Yak-9T - incredible firepower (or maybe incredible tank's lack of armor?)

[JtD]

Look guys, the way it is, if a projectile doesn't penetrate, it doesn't kill. You can spray all the 7.62 into even a lightly armoured tank, and nothing will happen.

[sniperton]

Originally Posted by JtD

Look guys, the way it is, if a projectile doesn't penetrate, it doesn't kill. You can spray all the 7.62 into even a lightly armoured tank, and nothing will happen.

Yep, but please teach the AI not to waste light ammo on armoured targets. I have lost many AI mates due to return fire when their bombs were gone and they pathetically continued their attack with LMGs...

[bladeracer]

Originally Posted by JtD

Look guys, the way it is, if a projectile doesn't penetrate, it doesn't kill. You can spray all the 7.62 into even a lightly armoured tank, and nothing will happen.

I disagree, decent non-penetrating hits can cause spalling of the inside surfaces of the armour.
7.62 is unlikely to "kill" a tank.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by bladeracer

I disagree, decent non-penetrating hits can cause spalling of the inside surfaces of the armour.
7.62 is unlikely to "kill" a tank.

I disagree about spalling with 7.62mm on heavy tanks, it should do, as it apparently currently does, nothing.

[bladeracer]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

I disagree about spalling with 7.62mm on heavy tanks, it should do, as it apparently currently does, nothing.

I didn't say that 7.62 would cause spalling.
But a projectile does not need to penetrate the armour to "kill" the tank.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

I disagree about spalling with 7.62mm on heavy tanks, it should do, as it apparently currently does, nothing.

It does nothing.
Other than entertain the crew inside with rain-like sound.
(proven, a relative of mine was a panther driver)

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by swiss

It does nothing.
Other than entertain the crew inside with rain-like sound.
(proven, a relative of mine was a panther driver)

On most armored vehicles 7.62 mm or similar rounds does nothing, except for AP rounds against very light mild steel armor at close ranges. In a few cases, though, you might get spalling against slightly heavier armor, which might injure crewmen or damage very delicate components. Spalling is unlikely to do any damage to the drive train, engine block or gun, however.

Practically, shooting small caliber bullets at AFV does three things:

1) It allows you to aim your heavier guns. You shoot first with light caliber guns, observe where your bullets fall, then shoot with your heavier weapons - assuming they have roughly the same trajectory or you correct accordingly.

2) It forces AFV to remain "buttoned up" limiting the crew's visibility from inside the vehicle and preventing them from manning top-mounted AAA MG.

3) The rattle of bullets might "rattle" the crew. Inexperienced tank crews might retreat or maneuver defensively, on the assumption that all those bullets are just a precursor to something much worse. In some cases this is a valid assumption, since MG were sometimes used as ranging weapons for AT guns. This result could be built into a "mobility kill" option that makes tanks move defensively.

[bf-110]

I was wondering that the other day.How effective were air attacks against tanks.

Also I guess that some of the effectiveness was based on making the tank crew freaking out and leaving the tank?

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by bf-110

I was wondering that the other day.How effective were air attacks against tanks.

Also I guess that some of the effectiveness was based on making the tank crew freaking out and leaving the tank?

There are some reports that you can dig for and dig up. The ultimate answer is that direct attacks against tanks weren't very effective at destroying actual tanks. Most rocket attacks didn't score the needed direct hits, bomb blasts were a similar story... what I have read is that IL-2s themselves were most effective against tanks when employing PTAB bombs. Initial reports were apparently not believed and additional field reports were conducted confirming their effectiveness. I haven't read the corroborating story but my understanding is that the PTAB bomblets were useful... the 37mm anti-tank cannons were less so. Similar story for the Stuka with the BK 3,7 where direct hits were effective but only from some angles on the heavier tanks. The massive 75mm gun on the Hs129B-3 and a Ju88 variant was found to be very effective, however, the recoil effects were immense.

That all said... attacks against tanks had secondary effects. Decreased morale, panic, etc. In Normandy the Thunderbolt and Typhoon attacks against tanks didn't destroy many but they reduced the overall effectiveness of whatever group was attacked. Also, air attacks against support vehicles that supplied the tanks were devastating. Destroying the fuel trucks that supplied the tanks caused no small impact.

[JtD]

Originally Posted by bladeracer

I disagree, decent non-penetrating hits can cause spalling of the inside surfaces of the armour.
7.62 is unlikely to "kill" a tank.

I was referring to the game. But yes, even none penetrating hits can in theory kill in real life.