“How the Hell Didn’t THAT Penetrate!?”

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

okay, this is not a serious article, but something Yuri Pasholok made a video of. Check this out – this is Yuri Pasholok, holding a 48 kilogram SU-152 (ML-20) shell.

 

 

He’s saying (the first part is hard to hear):

“…this is a 152mm shell from the stock version of the SU-152 SPG. It weighs roughly 48 kilograms. Gentlemen of the game balance department: we, who work in the museum would really like you to tell us – how can you not penetrate with THIS? Thank you.”

Funnily enough, Storm replied with:

“….and this is the guy, who told me on Skype that if the historicity messes up gameplay, then fuck historicity”

on which Yuri Pasholok reacted:

“This is not gameplay, this is ‘patented damage model’. Often fucked up. The fucked up mechanism has even been known for a long time.”

And as a bonus, Yuri Pasholok posted two pictures:

“Didn’t penetrate their armor” (a non-penetrating hit by a 152mm shell at Ferdinand frontal armor that just ripped it apart)

“Ricochet” (this happened to a Panther at 1200 meters, same gun, the shell ricocheted but the hit was still devastating)

72 thoughts on ““How the Hell Didn’t THAT Penetrate!?””

      • “in Polish – patentowany = niepoprawny (wrong)”
        It’s more “notorious” (niesławny) than “wrong” (niepoprawny).
        For example “leń patentowany” means “notoriously lazy person” and not “wrong lazy person”.

  3. So the Ferdi was luckily hit at the welds and the Panther ricoche the shell. What exactly is the highlight of the 152mm round ?

    Note, the area where Ferdi was hit has very low armor in-game, as it can be penned even by T-34 (the T5 that is).

    • I don’t think it was a lucky hit. A 152mm shell, unlike in WoT, cannot simply “bounce off”, it will rip apart anything it hits, one or the other.

      • The Russian “Range” photo are used a lot to demo the destructive power of big gun. But if You fire a 152mm /122mm gun at a target 10-20 time You get impressive but useless data. The crew would have died From overpressure after the 2 or 3 round and the tank would have been impair after 1-2 shot.

      • I think the examples are a little unfair, at least for ricochets. They are a straight 90° and 45° armours, whereas WoT ricochets happen at 20° maximum, at which angle lot of kinetic energy is going different way than to armour. And let’s face it, on both pictures the shells “did not penetrate”, literally – would the tanks work after that? Would the crew survive? Would they be able to shoot back?

        It would be interesting for heavy AP projectiles to have some guaranteed HP effect on hit, though – but it would still have to be compared with armour. It’s something different to hit a Panther and something different to hit a Maus.

      • Exactly, even a ricochet will have enough kinetic energy to shatter/smash the armour, shots to turrets were known do dislodge them from the turret rings or in some cases remove them completely no doubt slicing the turret crew into pieces too.
        Even if the shot does not penetrate can you imagine the effect that will have on the tank and more importantly its crew I would’nt be surprised if in either tank members of the crew were effectively shell shocked from that rendering them useless and probably deaf at the very least

      • By lucky hit I mean the area hit by the shell. As I said, at the welds, a zone with very low armor in WoT as well, just look at the left half of the impact hole.

        BTW, how do we know this was the SU-152 doing this damage, and not a more advanced 152mm gun like the BL-10 ?

        • You guys do realize that you’re adding more complexity ? Devs will simply say NO because they want to keep damage model simple as in :
          Penetration = Damage
          Bounce/ricochet = No damage

          I’m not saying your ideas are stupid, I’m just pointing out how the devs will respond to that.

        • There are no more advanced 152mm guns, BL-10 was only a prototype. The one the SU-152 is equipped with is the stock and commonly used 152mm gun.

      • I don;’t think these images are credible though. The vehicles have been repeatedly pummeled by shells from various calibers. There was a topic about this on EnsignExpendable(?)’s blog.

        Anyway, the point is these are not clean single shots on a pristine target. If you hit a vehicle hundreds of times with 76′s , 122′s(also evidence on EE blog) and other guns, then of course eventually they will fall apart. It is not credible evidence.

        Well, for the Ferdi at least.

        • Here:
          http://tankarchives.blogspot.fr/2013/03/suisu-152-vs-german-big-cats.html
          and here:
          http://tankarchives.blogspot.ca/2013/03/is-2-vs-german-big-cats.html

          classic quote (is2 with d-25 vs : tiger 2) :

          “Shot #3. Target: upper front plate. Shell: 122 mm AP flat type. Distance: 500 m.
          Result: dent 310 mm by 300 mm, 100 mm deep. On the rear side, a piece of armour 160 mm by 170 mm and 50 mm deep cracked off. The welding seam between the upper front plate and hull roof burst. All seams between the upper and lower front plates burst. The seam between the lower left hull and the left side of the hull burst. The driver’s observation device was torn off.”

