Would Schürzen be any more effective is it was sloped roughly

>>31502211
no just heavier

take a wild guess

>>31502235

This, that would just be heavier.

File: m113a3_13.jpg (224KB, 1000x742px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1000x742px

>>31502211

The only thing that could have made it better is to make it into this stuff.

File: 1473177669800.jpg (2MB, 3240x2430px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3240x2430px

>>31502211
Panther thread? Panther thread

>>31502211
Schürzen, IIRC, were only intended to defeat 14.5mm rifles, which they did, without sloping. Also sloping seems like it'd make it harder to fit down streets and bridges and stuff without having to stop to remove them.

File: Tank Armor Merkerva Turret.png (1MB, 1024x982px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x982px

>>31502211
Seeing as it was just a spaced metal sheet to trigger a HEAT, HESH, or HE round prior to hitting the actual armor.. not really.

This (image) would be been revolutionary for their armor at the time, and would make relatively lighter tanks impervious to tank rounds of the time period.

Metal/Rubber/Metal

>>31502332
Gr8 b8 m8.

File: Pz IV-012.png (2MB, 1213x951px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1213x951px

>>31502211
>Would Schürzen be any more effective is it was sloped roughly like that in the picture provided?

Not really.

The skirts were initially developed to prevent penetration / spalling by anti-tank rifles (such as the Soviet PTRS and British Boys) and later, for protection against shaped-charged (HEAT) warheads, at which point the Germans switched to wire mesh skirts, being lighter and cheeper while doing the same job.

>>31502254
>stop protecting against threats they were designed
>better
>inb4 in 2016 he still thinks that Schürzen was designed against HEAT rounds

How effective was Schürzen against regular AP rounds? For some reason I feel like it helped protect against standard AP rounds, but I'm not actually sure why I believe this.

>>31502397
heat rounds from anything but low velocity grenades/panzerfausts where useless at the time anyways. even those were pretty shitty due to not having piezo electric fuzes.
if you put your protection too close to the armor they would actually improve the armor penetration of the heat rounds

>>31502397
>wire mesh skirts
How come I only see mesh like that on military dozers and the like now a days and not on tanks?

Am I just not looking in the right place, is it ineffective or does it interfere with ERA or some other system?

File: mesh side skirts.jpg (41KB, 635x460px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 635x460px

>>31505843
>How effective was Schürzen against regular AP rounds?

The skirts we only 5mm thick and mild steel at that, their purpose was to slow down / destabilize the incoming anti-tank rifle round, which was then stopped by the tank's integral armor.

Against larger caliber tank or towed anti-tank gun AP rounds, the skirts wouldn't do shit but versus HEAT rounds, they caused premature detonation of the incoming round.

This is why later in the war, after anti-tanks rifles became essentially useless due to thicker tank armor, the skirts were made from wire mesh, even cheaper and lighter.

>>31505964
What about for 20mm offset/spaced-armour, like on the Pz.III Ausf M? I know it isn't technically Schürzen, but how was its performance against AP rounds?

>>31505954
>How come I only see mesh like that on military dozers and the like now a days and not on tanks?

Because dozers are more worried about falling bricks and shit and slat armor (>>31502254) does the same thing as WWII plate or mesh skirts (prematurely detonating the HEAT round) but they're sturdier, provide for better coverage and allow for better vision by the crew.

Tanks can carry heavy supplemental armor and thus go with ERA armor blocks, that are more effective then slat armor.

>>31506051
>but how was its performance against AP rounds?

Well, it was 20mm more armor and that itself is better and in theory, the AP round would be slowed / destabilized enough that it would be stopped by the tank's integral armor.

In the end, heavier integral armor on heavier tanks was needed.

>>31506087
>slat armor
I was considering them to be the same thing - same concept just much thicker mesh.

>Tanks can carry heavy supplemental armor and thus go with ERA armor blocks,

But what about the shitty tanks in the ME? They don't have the budget for ERA, but they definitely have a welder and sheet steel and the internet to learn about the idea.

Instead they're losing tanks to RPGs

File: 1453323840-tumblr-ntq2gtsdgh1tj31v2o1-1280.jpg (163KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1000x666px

>>31506482

While I suppose it doesn’t hurt to nigger-rig some spaced armor, modern HEAT warheads are much more effective then WWII ones.

File: 2c20.jpg (50KB, 1000x418px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 1000x418px

>>31506482
>But what about the shitty tanks in the ME? They don't have the budget for ERA

You're seriously overestimating how complex this stuff is.

It's just a thin metal box with some thin metal plates and a little bit of explosive. If you have even the most basic domestic production abilities, you can make ERA.

There's also plenty available just sitting around in various warehouses and stockpiles, so it's not as if they really need to make more of it to begin with.

>>31506399
I imagine the spaced armor would be interesting against high velocity, low weight shells such as the Littlejohn adapted 2lber.

File: tungsten end mills.jpg (97KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1200x1200px

>>31506612
>Littlejohn adapted 2lber.

These weapons required tungsten for the projectiles, which was in very limited supply, as it was needed back home for the machining industry.

Even the U.S. only managed to issue 18,000 rds of 76mm HVAP in the last year of the war.

>>31502211
it was there to stop 14.5mm tungten ammo, not HEAT
one layer is enough