Imperial Munitorum manual extra content discussion

[Cykeisme]

I look at it this way, at least they are looking in the right place as opposed to pulling it out of their arses entirely.

Seriously, if you want to blame authors for shit numbers in a franchise like SW, or on a smaller scale 40k, its the editorial oversight that you should take issue with.

True.

Sometimes I think publishers should run stuff by stardestroyer.net to make sure everything checks out, before going to print.

[Teleros]

Sometimes I think publishers should run stuff by stardestroyer.net to make sure everything checks out, before going to print.

I've thought the same thing myself more than once .

[Connor MacLeod]

Some further notes:

1.) WRT to the Conquerors being able to keep up with Titans, I've dug out that Warhound Titans (as per one of hte imperial armour sources, so its validity can be whatever one wants to make of it) give a rough movement speed of around 55-60 km/hr. A Conqueror would have to be capable of similar speeds in order to keep up, which implies that a Conqueror is about twice as fast as the "standard" Russ (at least as per IA and Chapter Approvd sources.)

2.) "Armour piercing" shells:

To withstand the shock of punching through thick sheets of armour plating,
shells were designed with a greatly strengthened case with a hardened,
shaped tip and a much smaller explosive payload (rendering the shell into a virtually solid missile). The impact of such a shell is unlikely to destroy an enemy tan, but even a glancing impact is enough to stun the crew of a vehicle struck by such a heavy shell. Once an enemy tank is halted, even if only for a few seconds, it is a simple matter to engage with multiple conventional shells to destroy it.

Emphasis mine. The latter half of that passage has a number of interesting details:

1.) the main difference between an AP and "regular" shell (differing from an anti-tank, one assumes?) is its's smaller explosive charge to make it a better physical impactor. Regular shells are thus also a combination of explosive and impact in terms of destructive effects, although at differing ratios.

2.) a phyiscal impactor alone is not enough to destroy an enemy tank, but is more meant to inflict crippling damage. Its also worht noting that most tanks (which presumably includes the "primitive" orks as well as the more fragile Eldar/Tau equivalents) require multiple shells to destroy - Imperium tanks ought to be at least similarily durable (if not moreso.) This implies significant impact/energy resistancee, given the estimated KE/momentum and explosive power of such shells.

3.) The physical impact (even glancing) can "stun" a tank's crew or even briefly halt the tank. Halting the tank would mean more than just stunning the crew, though (even stunned, the tank's engine would be running and it would still have momentum.) so this implies the momentum of the round is quite considerable (about what is implied by Honour Guard, in fact.) Stunning implies considerable acceleration imparrted to the crew, which in turn suggests the tank was accelerated significantly (again with force/momentum in the round being considerably greater than modern tank rounds.)

2The tank squadrons of Commander Rittman of the Fighting 56th claim to have destroyed an enemy titan by using such shells, though the probability of this is low given the thickness of a titan’s armour and the protection offered by void shields. Rittman is said to have rebutted this by claiming that his drivers were so daring that they were able to get their tanks within the void shield perimeter and that his gunners were so skilled that they were able to aim their shells at the same impact point and thus punch ever deeper into the titan’s body until it was destroyed. No records exist to prove or disprove this, but every tank in the squadron proudly bears the kill-marking that commemorates this deed.

This is not the first case I have heard of an Imperium tank group taking down a titan: A "chapter Approved" article on armoured regiments described a Cadian tank company engaging and destroying a Chaos battle titan (albeit with casualties.) They caused the armour to "crack" and run "molten" with their fire, and even sheared through one of its legs to topple it with a shell. The tactics were much the same, although in the CA version one tank survived to tell the tale.

Combining the two may indicate to us that the Cadian company was using Anti-tank rounds too (The round identified as being used in the anecdote above.) This implies considerable destructive power and penetration on the parrt of even conventional tank weapons, to be able to damage a Titan (even a small one, who have meters-thick armour.)

Also note that even able to penetrate a fraction of the thickness of titan armour with a shaped-charge, teh tank round would have to have a tremendous diameter given the "width to penetration ratio of 1.5 to 2" given in the pdf above. (ex: penetrating between 250-300 mm of Titan armour would require around a 125-150mm diameter shell minimum, 150-200mm more likely, which is consistent with Russ muzzle diameters from other sources. Not all Battle cannon are the same, of course, and carry tradeoffs for the larger shell.

