8.0 Corrections/Suggestions

[Wild Bill]

Let me say here after pages and pages of discussion, in some instances, (NOT ALL!), these are judgment calls. Please remember I said in some cases. It is much like the saying, "Tis with our judgments, as with our watches, none are quite the same, yet each believes his own."

The OOB team has not spent a great deal of time responding. They, to my knowledge, are reading your comments, considering them and then deciding what to do.

I personally applaud the many hours they have invested in trying to improve the game. They don't always respond because what they are doing is very time consuming in itself. Like you, they are men with families, jobs and other interests in life.

Through these five years of working on this project, the list of people who have come and gone for the OOB work is rather long...and impressive.

I assure you that when this is done, a complete list of changes will be issued. You may not agree with all changes, but please know that your points of view do receive consideration.

Let them work. They are trying hard to do it right. Now, honestly, we can't ask for more than that.

Wild Bill

[Alby]

LORRINS FINDINGS
APCR AMMO

Reviewing Russian penetration figures at close range, we found that the effectiveness of the rounds drops off as the range decreases and the impact velocity increases.

For the 76.2mm L41.5 APCR, vertical penetration is:
60mm at 1000m
92mm at 500m
98mm at 300m
102mm at 100m

A 32mm difference in penetration from 500m-1000m but 10mm from 100m-500m, which suggests that the round is failing structurally as the impact velocity increases. Normally, the change in penetration per given interval increases as the range decreases, which it does in American, British and German data for tungsten core ammo.

Results similar to Russian 76.2mm APCR were found for 45mm M37 and M42 APCR, where the penetration effectiveness appears to be blunted and reduced as the range decreases.

Using the available data the following vertical penetration figures were generated:

76.2mm 41.5 APCR
================
104mm at 0m
102mm at 100m
100mm at 200m
98mm at 300m
95mm at 400m
92mm at 500m
88mm at 600m
83mm at 700m
76mm at 800m
69mm at 900m
60mm at 1000m

45mm L46 M37 APCR
=================
96mm at 0m
89mm at 100m
82mm at 200m
75mm at 300m
69mm at 400m
64mm at 500m
57mm at 600m
50mm at 700m
45mm at 800m
40mm at 900m
35mm at 1000m

45mm L66 M42 APCR
=================
111mm at 0m
101mm at 100m
93mm at 200m
85mm at 300m
79mm at 400m
72mm at 500m
67mm at 600m
60mm at 700m
53mm at 800m
47mm at 900m
42mm at 1000m

References:
1. Russian April 1943 firing tests vs Tiger
============================================
45mm M37 APCR penetrates side at 200m
45mm M42 APCR penetrates side at 350m
76.2mm L41.5 APCR penetrates front at 500m on some hits

2. Russian "Instruction on fighting German tank T-VI", April 20, 1943
=======================================
45mm M37 APCR penetrates side at 200m
45mm M42 APCR penetrates side at 500m and front at 100m
76.2mm L41.5 APCR penetrates front at 100m

Above results appear to be based on calculations from published penetration data and the report predates actual firing tests against Tiger.

3. British A.R.D. Sketch "Penetration Curves of Russian Weapons, 30 Degree Attack (According to Russian Data)", Nov. 1946
===========================================
45mm M37 APCR at ranges from 100m to 491m.

4. Russian Battlefield table on "The Armor Penetration of the Soviet Tank Guns"
===========================================
76.2mm L41.5 APCR defeats 102mm at 100m, 98mm at 300m and 92mm at 500m

The Russian penetration figures for 45mm M42 APCR of 80mm at 500m and 52mm at 1000m appear to be questionable, since they are not consistent with 350m penetration range during April trials and are not consistent with 45mm M37 APCR penetrating 80mm at 200m (which is consistent with trials against Tiger).

The penetration estimates for 45mm M37 and M42 APCR were adjusted to equal 82mm penetration at 200m and 350m range to be consistent with the April firing test results against Tiger.