          Here, we see the perils of overly hard armour again. Even though the shell did not penetrate, the large chunk of armour that flew off the other end effectively carried out the shell’s job, killing crew members and destroying tank components. The driver now has his observation device embedded in his skull, which doesn’t increase his effectiveness any. More welding seams fail throughout the tank.

      • Su-152 had muzzle velocity if 880ms/s, and maximum range of 18500m. We know already that its shell weights 43 kg (actually more like 43,5 but never mind that).
        To compensate for the loss of speed because of distance lets take 800m/s and 43 kg of weight. That shell, impacting would have released 15360000 Joules of kinetic energy. And this is its pure weight, not even taking its payload into consideration.

        But, wtf that means. Well that converts to 3,67 kg of pure TNT just placed on the tank and detonated. And that’s before the payload detonates. Just to compare, soviet TM-35, WWII anti-tank mine used 200g of TNT, a really big, german Tellermine 29, used 4,5 kg

        • You have some big failures in there, that i can see without being an expert(kinetic energy comes from the ammunition itself -> losing much weigt).
          So please dont do pseudo-science when you dont have a big idea of that.

          and your comparison doesnt make much sense either …
          The main purpose of anti tank mines is to blow off the track or generally make the tank immobile and not to destroy the whole tank.

          • Ek = 1/2mv^2

            It’s literally transfer of mass and velocity into energy. All modern sabot shells are kinetic impactors. All rifle bullets are kinetic impactors. Object that weighs 43 kg, travelling at 800m/s, has 15360000 Joules of energy. When such object comes into a collision with something, lets say a tank, its tries to still travel. That’s called momentum. The armour would try to stop the object, but to do that it needs to absorb or redirect its energy. But ISU is not an impactor, what Yuri showed was probably APBC that also carries a 0,5 kg active payload that would detonate AFTER the shell penetrates. But that does not change its mass on impact and its kinetic energy.

            And I know that AT mines are supposed to immobilize tanks, I just thought that energy expressed in Joules is not something most people would understand, so I calculated that into kg of TNT. As it happens the effect was around a heavy AT mine, so I put that as a more graphic example.

            While my calculations are sound, I’m sorry for any lacklustre explanations on my part.

        • If mass is the only important thing then why the hell do tank have guns and not old cannons which shoot cannonballs ? Good grief, talk about stupidity.

          • I’d rather say, you are the one that doesn’t understand that basic equation:

            Energy(kinetic)=0,5*Mass*Velocity²

            What you see here is, that the velocity of the projectile goes in SQUARED, so has a MUCH bigger influence on the energy of that projectile.
            A medieval cannon fired those balls at what? 250? 300? m/s definitely below the speed of sound.
            So, let’s say that thing weight 50 kg (a fucking big ball of steel…err iron), that’s an energy of 2,25 MJ (2.250.000 Joule).
            A modern tank projetile, although rather low on mass has a muzzle velocity of +/- 1600 m/s (Leopard 2, according to Wikipedia).
            That’s an energy of 9,8 Megajoule (9.800.000 Joule – again, Wikipedia) concentrated on an area of like 50 mm². And that hurts A LOT.
            So your comparison is moot and rather childish.

            Please go and fetch a 10th grade physics book and learn what you’re trying to talk about before throwing random insults at people.

            P.S: I just registered to write that little essay. If my math is off, please correct me, it’s late ;)

          • Mass is important, but velocity is as well.

            Cannonballs, unlike shells, have very bad aerodynamics so in the air, they lose a lot of speed due to air resistance.

            Thats why guns are used instead of cannons – it gives the shell a far greater range and it can still hit with a lot of energy.

        • Your calculations have to be off. There is no way that 152mm shell is travelling at 880m/s at the moment of impact, nor is there anyway that is the actual muzzle velocity.

          I would guess 600m/s is much more reasonable for that howitzer. I won’t deny sheer kinetic energy can wreck metal like it was Styrofoam, but 880m/s is the muzzle velocity of an AK-74. No way that short barrel can hold enough pressure to propel such a heavy round at rifle speeds. Since kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the velocity, big differences on velocity like this do matter a lot.

    • If it happens to be a 152 HE shell the overpressure created inside the tank could kill or seriously injure the crew.

      The 152 is not just an ordinary cannon..it is a field artillery piece.

      • pretty sure centurions were shot in korea by field artillery and the crew were fine , just damage to the optics etc, can’t remember the calibre of the guns though.

        • Is the 48kg just the projectile or the projectile and propellant case – seen the weight quoted in various places for both.

