MG's penetration vs. rifles ?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

MG's penetration vs. rifles ?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SP:WaW Training Center >> MG's penetration vs. rifles ?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

MG's penetration vs. rifles ? - 3/5/2004 10:09:41 AM

Gavris Narcis

Posts: 311
Joined: 8/19/2000
Status: offline

Just I'm asking what reason have the armor penetration values have the MG's versus rifles, because take an example: the kar.98 german rifle and the MG 34 LMG have the same ammo: 7.92mm x 56, the muzzle speed is identical, the weight of the bullets identical, etc......
In game terms, the LMG have AP penetration =6, and the kar98 AP=0.
The only guess is that the rifle have ball point bullets (brass/copper) and the LMG have steel point (not solid) !?
It is true ? I think that's the only explanation. Or maybe......
I await curiously responses.

Leo.

Post #: 1

RE: MG's penetration vs. rifles ? - 3/5/2004 7:17:34 PM

Robert J. Smead

Posts: 890
Joined: 8/9/2003
Status: offline

There was a definate difference for US ammo in WW2. Armor piercing ammo, hardened tip, being available as an option.

(in reply to Gavris Narcis)

Post #: 2

RE: MG's penetration vs. rifles ? - 3/5/2004 8:35:57 PM

VikingNo2

Posts: 2918
Joined: 1/26/2002
From: NC
Status: offline

I also think the the rate of fire has something to do with it, one round from the rifle you mention hitting a Jeep or truck probably will not kill it but 20 hitting it in one second its a whole different ballgame. I could be wrong though, just my .02

(in reply to Robert J. Smead)

Post #: 3

RE: MG's penetration vs. rifles ? - 3/6/2004 4:22:29 AM

Maciste

Posts: 81
Joined: 3/5/2004
Status: offline

Remember that a MMG have a longer barrel than the M98k, thus it, combined with gas pressure, make the rounds achieve more velocity, which implies more penetration capability (maximum distance of the Mauser 98, about 600 meters; the mg34 or 42 1000 meters)

(in reply to Gavris Narcis)

Post #: 4

RE: MG's penetration vs. rifles ? - 3/6/2004 11:20:28 AM

Voriax

Posts: 1719
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: Finland
Status: offline

98k barrel length is 600mm
For MG34 the barrel length is 625mm or 560mm, depending of version
And for MG42, 535mm
Finally the M98 rifle, 740mm

Voriax

_____________________________

Oh God give Me strength to accept those things I cannot change with a firearm!

(in reply to Maciste)

Post #: 5

RE: MG's penetration vs. rifles ? - 3/6/2004 3:32:36 PM

harlekwin

Posts: 5863
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: arkham asylum
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gavris Narcis

Just I'm asking what reason have the armor penetration values have the MG's versus rifles, because take an example: the kar.98 german rifle and the MG 34 LMG have the same ammo: 7.92mm x 56, the muzzle speed is identical, the weight of the bullets identical, etc......
In game terms, the LMG have AP penetration =6, and the kar98 AP=0.
The only guess is that the rifle have ball point bullets (brass/copper) and the LMG have steel point (not solid) !?
It is true ? I think that's the only explanation. Or maybe......
I await curiously responses.

Leo.

You are misunderstanding the things being modeled. A rifleman is going to shoot maximum 15 to 40 rounds per game turn multiplied by the number of rifles in use.(although in real life this is STILL a vast overrepresentation it is what is being modeled) The aiming points will vary wildly over the body of the vehicle as they are not all aiming at the same point and the angles of impact will be disparate based on positioning.

A machine gunner will put by himself 50-450 rounds depending on the type of firing he is doing in the same timeframe. These rounds will impact from a similar vector at a smaller point of aim as long as the gunner is engaging in point fire at the time of engagement. This means that there is more likelihood of multiple impacts along the same area of the vehicle.

The way a small caliber non-hardened round (and even hardened rounds to an extent) delivers damage to a material is through impact bending and wearing down the tensile strength of the material eventually destroying the temper in steel. A rifle is less likely to do this quickly because of the inherent variance in point of impact and the protracted nature of the timing of the impacts.(ie does not overstress the molecular bonds as quickly as a repeated and constant stream of impact) All of this is even ignoring the different temper levels of the likely targets.(ie an engine block is harder steel than a door and cast tank steel harder than all of the preceding by a strict MM comparison)

The .30 caliber class was NOT considered an armor piercing round by any stretch of the imagination that the powers that be considered the 12.7 and above class of weaponry.

Hope this helps.

regards,
sven

_____________________________

$ociali$m-from those who will to those who won't.....