[Major Destruction]

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen

Let´s be simple and start with that .30 Cal. Machinegun (The aircooled version) that by pure magic has an RF/FC higher than most tanks of the period. Why was all machineguns not treated equally?

We will take the rest as we go along.

What values would you suggest to be more accurate?

[VikingNo2]

I would say one less on RC/RF than the .30 cal mounted on the tripod. Don't don't have any reason why I pick that just think they should be lees than the mounted one

[JJKettunen]

ORIGINAL: Alby

LORRINS FINDINGS

Note that those values are for APCR-ammo only...

LORRINS FINDINGS. Part 2. [:D]

ANALYSIS OF RUSSIAN PENETRATION CURVES

The Russian Battlefield web site provides penetration curves for Russian and Lend Lease tank guns in use during WW II, where the graph is available at http://www.battlefield.ru/library/archi ... ration.gif. The following discussion attempts to fill in the missing information regarding armor type and success criteria, and provides some cautions on the use of the curves.

1. The plots for 57mm thru 122mm guns are straight lines, whereas the data should present a curve
2. Comparison of the Russian penetration data for 75mm M72 (M4A2) and 6 pdr (Mark IV) guns with Allied figures suggests that the armor type is homogeneous, the Russians are using the Initial Penetration criteria (20% of hits succeed) and one data point at 500m has been extended to other ranges using a straight line approach
3. The curves for Allied 40mm and 37mm penetration show extreme fall-off with range and are questionable due to zero slope at 1150m (no change in penetration with range)
4. The Russian 20% IP criteria can be converted to 50% success using a 0.9443 multiplier

Applying expected penetration-vs-velocity-vs-range profiles for stated or likely ammunition types with the above assumptions results in the following revised penetration figures for Russian use tank guns (homogeneous armor, 50% of hits succeed):

1. 6 pdr (APC): 102mm at 100m, 85m at 500m, 68mm at 1000m
2. 76.2mm F-34 (APBC): 78mm at 100m, 69mm at 500m, 59mm at 1000m
3. M4A2 75mm (M72 AP): 108mm at 100m, 92mm at 500m, 76mm at 1000m
4. 122mm (APBC): 207mm at 100m, 189mm at 500m, 167mm at 1000m
5. 85mm (APBC): 136mm at 100m, 120mm at 500m, 102mm at 1000m

The above estimates are consistent with Russian firing tests against the 80mm design spec side armor on Tiger tanks during April and September 1943, where the 6 pdr tank gun had a 600m penetration range and APBC fired by the 76.2mm T34 gun failed to defeat the Tiger side armor at 100m and 200m range on perpendicular hits.

Analysis of 20 firing test results against the 80mm design thickness side plates on Tiger suggest that the average plate resisted penetration like 84.5mm of good quality armor (increased resistance due to combination of thicknesses above 80mm and improved ballistic response) .

[Rune Iversen]

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen

Let´s be simple and start with that .30 Cal. Machinegun (The aircooled version) that by pure magic has an RF/FC higher than most tanks of the period. Why was all machineguns not treated equally?

We will take the rest as we go along.

What values would you suggest to be more accurate?

I have been asked to refrain from commenting on this issue.

[Rune Iversen]

ORIGINAL: VikingNo2

I would say one less on RC/RF than the .30 cal mounted on the tripod. Don't don't have any reason why I pick that just think they should be lees than the mounted one

Seems reasonable, but again, I must curb my tongue.

[VikingNo2]

A curbed tongue, does not suit you[:-]

[JJKettunen]

Is this some sort of cencorship again? [:-]

[Rune Iversen]

Nah.
The powers that be feels that the OOB team should get a chance to finish their job.
I am willing to play along with that and intend to obey the ceasefire unless attacked myself.

http://spwaw.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=914

[Major Destruction]

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen

Nah.
The powers that be feels that the OOB team should get a chance to finish their job.
I am willing to play along with that and intend to obey the ceasefire unless attacked myself.

http://spwaw.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=914

This is beyond ridiculous![&:]

You asked me to consider making a change but you will not suggest how to make that change? What are you afraid of?

