at 100m) is complete bull*hit if you are basing on 0
