|
|
От
|
Ibuki
|
|
|
К
|
Jager01
|
|
|
Дата
|
27.02.2012 16:45:01
|
|
|
Рубрики
|
WWII; Танки; Артиллерия;
|
|
Re: Спасибо, а...
Из поста участника bojan на танкнете, данные югославских испытаний:
http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.php?showtopic=18562&st=20
>По результатам реальных обстрелов?
Как можно сделать вывод, частично реальные, частично пр плитам эквивалентам:
>Posted 16 November 2006 - 1614 PM
>>jwduquette1, on Thu 16 Nov 2006 1527, said:
>>I don't suppose you have a feel for what sort of ballistic limit criteria was being used?
>50% in this case. Yugoslavia switched to 80% criteria in '70s.
>>Quote
>>Moreover, as you know complete penetration can be defined in a number of different ways. >>Projectile complete thru and bursting charge functions...or any sort of hole where a light can be seen on thru to the other side of the armor...or protection limit where a witness pack is placed behind the armor and any perforation of the witness pack defines complete penetration. What sort of criteria was the Yugoslavian Army using at the time of the trials?
>At least 50% of the projectile solid mass (eg in case APHE steel mass only, minus fuse/tracer/charge) had to be behind armor. How was it colected/measured - I don't know, but I guess it was a witness plate method.
>>Quote
>>Any consideration to some sort of "fair hit" criteria -- i.e. location of hits relative to other hits or location of hits relative to telescope or vision slit areas? If yes can you briefly describe the rules employed during the tests?
>In case where fabricated plates were used (most of T-54 glacis tests) plate was subjected to 10 hits (10 hits were fired with every type of round).
>In other cases - location was examined after one set of testing if changes were substantial that they would affect furter testings. In case of 90mm T33 AP vs T-34/85 you will note in coments that substantial damage of armor happened.
>In case of 90mm M431 HEAT vs T-54 glacis at off angle only two hits where rounds fused were discounted as in one case round hit a tow hook and in other case drivers periscope so compaunded angles of impact were not >60deg...
>In case of hits on coax-ports/telescopes it apears that those were ignored and not counted in statistics.