If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
However, I would very interested to see the video clip. Likewise. Okay, I don't know if you all will be able to view this (I just got a new video editing program), so let me know. I have uploaded the video clip as promised...but I made it in the smallest file size possible--and the video is not the best, but you can hear the audio quite well. I put it in a REALPLAYER format. THe URL to download is: www.texasairmuseum.com/temp/p47tank.rmvb Let me know what you all think. If someone wants a super high quality video, I can try to provide it. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
"Nick" wrote in message
om Let me know what you all think. If someone wants a super high quality video, I can try to provide it. I can't say for sure, but it sounds like he's talking about getting ricochets into the fuel tank in the *trailer* the Tiger was towing, not into the Tiger itself. -- Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail "If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed) |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
|
#74
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 01:44:04 GMT, "Gord Beaman" )
wrote: (TooPlaneCrazy7) wrote: No, I've thought about this but it's not what he's saying. He said that sometimes the trailer comes off and he'll just try to "bounce" the bullets underneath the tiger's belly and penetrate the thin armor, instead. He'll find any way he can to take it down. I think that's what he's saying. I agree with this too, although, like Tony and others I feel that ricochets would have expended most of their energy and likely wouldn't be able to penetrate much. Even .303 tracer rounds ricochets off the ocean surface haven't much energy, their flight path is very curved indicating they've lost most of their speed. I've seen lots of this effect. Note that a .50 cal Browning has a LOT more energy than a .303. Al Minyard |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: P-47/51 deflection shots into the belly of the German
tanks,reality From: Alan Minyard Date: 8/31/03 3:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time Message-id: Note that a .50 cal Browning has a LOT more energy than a .303. Al Minyard Al , that was one of the greatest understatements ever posted on this NG. But tactfully presented. (grin) Arthur Kramer 344th BG 494th BS England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 01:44:04 GMT, "Gord Beaman" ) wrote: (TooPlaneCrazy7) wrote: No, I've thought about this but it's not what he's saying. He said that sometimes the trailer comes off and he'll just try to "bounce" the bullets underneath the tiger's belly and penetrate the thin armor, instead. He'll find any way he can to take it down. I think that's what he's saying. I agree with this too, although, like Tony and others I feel that ricochets would have expended most of their energy and likely wouldn't be able to penetrate much. Even .303 tracer rounds ricochets off the ocean surface haven't much energy, their flight path is very curved indicating they've lost most of their speed. I've seen lots of this effect. Note that a .50 cal Browning has a LOT more energy than a .303. The argument as far as I'm concerned is not about energy loss from a ricochet. It's that the .50 didn't have enough penetrative ability to get through a tank's belly armour at what would have to be a very glancing striking angle. Furthermore, the bullets would probably have been destabilised by the impact with the road (assuming that they didn't just drill into it) and tumbling on impact with the armour, further reducing their effect. Incidentally, while the .50 has about four to five times as much energy as a rifle-calibre cartridge, the AP bullet has only about double the penetration because, being wider, it takes much more energy to push it through armour. Tony Williams Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk Military gun and ammunition discussion forum: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/ |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
I will be getting this footage on DVD which will enable us to see a better
picture quality, as well. Also, I sent an email to the show's director asking him about this "claim". Give me a couple more days until I get the DVD. |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
The reference was to .303 tracer rounds. The .50 cal AP would, in all probability, not penetrate after a ricochet, however if you can put 50-60 rounds under the belly there is a fairly good chance the one or two will. Well, at the risk of repeating myself (the problem with long threads!) you need to bear the following in mind: 1. It is extremely unlikely that any bullets bounced off the road would strike a tank's belly armour at an angle better than 30 degrees (that would involve the plane attacking in a dive steeper than that). 2. The penetration of a .50 AP round at 300 yards and 30 degrees is just 5mm (official figures) - and that's without bouncing off the road first). 3. The belly armour of any 1944 tank is at least double that, to the best of my knowledge. 4. In order for the bullets to bounce off the road but penetrate the armour, the road would have to be harder than the armour plate. Tony Williams Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk Military gun and ammunition discussion forum: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/ |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Tony Williams wrote:
Well, at the risk of repeating myself (the problem with long threads!) you need to bear the following in mind: 1. It is extremely unlikely that any bullets bounced off the road would strike a tank's belly armour at an angle better than 30 degrees (that would involve the plane attacking in a dive steeper than that). 2. The penetration of a .50 AP round at 300 yards and 30 degrees is just 5mm (official figures) - and that's without bouncing off the road first). 3. The belly armour of any 1944 tank is at least double that, to the best of my knowledge. 4. In order for the bullets to bounce off the road but penetrate the armour, the road would have to be harder than the armour plate. Beyond that, isn't there the issue of the integrity of the projectile? After a strike pavement or a cobble, a jacketed round will deform. AP ..50" calibre, which had a jacketed antimony core IIRC, would usually have its jacket torn off and suffer some degradation or its terminal ballistics. -- Andrew Chaplin SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO (If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
P-47/51 deflection shots into the belly of the German tanks, reality or fiction? | [email protected] | Military Aviation | 55 | September 13th 03 06:39 PM |