WW2 armor vs Modern armor

[Big K]

what about a comparison between late-ww2 period tanks and todays tanks and anti tank weapons?

for exemle can a 88mm Flak penetrate the armor of a M1 Abrams or Challenger2? or an Arjun MBT?

or how effective will be Panzerfaust against a modern armor?

i know that this is not a fair match but i wonder what are the differences took place at armors and main guns and etc...

armor comparison,
penetration,
main guns and etc...

can we have a discussion of this?

for exemple:

Panther vs M1 Abrams,
IS-3 vs Challenger,
or
88mm vs modern tanks
or
a panzerfaust against modern armor.?

edit:
lets add ww2 era tank destroyers like;
JagdTiger and SU-122

thanks in advance

[zraver]

what about a comparison between late-ww2 period tanks and todays tanks and anti tank weapons?

for exemle can a 88mm Flak penetrate the armor of a M1 Abrams or Challenger2? or an Arjun MBT?

or how effective will be Panzerfaust against a modern armor?

i know that this is not a fair match but i wonder what are the differences took place at armors and main guns and etc...

armor comparison,
penetration,
main guns and etc...

can we have a discussion of this?

for exemple:

Panther vs M1 Abrams,

The Abrams has 10x the protection, is faster, low profile, better optics, themal vision, and its 120mm is 5x as effective as the Kwk43L/70

IS-3 vs Challenger,

A bit more interesting, the 122mm packs a big HE punch hat can wreck a modern tank for continued use without repair. But again the mobility, protection, optics issue only add up to one thing a deas WW2 era tank.

88mm vs modern tanks

Saddam tried to use 100mm ATG's with simialr performance vs the Abrams and even Pattons in 91 to no avail. The gun simply does not pack the punch in any form of the 88 to be effective.
or

a panzerfaust against modern armor.?

From the side the panzerfaust with its 200mm RHA penetration at 90 degrees will punch any tank in the lower side hull or rear and some modern tanks in the side turret.

[RustyBattleship]

I think that if some time machine ever had a meeting between the best WW II German tanks (including hunting tiger) against modern tanks;

After the first rounds of opening fire the Germans would say, "Ach Scheiss"

[IDonT]

I think that if some time machine ever had a meeting between the best WW II German tanks (including hunting tiger) against modern tanks;

After the first rounds of opening fire the Germans would say, "Ach Scheiss"

Screw the opening rounds. The Germans would only know that the Abrams are there is when one of their tanks blows up. Don't even get me started about engagements at night or in bad weather.

[zraver]

Screw the opening rounds. The Germans would only know that the Abrams are there is when one of their tanks blows up. Don't even get me started about engagements at night or in bad weather.

Harry Turtledoves colonization series has Pz III's taking on the equivalent of M1A1's. After getting ripped apart initially the Germans start using reverse slope and popping them in the bely form like 10-20m. They still lose but its the only way they manage a kill. Humanities biggest blow is when a German siege shell nails a landed alien ship and blows it apart. The Aliens are frantically firing anti-missile missiles at it and the shrapnel just bounces off of its thick bronze hide. Kind of like the EMP blast that does nothing to the earth side communications thanks to vacuum tube technology.

[T_igger_cs_30]

Screw the opening rounds. The Germans would only know that the Abrams are there is when one of their tanks blows up. Don't even get me started about engagements at night or in bad weather.

Even moreso with Challenger 2 than Abrams.

[Tarek Morgen]

Harry Turtledoves colonization series has Pz III's taking on the equivalent of M1A1's. After getting ripped apart initially the Germans start using reverse slope and popping them in the bely form like 10-20m. They still lose but its the only way they manage a kill. Humanities biggest blow is when a German siege shell nails a landed alien ship and blows it apart. The Aliens are frantically firing anti-missile missiles at it and the shrapnel just bounces off of its thick bronze hide. Kind of like the EMP blast that does nothing to the earth side communications thanks to vacuum tube technology.

I think I have heart of that series. Its about a slow developing Alien race which tries to invade earth during the Second World War and forces all sides to fight together against them? The War is so intense that Little Rock becomes the new U.S. Capital because all other major cities are lost?

[zraver]

I think I have heart of that series. Its about a slow developing Alien race which tries to invade earth during the Second World War and forces all sides to fight together against them? The War is so intense that Little Rock becomes the new U.S. Capital because all other major cities are lost?

Yup thats it.

[vannor]

Hmmm,...

Sounds interesting, OK I'll bite!

I submit that modern tanks have not changed, but improved. So much that the number of "Panthers" needed to destroy an "Abrams" would be equal to the "Abrams" total rounds of all types +four. This assumes the "Panthers" in prepared defense with only one route of advance for the "Abrams" and no retreat for either side.