(in reply to Gavris Narcis)

Post #: 6

RE: MG's penetration vs. rifles ? - 3/8/2004 10:21:00 AM

Gavris Narcis

Posts: 311
Joined: 8/19/2000
Status: offline

>>>Remember that a MMG have a longer barrel than the M98k, thus it, combined with gas pressure, make the rounds achieve more velocity, which implies more penetration capability (maximum distance of the >>>>Mauser 98, about 600 meters; the mg34 or 42 1000 meters)

I was very clear: SAME MUZZLE VELOCITY !

Leo.

(in reply to Gavris Narcis)

Post #: 7

RE: MG's penetration vs. rifles ? - 3/8/2004 10:30:29 AM

Belisarius

Posts: 4041
Joined: 5/26/2001
From: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gavris Narcis

>>>Remember that a MMG have a longer barrel than the M98k, thus it, combined with gas pressure, make the rounds achieve more velocity, which implies more penetration capability (maximum distance of the >>>>Mauser 98, about 600 meters; the mg34 or 42 1000 meters)

I was very clear: SAME MUZZLE VELOCITY !

Leo.

You know this for a fact?

_____________________________

Got StuG?

(in reply to Gavris Narcis)

Post #: 8

RE: MG's penetration vs. rifles ? - 3/8/2004 11:13:29 AM

Gavris Narcis

Posts: 311
Joined: 8/19/2000
Status: offline

> You know this for a fact?

Yes, it's a fact. I do not throw words before I search documents/sources.
All sources say the same thing: same muzzle velocity.

Leo.

(in reply to Belisarius)

Post #: 9

RE: MG's penetration vs. rifles ? - 3/8/2004 11:18:11 AM

Gavris Narcis

Posts: 311
Joined: 8/19/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: harlekwin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gavris Narcis

Just I'm asking what reason have the armor penetration values have the MG's versus rifles, because take an example: the kar.98 german rifle and the MG 34 LMG have the same ammo: 7.92mm x 56, the muzzle speed is identical, the weight of the bullets identical, etc......
In game terms, the LMG have AP penetration =6, and the kar98 AP=0.
The only guess is that the rifle have ball point bullets (brass/copper) and the LMG have steel point (not solid) !?
It is true ? I think that's the only explanation. Or maybe......
I await curiously responses.

Leo.

You are misunderstanding the things being modeled. A rifleman is going to shoot maximum 15 to 40 rounds per game turn multiplied by the number of rifles in use.(although in real life this is STILL a vast overrepresentation it is what is being modeled) The aiming points will vary wildly over the body of the vehicle as they are not all aiming at the same point and the angles of impact will be disparate based on positioning.

A machine gunner will put by himself 50-450 rounds depending on the type of firing he is doing in the same timeframe. These rounds will impact from a similar vector at a smaller point of aim as long as the gunner is engaging in point fire at the time of engagement. This means that there is more likelihood of multiple impacts along the same area of the vehicle.

The way a small caliber non-hardened round (and even hardened rounds to an extent) delivers damage to a material is through impact bending and wearing down the tensile strength of the material eventually destroying the temper in steel. A rifle is less likely to do this quickly because of the inherent variance in point of impact and the protracted nature of the timing of the impacts.(ie does not overstress the molecular bonds as quickly as a repeated and constant stream of impact) All of this is even ignoring the different temper levels of the likely targets.(ie an engine block is harder steel than a door and cast tank steel harder than all of the preceding by a strict MM comparison)

The .30 caliber class was NOT considered an armor piercing round by any stretch of the imagination that the powers that be considered the 12.7 and above class of weaponry.

Hope this helps.

regards,
sven

Definitelly you have a very good answer. Though the above mechanism work on stationary targets best, it was reported and happened with moving targets too (not too often). But this can't eliminate the presence of the AP core hardened bullets often used in ww2 by many countries. I militate for introduction of them with the year and country parameter. Ex: the germans had at every 5-10 common bullets 1 AP hardened core ! It's a fact !
Thank you for the reasonable and good answer.

Leo.

(in reply to harlekwin)

Post #: 10

RE: MG's penetration vs. rifles ? - 3/8/2004 1:19:35 PM

Belisarius

Posts: 4041
Joined: 5/26/2001
From: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: offline

I won't go into wether it's should be in the game or not, but a 7.62 rifle has a massive strike power. It will easily punch through soft steel at least.

_____________________________

Got StuG?

(in reply to Gavris Narcis)

Post #: 11

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SP:WaW Training Center >> MG's penetration vs. rifles ?

Page: [1]