<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Buff My Tank: T-60</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:08:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: EnsignExpendable</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/#comment-29600</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[EnsignExpendable]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 19:28:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=1925#comment-29600</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I already linked to the 90 mm result. Obviously it won&#039;t be in the tests against the Tiger, as the Blum rifle was tested against the Tiger, not the VJa-14.5. The data for the Blum rifle is from ЦАМО РФ 38-11377-13, page 50. &quot;Борт, 82 мм, №13, сквозная пробоина&quot; (side, 82 mm, #13, complete penetration).

The order of the weapons was also given in the document. The Blum rifle was tested against a clear section of the armour, so there&#039;s no cheating by pummeling the plate with shells beforehand. You would know all this if you had read the links in the article.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I already linked to the 90 mm result. Obviously it won&#8217;t be in the tests against the Tiger, as the Blum rifle was tested against the Tiger, not the VJa-14.5. The data for the Blum rifle is from ЦАМО РФ 38-11377-13, page 50. &#8220;Борт, 82 мм, №13, сквозная пробоина&#8221; (side, 82 mm, #13, complete penetration).</p>
<p>The order of the weapons was also given in the document. The Blum rifle was tested against a clear section of the armour, so there&#8217;s no cheating by pummeling the plate with shells beforehand. You would know all this if you had read the links in the article.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mariouus</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/#comment-28814</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mariouus]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 01:40:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=1925#comment-28814</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sorry, not the same document, some result probably can be found august 1943 Выстрел documents.

Has I understand you are talking about test result late april/early may 1943.Where exactly its say that it penetrates 90mm or even 70mm. I can only find &quot; Блюма пробивает 62 мм броню танка T-VI с дистанции 100&quot; What, I belive means &quot;Bluma penetrates 62mm armor of T-VI at 100.meters.

And in what order the weapons was tested?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, not the same document, some result probably can be found august 1943 Выстрел documents.</p>
<p>Has I understand you are talking about test result late april/early may 1943.Where exactly its say that it penetrates 90mm or even 70mm. I can only find &#8221; Блюма пробивает 62 мм броню танка T-VI с дистанции 100&#8243; What, I belive means &#8220;Bluma penetrates 62mm armor of T-VI at 100.meters.</p>
<p>And in what order the weapons was tested?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: EnsignExpendable</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/#comment-28584</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[EnsignExpendable]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 17:44:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=1925#comment-28584</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Then you think wrong. There is nothing about a Blum rifle being able to only penetrate 55 mm in that document. Show me where you found your figures.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Then you think wrong. There is nothing about a Blum rifle being able to only penetrate 55 mm in that document. Show me where you found your figures.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mariouus</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/#comment-28066</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mariouus]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 07:44:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=1925#comment-28066</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[55mm@100m and 50mm@300m is allready exelent by any standard, it&#039;s 3,7x of it&#039;s calibre.The fact that theres only slight drop in penetration at range, suggests that it isn&#039;t speed that is keeping penetration back, shell just isn&#039;t strong enought.


I think 20mm RES AT-Rifle (20mm shell probelled by shortened and necked-down 45mm).Would be much more potent weapon.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>55mm@100m and 50mm@300m is allready exelent by any standard, it&#8217;s 3,7x of it&#8217;s calibre.The fact that theres only slight drop in penetration at range, suggests that it isn&#8217;t speed that is keeping penetration back, shell just isn&#8217;t strong enought.</p>
<p>I think 20mm RES AT-Rifle (20mm shell probelled by shortened and necked-down 45mm).Would be much more potent weapon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mariouus</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/#comment-28013</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mariouus]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 04:00:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=1925#comment-28013</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not really my problem, you are the arhcive guy, 55mm@100m also comes from fireingtest result (I think the same one).So theres conflicting result,for some reason you publiced unrealistic ones.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not really my problem, you are the arhcive guy, 55mm@100m also comes from fireingtest result (I think the same one).So theres conflicting result,for some reason you publiced unrealistic ones.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: EnsignExpendable</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/#comment-27991</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[EnsignExpendable]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 01:01:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=1925#comment-27991</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Stalin cancelled the T-60 project before this gun was made. 

As for the penetration of the armour, the document clearly states that the Blum rifle penetrated the side of the Tiger tank. If you don&#039;t believe it, well, that&#039;s your problem.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stalin cancelled the T-60 project before this gun was made. </p>
<p>As for the penetration of the armour, the document clearly states that the Blum rifle penetrated the side of the Tiger tank. If you don&#8217;t believe it, well, that&#8217;s your problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mr48</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/#comment-27983</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mr48]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:09:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=1925#comment-27983</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Maybe because the GAU-8 was not tested against obsolete WWII era armor? Seriously, think before you post.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe because the GAU-8 was not tested against obsolete WWII era armor? Seriously, think before you post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/#comment-27957</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 23:16:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=1925#comment-27957</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It may or may not lose that gun.  It all depends on whether SerB gets his way or not.  If he does, the gun stays.  If not, it gets removed.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It may or may not lose that gun.  It all depends on whether SerB gets his way or not.  If he does, the gun stays.  If not, it gets removed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kellomies</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/#comment-27914</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kellomies]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 20:31:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=1925#comment-27914</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Whatever, really - I doubt anyone seriously considered trying to take out a Tiger with one of these things, and in game terms the thought exercise is about a *Tier 2* tank. The penetration ought to be entirely sufficient for about anything it runs into.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whatever, really &#8211; I doubt anyone seriously considered trying to take out a Tiger with one of these things, and in game terms the thought exercise is about a *Tier 2* tank. The penetration ought to be entirely sufficient for about anything it runs into.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mariouus</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/25/buff-my-tank-t-60/#comment-27907</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mariouus]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 20:10:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=1925#comment-27907</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As we know, 14.5mm AP shell was incendiary round, so yes &quot;burnt-out&quot; (why?figure it out).

To keep it simple, 14.5mm is just to small calibre and materials were inferior to penetrate 90mm. You could shoot it at 2000+m/s, but it still would&#039;n penetrate that much, at 60-70mm it would have been only tungsten dust and littlebit of melted metal.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As we know, 14.5mm AP shell was incendiary round, so yes &#8220;burnt-out&#8221; (why?figure it out).</p>
<p>To keep it simple, 14.5mm is just to small calibre and materials were inferior to penetrate 90mm. You could shoot it at 2000+m/s, but it still would&#8217;n penetrate that much, at 60-70mm it would have been only tungsten dust and littlebit of melted metal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
