What the hell is Soviet T-34's front armor bouncing mechanization

[Arima]

i mean, seriously, how the hell u bounce at any point beside that (unworking) machingun post, even with flak 88

[Katokevin]

Originally posted by Li_Shin:

It is Gjan being Gjan aka Russian bias. In real life, countless documenties have shown that the German 88mm, 75mm (on Panther), and even the 75mm on Panzer IV H have no problem punching through the supposedly stalinum sloped armor of T34. Meanwhile, the Russian with their 85mm and even later 122mm constantly struggle to fight the Germans from long distance due to poor optics and cheap materials the Soviets used to make their shells.

Of course the 75mm and 88mm could, the T-34 reamined 45mm on the front hull all throughout the war. The 85mm and 122mm were no light hitters either. Optical issues had been sorted out by then as radio and optic problems were only a problem untill around 1942 as the Germans forced their way quickly into Russia and they were forced to constantly move factories rearward. Once finally settled in areas safe from German air and ground attack, these issues were sorted out.

If you want quality issues, look at the Germans as well. By as early as 1944, the German steel industry was in a very poor state. Testing by the US at the Watertown arsenal laboratory had shown this quite well. What they had found was that due to bombing and material shortages, Germans had been replacing Molybdenum with Vanadium as well as using high carbon steel. To make things even worse, they were not heated and cooled correctly, resulting in steel as hard as 262 - 300+ on the Brinell scale.

So, what does that exactly mean? Very brittle armor. How bad exactly? Well, on May 26, 1945, ordnance personnel had blown off a piece of a Panthers side armor 21.5 inches long and 18.5 inches wide (triangular in shape) with a 75mm HE shell. Now think of what an 85mm or 122mm would do, even just the impact of the shell alone. If you want to further read up, the report number is: No. WAL 710/750, 25 may 1945. Another similar report being No. WAL 710/715 18 Jan 1945. Both done at the Watertown Arsenal Laboratory.

[Wiesell]

This is either a l2p issue or rng issue

[Zalzany]

Originally posted by Li_Shin:

It is Gjan being Gjan aka Russian bias. In real life, countless documenties have shown that the German 88mm, 75mm (on Panther), and even the 75mm on Panzer IV H have no problem punching through the supposedly stalinum sloped armor of T34. Meanwhile, the Russian with their 85mm and even later 122mm constantly struggle to fight the Germans from long distance due to poor optics and cheap materials the Soviets used to make their shells.

What the hell you on about? The 88 was mounted on the tiger that was built as mobile 88 platform was more of an SPG then a heavy tank and the 75mm on the panther were both put into action fight the t-34 because every tank till then couldn't pen it. And the 85, and 120 showed up on the last year of the war, and they beat the germans in less then one year with them so I want to see this struggled with them when they pushed them all the way back to Berlin with in one year of D-day when staling finally decided to invade german held turf and march to Berlin lol.

I love these people you can find eye witness acounts of the germans struggling for what 5 years almost 6 against the Russian armor and you talking about optic problems they sorted out after 1943 or so before the 85 and 120 were even put into the war lol. Aslo it wasn't struggle they never really needed them till late war because for starters a t-34 was built to last about 3 months, they had so many they really didn't need to put sniper scopes on their tanks as it was the enemy who was pushed into a corner and needed them to try and fight them off with too little too late.

T-34 went down as the tank the won the war it had ass tons of problems yeah, but it didn't matter it was built to win wars not beuty pagents or marksmeans ship tournments. It was made so any farm boy could build it, and they often did, they could be cheap and made in bulk and you can toss some bumpkin into it and sick him on the enemy. They had problems but they were all super easy to fix. That was and still kind of is the Russian defination of quality we see it as work of art that doesn't break to them quality means its super cheap/easy to make, and repair.

Germans were making hand crafted masterpieces that took ages to repair and needed custom tools, and parts. You could loot a barn or shed and fix a t-34 in the field with zero special training.

[Wiesell]

Originally posted by Zalzany:

Originally posted by Li_Shin:

It is Gjan being Gjan aka Russian bias. In real life, countless documenties have shown that the German 88mm, 75mm (on Panther), and even the 75mm on Panzer IV H have no problem punching through the supposedly stalinum sloped armor of T34. Meanwhile, the Russian with their 85mm and even later 122mm constantly struggle to fight the Germans from long distance due to poor optics and cheap materials the Soviets used to make their shells.

What the hell you on about? The 88 was mounted on the tiger that was built as mobile 88 platform was more of an SPG then a heavy tank and the 75mm on the panther were both put into action fight the t-34 because every tank till then couldn't pen it. And the 85, and 120 showed up on the last year of the war, and they beat the germans in less then one year with them so I want to see this struggled with them when they pushed them all the way back to Berlin with in one year of D-day when staling finally decided to invade german held turf and march to Berlin lol.