[KG Erwin]

No censorship, but the word has been passed down from the top that Matrix' forum policies are to be enforced. I received full blessing from David to exercise my discretion in the methods to be used in doing so.

ORIGINAL: Keke

Is this some sort of cencorship again? [:-]

[KG Erwin]

Stuart, this policy applies to team members, too.

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen

Nah.
The powers that be feels that the OOB team should get a chance to finish their job.
I am willing to play along with that and intend to obey the ceasefire unless attacked myself.

http://spwaw.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=914

This is beyond ridiculous![&:]

You asked me to consider making a change but you will not suggest how to make that change? What are you afraid of?

[harlekwin]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

No censorship, but the word has been passed down from the top that Matrix' forum policies are to be enforced. I received full blessing from David to exercise my discretion in the methods to be used in doing so.

ORIGINAL: Keke

Is this some sort of cencorship again? [:-]

That's charming and ominous.

David sent me a PM asking me to relent I shall out of deference to him and have in fact been encouraging others to do so behind the scenes.

KG you are very obviously the BEST PR force Matrix games has going for it.

[Rune Iversen]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

No censorship, but the word has been passed down from the top that Matrix' forum policies are to be enforced. I received full blessing from David to exercise my discretion in the methods to be used in doing so.

ORIGINAL: Keke

Is this some sort of cencorship again? [:-]

This is not because of anything you said or did.

[harlekwin]

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

No censorship, but the word has been passed down from the top that Matrix' forum policies are to be enforced. I received full blessing from David to exercise my discretion in the methods to be used in doing so.

ORIGINAL: Keke

Is this some sort of cencorship again? [:-]

This is not because of anything you said or did.

Quite it was because of what I said and did on behalf of David.

[Rune Iversen]

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen

Nah.
The powers that be feels that the OOB team should get a chance to finish their job.
I am willing to play along with that and intend to obey the ceasefire unless attacked myself.

http://spwaw.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=914

This is beyond ridiculous![&:]

You asked me to consider making a change but you will not suggest how to make that change? What are you afraid of?

Nothing, but I have been asked to refrain from commenting or critizicing as long as the OOBs is in the works.

[KG Erwin]

No, I won't ban you, nor will I delete anyone's posts, even though I have the authority to do so. If members want to incriminate themselves by flouting their disrespect for this forum, then the evidence can speak for itself.
My desire is for open but civil discussion in my area of the forums. This applies to everyone who posts here, whether they are involved in current Matrix projects or not.
I have written to every member of the OOB Team, requesting that they be more forthcoming on information regarding the upcoming OOB patch. I did this on the gamers' behalf, but at this point, that's all I can do.

ORIGINAL: harlekwin

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

No censorship, but the word has been passed down from the top that Matrix' forum policies are to be enforced. I received full blessing from David to exercise my discretion in the methods to be used in doing so.

ORIGINAL: Keke

Is this some sort of cencorship again? [:-]

That's charming and ominous.

David sent me a PM asking me to relent I shall out of deference to him and have in fact been encouraging others to do so behind the scenes.

Tell you what though 'sport' why don't you go on ahead and ban me now though okay?

[JJKettunen]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

No censorship, but the word has been passed down from the top that Matrix' forum policies are to be enforced. I received full blessing from David to exercise my discretion in the methods to be used in doing so.

I know Matrix' forum policy, and since I'm not going to present any pr0n here, I will continue to present relevant criticism, and there's nothing you can do about it.

[Rune Iversen]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

No, I won't ban you, nor will I delete anyone's posts, even though I have the authority to do so.

Afaik. you only have authority to enforce the forum guidelines as laid down in the official policy of Matrixgames.