Without getting too bogged down in a Statistics war. The "Abrams" can accurately move and fire which accounts for all the "Panthers" out of action. (I could imagine fairly easily the Hvy Mmg's on the "Abrams" disabling a few "Panthers") Eventually, "Panthers" will begin to score track hits on the "Abrams" immobilizing it and allowing the"Panthers" eventual point blank rear and side shots. This would be a long, tiring and difficult battle and under extremely narrow rules of engagement. I am also giving both sides highly motivated and skilled crews.

If one were to exchange the "Panthers" for German anti-tank squads circa:1944. As the "Abrams" is without infantry support, I believe 1-2 squads would first immobilize and then completely incapacitate the "Abrams" if not destroy it outright.
My reasons for a relatively "cheap" victory by the Inf. are as follows,
The "Abrams" would have great difficulty targeting the Inf. and while PzFst can't penetrate most of the "Abrams" armor It/they can certainly immobilize the " Abrams" this shifts the tactical momentum to the Inf.

On the subject of Harry Turtledove, is he really a writer? or merely taking a grade school history book and changing the names.

[gunnut]

How improved are the RPG-7s compared to the old Panzerfaust? It seems like the basic design is still the same. I'd say WW2 infantries armed with Panzerfaust are as dangerous to today's tanks as today's infantry armed with RPG. They can be quite effective in urban warfare and certain ambush situations.

[IDonT]

Chobham armor is designed to defeat shaped charged warheads from either an rpg or a HEAT round.

It is not just about armor and warhead. It's also about targeting systems. A modern tank can hit a moving target at more than a mile away while traveling at 40mph. Also, platoon leaders and company commanders have much better situational awareness.

Imagine the battle of 73 eastings, but instead of a troop destroying a brigade, a troop destroying 1 armored corps with little to no casualties.

[T_igger_cs_30]

rpg 29

[omon]

How improved are the RPG-7s compared to the old Panzerfaust? It seems like the basic design is still the same. I'd say WW2 infantries armed with Panzerfaust are as dangerous to today's tanks as today's infantry armed with RPG. They can be quite effective in urban warfare and certain ambush situations.

very improved, means of delivering a charge is entirely different, yes basic design is the same, but so is wright brothers flyer and b747, both have wings, and obey laws of aerodynamic.

in one way Panzerfaust was better for urban war, you could shoot it from a window, or closed quaters, try it with rpg, you'll be dead before your target is hit.

rpg is rocket propelled, has longer range, better sights(since it isn,t single use tube), better accuracy, and new tandem charge packs more punch. keep in mind rpg was designed in 60s, and hasn,t changed since than basicly, only the shot did.

[Albany Rifles]

25mm

My war story

JAN 1988 FT Stewart, GA. I was taking my Mech company through gunnery and was conducting Table VII Bradley Gunnery on Range Red Cloud FOXTROT. AT the end of the range was an old M47 tank hulk. At the end of the gunnery run I had 12 rounds of M791 APDS-T left (this was standard service 25mm but not the DU rounds of a few years later. From 1000 meters I put 2 6 round bursts into teh front hull of the M47. Next day I check out the front glacis of the hull of the armor. The 25mm had not fully penerated but they had penetrated to a depth of about 4 inches.

In the Gulf War there are many validated stories of Bradleys firing the 25mm DU APDS-T penetrating the armor on the T-72 in flank and turret.

So if that is what happened 17 years ago to more modern weapons, what do you think would happend to T-34s, PZKW Vs, M4A3s or Comets?

[zraver]

My war story

JAN 1988 FT Stewart, GA. I was taking my Mech company through gunnery and was conducting Table VII Bradley Gunnery on Range Red Cloud FOXTROT. AT the end of the range was an old M47 tank hulk. At the end of the gunnery run I had 12 rounds of M791 APDS-T left (this was standard service 25mm but not the DU rounds of a few years later. From 1000 meters I put 2 6 round bursts into teh front hull of the M47. Next day I check out the front glacis of the hull of the armor. The 25mm had not fully penerated but they had penetrated to a depth of about 4 inches.

In the Gulf War there are many validated stories of Bradleys firing the 25mm DU APDS-T penetrating the armor on the T-72 in flank and turret.

So if that is what happened 17 years ago to more modern weapons, what do you think would happend to T-34s, PZKW Vs, M4A3s or Comets?

You can take out an early T-72 from the front with a .50 cal firing tracers if you can get the right angle on the right front fender and put a tracer into the unarmored fuel tank just above the fuel level.