View Single Post
  #43  
Old 10-05-2012, 09:37 PM
Kurfürst Kurfürst is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 705
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NZtyphoon View Post
And where did a weight of 12.1 kg for the light alloy plating come from?
From a detailed report.

Quote:
That the 8mm thick 109E "armour" weighed only 46 kg indicates that it was not armour plate, which would have weighed considerably more, but probably a toughened alloy of some kind, or a sandwich of armour and alloy.
You are simply wrong.

Quote:
Then we have the usual assertion of how bad British methods were cf the uber German...
Well the British method was to put relatively low thickness armor plates in a lot of places, which were useful when you were shooted at with non-AP munition or by German bombers. Unfortunately the thickness used on British fighters (4.5 mm back plate, 6.2mm head plate) was only marginally effective when shot at by even 7.92mm AP munition.
__________________
Il-2Bugtracker: Feature #200: Missing 100 octane subtypes of Bf 109E and Bf 110C http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200
Il-2Bugtracker: Bug #415: Spitfire Mk I, Ia, and Mk II: Stability and Control http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/415

Kurfürst - Your resource site on Bf 109 performance! http://kurfurst.org
Reply With Quote