From: Steve Grammont (islander@midmaine.com)
Date: Tue Dec 14 2004 - 16:28:37 PST
Hello Ryan,
>Ahh, you're talking about the two plates of 20mm isn't equal to a
>single plate of 40mm. That's had some interesting contradictory
>conclusions based on the study.
I see you're into the geeky stuff full tilt! Good for you :-) Yes, the
50% thing is just a rule of thumb. Depends on the type of armor, how it
is applied, and what hits it. I never looked into the naval stuff too
much, but I am not surprised to hear there is a bit of difference.
>Still, it really was mostly moot, when an 8.8cm Flak or 7.5cm L60 PAK
>was shooting at you, it didn't matter if you had 20mm 40mm or 60mm,
>you were still going to get perforated.
Yup. Which is why some commanders tried to stop all the extra stuff from
getting added. Other commanders, however, probably felt that if it
boosted morale (even if without true justification) then it was better to
just let sleeping dogs lie. The Allied crews had enough downers on the
battlefield they didn't need their commanders reminding them there wasn't
a damned thing they could do about it!
Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:38:53 PDT