109 Can Kill Stuart from any angle#173

The 109 round had a 0.25 inch armor penetration ability from 90 degrees from what I understand.
The Stuart’s THINNEST armor is 0.25, and that’s only parts of the top (not the turret) from what I understand.
The 109 can kill the Stuart (and it kills all crew 1-4 at once) by strafing it from just about any angle.
Something doesn’t sound right.

We will review and check for errors just to be thorough. But in the future, please check and verify your sources before reporting improper performance. You misstated the Stuart’s topside armor and wildly understated the 20mm MGFF and MG151 AP capability. Depending on your references, the Stuart’s THINNEST armor is between 3/8” (9.5mm) to 1/2” (12.7mm) on top and bottom hull and turret top. Also, again depending on sources, the 20mm MGFF and MG151 can penetrate between 20-25mm at 100m, and that doesn’t include the added velocity of the rounds imparted by the aircraft. So while not specifically designed for killing tanks, those rounds were perfectly capable of punching through the top of Stuart light tank with a steep enough dive angle.

I will look back at the sources. Granted, it’s been a while since I looked. Regardless, in game the 109 can tear up all 4 positions in the tank from any angle and any distance. The 109 could not penetrate through Stuart armor, except MAYBE for the top armor, and it would have had to be at the right angle. What angle does your source say penetration was 20-25mm? I have read a TON of WWII books and historical articles, and I do remember finding mention in a couple of sources that there is no record of a 109 EVER killing a Stuart Tank, not even with bombs.

In a couple days I will test killing stuart with 109 from various angles. In the past we have tested various angles (we could have missed some shots though so i will double check) and found the spot to be the rear engine deck and you need to hit it atleast at ~40deg angle using any of the standard 20mm cannon(s) on axis planes. We did not test shooting it in other spots with the 109f2 cannon which uses 15mm AP since the other spot is practical enough.
There was probably no record in the war of 109 killing a stuart because strafing tanks with a 109 at high speed + angle would be insane in real life but this is a game and we do not value our lives.

Thank you lovewing, please advise on results. S!

@Hatch, I went back and looked, and according to what I am seeing, the armor on top of the Stuart was 25mm. The armor penetration for the BF 109 F-2 was 18 mm at a 60 degree angle. That means it should not penetrate the Stuart. Also, when a projectile is firing greater than the speed of sound (or close to it) an extra 300 miles per hour is virtually negligible to adding force penetration - certainly not another 39% of penetration through armor.

I suggest you dig a little deeper into your hull top and bottom as well as turret top specifications. A good place to start would be “Catalogue of Standard Ordnance Items, volume 1” from the Office of the Chief of Ordnance, Technical Division, Washington DC. https://archive.org/details/CatalogOfStandardOrdnanceItemsVolume1

Or maybe “Technical Manual TM 9-726 Light Tank M3 (Stuart)”. https://archive.org/details/TM_9-726_1942_Light_Tank_M3

I think you are mistaking the upper rear specs for the hull top…

And

Kinetic energy is one of the main piers of penetration calculations. As an example: MGFF 20mm AP round weighing .115kg with a mv of 615 m/s has a minimum penetrative value of 18-19mm RHA plate at 100m. If I add 300mph (134.11 m/s) to that mv (615+134.11=749.11), that moves my penetrative capability from 18-19mm to 23-24mm, or approx an addition of 4-5mm in capability at the same 100 meters. That’s almost a half to a quarter of your armor value at 3/8-1/2”.

And given the correct armor specs and these penetrative values, your dive angle can be as low as 30 to 40 deg (60 to 50 from perpendicular) and still penetrate 3/8” to 1/2” respectively, (note that does not include additional kinetic energy from a moving airframe).

Here is a publicly available web based penetration calculator for you to reference to see the effects of additional kenetic energy from the airframe yourself. Just put the correct specs in and add airspeed to the mv.
https://www.tankarchives.ca/p/demarre-calculator.html

The 15mm had the 18mm penetration at 60 degrees - not the 20mm. The 20mm penetration was far less - i believe 11-13mm. The mass you calculated is incorrect. The 15mm round had far less mass than the 20mm cannon round.

I got the Stuart armor thickness from Steven Zalota, who is one of the foremost experts on WWII light armor and transport vehicles. Online WWII Museum also references Stuart armor thickness.

I clearly stated my numbers were based on the MGFF 20mm, and armor thicknesses on declassified wartime material. If you truly believe I am in error after the references I shared with you, I suggest you actually contact Mr Steven Zalota and get clarification. The bottom line is that both cannons available on the 109 series are capable of piercing the top deck and turret top of the Stuart at an easily achievable diving approach. I cannot change the physics.

“I believe” that you are doggedly trying to support a false belief/assumption on your part and are providing nothing but non-referenced (shared) or anecdotal and/or other clearly incorrect assumptions, which costs me time I cannot afford to lose having to un-archive/reference the data and re-verify the in game data entry/performace to refute such unsupported theories, and/or to provide you the references with which you should be able to find and come to the proper conclusions yourself. I am not here to argue or debate with you, have provided official references and tools for you to learn from, and at this time consider the matter closed.

Hey Dan, when in doubt, you can always load up War Thunder and mess with their armor protection feature to test out theoretical weak spots at ranges which would also apply to WWIIOL, since both games take their ballistics and armor data from historical sources. I loaded up an Sdkfz fitted with the same 15mm gun found in the F-2 and had it firing against a Stuart at 200 to 300m and found if anything, WT not only supports its lethality against the Stuart but shows maybe it should be even more lethal? You may be onto something, it may actually be underperforming in WWIIOL! Screenshots attached https://imgur.com/a/Yh8UMzc

Additionally, Hatch, is that penetration calculator you linked a good resource to test penetration capabilities currently live in WWIIOL with the right data inputs?

No. Not specifically. I mean its probably a good “ballpark” reference if you are inputting the correct historical AP shell data AND have the shells velocity through its range of travel to enter for the correct velocity at impact.

As far as WWIIOL, I don’t know what equation Hoof used in the code (DeMarre, Krupp, something newer or another variation thereof), and then we use cross-referenced official WWII data and performance reports (one example below) to enter the correct gun/shell specs and then adjust ballistics and penetration coefficients to get as close to the historical test performances throughout their effective range.

http://michaelhiske.de/Wehrmacht/Luft/HandbuchBordwaffenMunition/Teil02/Inhalt.htm

战争雷霆中KWK40轻松击穿M4A3E8，在WWIIOL中M4A3E8的正面是无敌的

As mentioned previously, this issue is closed.