          Muzzle velocity also quoted as 600, 650 and here 800 m/s

    • Actually low armor part on ferdi is untouched at that picture, where the signal lamp (or headlight?) is mounted.

  4. The more and more I see Yuri in this enviroment, the more I like and respect him. He CAN be a real douche on the forums, but THIS Yuri I can accept, and agree with his statements

      • Also German 12,8 cm FlaK cannons might do the same with armour piercing round, they are of high velocity. We all should remember simple physics formula for kinetic energy. Sure it’s an approximation but very useful. And can’t write it properly with my phone, but: Kinetic energy equals to half the mass times velocity squared.

      • I’m just taking a jab.
        Of course WG shouldn’t pass the opportunity for “historical accuracy” buff, especially for 122 mm and 152 mm Russkies. Might come with stationary German heavies in one patch!

        • The greatest problem with 122mm was their abysmal range. Small maps are basically another facade of soviet bias

            • artillery range and effective tanking range are different things. 122 mm D-25TA/2A17 the most modern soviet 122 mm, mounted on T-10 had effective range reported between 1000-1500 m. Those are reports of post war test on shooting range, using Tiger ausf B as target. The same soviet tests concluded that Tigers B 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71 was able to penetrate any allied tank on ranges up to 2500m. What more, D25-T 122 mm gun is more known for its 500-1000 metres capabilites.

              Soviets knew this and after meeting Tigers II, they delegated almost all IS and IS-2s to supporting infantry. They were really good at busting bunkers or fortification.

          • Armour of Tiger II has nothing to do with the effectiveness of these guns…

            Where is your source that claims 100mm is better than 122mm?
            Source for where immobilized Tiger”B” destroyed 5 IS-2? (not that it’s relevant; because that involves a lot more than just gun’s effectiveness)

            I posted mine, and 100mm only has a minor advantage at close range; otherwise the heavier projectile from 122mm wins(and don’t forget, again, 122mm does not need to penetrate 75% to do more damage than 100mm going by weight of how much of projectile went through).

  8. Off topic; Yuri’s face is begging to be bashed up w/ a baseball bat.

    What a fucking retard…

  9. If you want to kill a Ferdi with a SU-152 by autoaiming you can always load HEAT ammunition. With that the ML-20 gets 250mm penetration.
    And if you want to instagib any target with nearly any gun play WT…

  10. I remember there are modern 152 howitzers that have shells that have compatibility with the venerable ML-20, right?

    why not grab a working ML-20, a live 152 shell like the shit modern pieces use or a live WW2 one, and have the ML-20 direct fire at a 3-5 inch steel plate that aint acutely angled and see what happens. really would like to see an ML-20 roar though.

  12. Well, with an addition of a “shell weight”, it might be interesting gameplay wise. Doing damage to armored targets with AP like HE shells, it’s interesting, but I personally think it’ll give high caliber guns(which tend to have big shells) a somewhat unfair advantage over those with smaller guns.
    Really, all it does is make the BL-10s and such be capable of dealing damage to pretty much anything even if it’s at auto-bounce angle.

    tl;dr It’ll just be a buff to russian TDs and arties that can fire AP.

  13. What tank game has ever modelled this kind of reaction to an impact before? WoT is clearly an arcade tank game that is designed to work well for esports, whether they admit it to all. Historicity will always fall second to game balance; there is nothing wrong with that. WT is supposed to be (using the simulation battle type) a more realistic alternative to WoT, but they don’t model this either. Seems kinda pointless to insult WG staff on not having this properly modeled in a game that has never tried to be 100% accurate anyways.

    • i think what yuri meant was to atleast give high caliber non penetrating hits some effect. only my opinion tho, since they also did this at he shells

    • i can lift a 25kg sack with one hand. im pretty sure i can lift up to 50kgs more if i exercise a bit

    • Do you even lift bro?

      48kg resting against his chest, moving it about using both arms always close to the body.

      That’s about the weight of a 12 year old kid.

      Hell, even a 12 year old kid could lift a 12 year old kid like that.

      So why can’t you?

  17. “Baaah why I don’t one-shot tier X tanks with my tier VII TD?”

    Fuck off, Yuri. As if ISU wasn’t broken as fuck with its retarded penetration values… This is a game where there are fucking HEALTH BARS, for fucks sake. If you want realism, join the army (or play Warthunder).

  18. “why doesn’t it work like this? here, we have evidence”
    “because fuck realism”
    sO WHY THE FUCK
    DO YOU HIRE
    A HISTORIAN

  21. historicity is not a word in the English language. Therefore how does one fuck something that doesn’t exist?

    I think the correct word in this case would be authenticity.

  22. They used to have a different HE model. But it was to OP (No one shot AP ammo because if it), so they went with the current one.