Welcome to the Inert Ordnance Collectors.
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Meon Valley, UK
    Posts
    576
    Images
    83
    Thanks
    285
    Thanked 176 Times in 73 Posts

    Mega Joules on the Eastern front.

    For those interested in the heavy metal, I hope you'll find the following comparitive picture of interest.

    • On the left is the German 12,8cm Pzgr43 (APCBC/HE) which with a total weight of around 28.35Kg and velocity of 950 m/s would carry a muzzle energy of around 12.79MJ of energy and penetrate around 210mm armour at 500yrs and 30° obliquity
    • On the right is the Russian BR-471 (APHE) which with a total weight of around 25Kg and velocity of 800 m/s would carry a muzzle energy of around 8MJ of energy and penetrate around 140mm armour at 500yrs and 30° obliquity

    For comparison if I assume (I've had to guess) the British Challenger 2 using CHARM has penetrating rod weight of around 10Kg and velocity of around 1600 m/s it would carry a muzzle energy of around 12.8MJ of energy which coincidentally is almost identical to that of the PJK44 in the Jagdtiger (or Pak44/80), but I have a wee inkling it significantly outperforms the old German beast..

    ...and finally the little 2.8 cm sPzB 41 would carry around 0.13MJ energy (Vo 1400 m/s and mass of 0.132kg - thanks StrakV)...not quite Pzgr40/42 writeups, but I hope you find interesting.

    German 128mm and Russian 122mm -1024.jpg
    Last edited by RichardB; 29th December 2016 at 04:33 PM.


  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to RichardB For This Useful Post:

    apfsds (29th December 2016), beihan62 (29th December 2016), enrico959 (29th December 2016), SG500 (29th December 2016)

  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary, Hungary
    Posts
    102
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 50 Times in 29 Posts
    I guess, the mass of the 2,8cm applies to the complete round. The projectile itself weighs 132g

    V.

  4. #3
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Meon Valley, UK
    Posts
    576
    Images
    83
    Thanks
    285
    Thanked 176 Times in 73 Posts
    Your probably correct, I did a quick search for it.... in hindsight it does seem rather high
    I'll re-edit my thread. Thank you


  5. #4
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Posts
    720
    Thanks
    271
    Thanked 555 Times in 280 Posts
    The kinetic energy at impact is of course only one part of the story. More to the point is the energy per unit area, and hence one key reason for the development of discarding sabot ammunition. A heavy metal penetrator of given energy with smaller incident area will deliver a greater force (pressure) than an equivalent energy penetrator of bigger area.





    Tom.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Snufkin For This Useful Post:

    RichardB (30th December 2016)

  7. #5
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Meon Valley, UK
    Posts
    576
    Images
    83
    Thanks
    285
    Thanked 176 Times in 73 Posts
    ....not to mention losing a lot less velocity (and therefore energy) on the way to the target, due to its smaller cross section
    Last edited by RichardB; 30th December 2016 at 08:56 AM.


 

 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to top