I love these people you can find eye witness acounts of the germans struggling for what 5 years almost 6 against the Russian armor and you talking about optic problems they sorted out after 1943 or so before the 85 and 120 were even put into the war lol. Aslo it wasn't struggle they never really needed them till late war because for starters a t-34 was built to last about 3 months, they had so many they really didn't need to put sniper scopes on their tanks as it was the enemy who was pushed into a corner and needed them to try and fight them off with too little too late.

T-34 went down as the tank the won the war it had ass tons of problems yeah, but it didn't matter it was built to win wars not beuty pagents or marksmeans ship tournments. It was made so any farm boy could build it, and they often did, they could be cheap and made in bulk and you can toss some bumpkin into it and sick him on the enemy. They had problems but they were all super easy to fix. That was and still kind of is the Russian defination of quality we see it as work of art that doesn't break to them quality means its super cheap/easy to make, and repair.

Germans were making hand crafted masterpieces that took ages to repair and needed custom tools, and parts. You could loot a barn or shed and fix a t-34 in the field with zero special training.

its sarcasn

[sagagt505]

Do you know about STALINIUM material? It's used for Soviet tank armor.

[Wiesell]

Originally posted by sagagt505:

Do you know about STALINIUM material? It's used for Soviet tank armor.

Sarcasm

[saymyname]

https://youtu.be/rdp6GY_VAUg

And no lmao, sloped armor just increase the thickness.
It shouldn't bounce shell with higher penetration than t34 effective armor

[saymyname]

Originally posted by Zalzany:

Meanwhile Gajin has miltary advisors and historians on staff, and realistically angled armor is so damn good its standard issue for every decent tank in the world since T-34 showed off how effective it was lol.

Even the germans copied it with the panther line because they were so dumbfounded by how good it worked.

Lol you clearly don't know what you are talking about

1) Sloped armor has been ditched LONG AGO
Today tanks use perforated, composit and reactive armor, regardless of what you look from Challefer, Leopard, Abrams, Ariete, Leclerc....even t14 abandoned sloped rounded turret for a boxy one.
Sloped armor offers little to no benefit.
You clearly have no military experience and i hardly think Devs military advisors, if they are actually a thing, have as well

2) Germans used sloped armor way before t34 was in the drawing board, in the stug 3. The reason why it wasn't used on mainline turretted tanks is the reason why both early French and Russian tanks using this failed. The sloping add weights and reduce internal space, it limits the size of the carried gun and both tanks lacled a proper commander 360 view cupola.
Hell they even lacked radio units before 1944 t34-85 overhaul because of how cramped t34-76 were.
Sherman and Panther are the first tanks to correctly benefit from the sloped armor without being damaged from it

[Eftwyrd]

Originally posted by SAY_MY_NAME:

Lol you clearly don't know what you are talking about

1) Sloped armor has been ditched LONG AGO
Today tanks use perforated, composit and reactive armor, regardless of what you look from Challefer, Leopard, Abrams..
Sloped armor offers little to no benefit.
You clearly have no military experience and i hardly think Devs military advisors, if they are actually a thing, have as well

these technologies increase effective armour thickness without the weight of 1m of steel armour... if we were still using steel armour you would still see more sloped armour.

the reason few of these more modern armours show slopes is because the interaction of the different layers serves the same purpose of redirecting force, i.e. in perferated armour the incominng shell is redirected by following the path of least resistance through the perforations rather than the solid material in its way, most sloping as it was seen in ww2 would be redundant and only serve to reduce the interior space of the tank without actually adding to the effective thickness and deflection characteristics as it does with plain old steel

[saymyname]

Originally posted by Eftwyrd:

Originally posted by SAY_MY_NAME:

Lol you clearly don't know what you are talking about

1) Sloped armor has been ditched LONG AGO
Today tanks use perforated, composit and reactive armor, regardless of what you look from Challefer, Leopard, Abrams..
Sloped armor offers little to no benefit.
You clearly have no military experience and i hardly think Devs military advisors, if they are actually a thing, have as well

these technologies increase effective armour thickness without the weight of 1m of steel armour... if we were still using steel armour you would still see more sloped armour.

the reason few of these more modern armours show slopes is because the interaction of the different layers serves the same purpose of redirecting force, i.e. in perferated armour the incominng shell is redirected by following the path of least resistance through the perforations rather than the solid material in its way, most sloping as it was seen in ww2 would be redundant and only serve to reduce the interior space of the tank without actually adding to the effective thickness and deflection characteristics as it does with plain old steel

Exactly

[Arima]

guys, stop, this is getting ridiculous

basically, i shot t34 front hull because turret front side always bounce any ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ ammo, maybe gaijin made that to balance (or memes) the downside of their depression, which is suck ass

and their front hull is sloped which is the main problem, because actually, enemy's t-34 stz (both of me and my enemy is stz) can one shotted me through that useless machinegun port while i dont, and it made me frustated because thats the reason i dont ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ play russian tank anymore (and also, when i played kv 1 zis, im always getting uptiered, which is frustating because i cant upgrade it)