The shell is formed from an explosive shaped charge that creates a
high-velocity jet of molten metal on impact that can punch through virtually
any armour2. This hypersonic jet of plasmic metal eats through thick
armour with ease and flares out within the body of the target tank, incinerating the crew and damaging onboard systems and controls.

Again the anti-tank (shaped charge) round. Note the reference ot "plasma", which probably does not refer to (literal) plasma (but is probablyt a rip off of descriptions of the actual shaped charge.) Then again, the Demolisher cannon shell (which is a larger version of this) also makes reference to plasma, so there might be something more or exotic to it (40K has lots of "exotic" plasmas after all, and some of them are described as "liquid", inane as that sounds.)

Interesting to note: the "Shaped charge" will incinerate multipel gun crews after penetrating the tank round. This implies hundreds if nto thousands of megajoules of enegy (to incinerate a human being), AFTER penetration (which probably increases the yield at least several times, since the tank armour is qutie durable.) It also tells us just how much energy is needed to punch through the armour (and thus tells us the relative power of anti-tank weapons as well.)

It's also interesting to contrast this with flamer weapons (lke the hellhound) which will also incinerate troops but won't do squat to tank armour.

During the siege of Raphon Guardia, over three thousand Basilisk artillery pieces were tasked with breaching the walls. Millions of tonnes of ordnance were expended in the opening days of the bombardment, but such was the strength of the xenos fastness that it took a further week of constant shelling to bring down the walls.

severla thousand Basiliks dumped "megatons" of ordnance in a matter of "Days" in a siege on a town, simply to breach the walls. This gives us an indication of how durable 40K defenses can be (it took over a week to breach the walls, indicating far more than the "megatons") and just how powerful basilisks could be.

If we assume each basilsk expended around 100 shells per day, over 3 days (300 shells per basilisk in all, each shell is equilvaent to several tons of TNT. even if I'm off by an order of magnitude, that is an insane amount of firepower on a "per shell" basis (easily equal to a 250 kilo explosive warhead.)

[Connor MacLeod]

Several more more interesting tidbit relating to the HK missiles:

Each missile can defeat the armour of practically
any armoured vehicle and many a tank crew has been thankful for that
extra weapon system when an enemy tank bears down on them from an unexpected quarter.

The hunter/killer has an effectively unlimited range and the system will operate in all weather conditions in which the tank’s crew can see the target throughout the missile flight by using either a day or night sight (the use of a targeter will substantially increase the probability of scoring a kill shot).

First: The ability to penetrate the armour of any vehicle implies that the warhead is going to be of similar power to any other armour-piercing warhead (liek an anti-tank round) which gives us an idea of the yield of the krak missile (GJ range probably.)

SEcond: Effectively unlimited range as long as the target is basically within line of sight. Given the height of a Russ and an Eartthlike planet, this would imply a range of around 7-8 km or so. What is interesting is that this is considered a "backup" weapon against an enemy, so this implies that other anti-tank weapons are considered to be of comparable range.

Third: Note the mention of "night sights", indicating the ability to target/fight at night (given the compactness of auspex and targgeters and IR gear, no surprise.)

[PainRack]

If you refer to the recent SB thread, I couldn't understand why he was so unwilling to post references, after all, His Last Command has bayonet charges. Then I checked my notes, and saw the bit about how it was a desperate move, an "antique" tactic, and that the terrain and close proximity of the enemy, plus the requirement to dig them out led to it. and they "still" shot the fuck out of them as well.

God... My frustration with the bayonet charge tactic isn't the fact that its a WW1 tactic that's not really being used by the IG or SM(Ignoring specialised chapters). Its the fact that fans are annoying PROUD of it and go berserk with the idea that hth combat is prevalent in the Imperium.
I recall such a wankage going on with this guy over Roughriders...... Ok, the IG had cavalry regiments which serve as scouts and are even organised into heavy cavalry units. So?

Don't these fans see how stupid wanking over such a tactic is? Its like arguing that because the IG have guns which can shoot through walls, they're uber elite troopers!

[white_rabbit]

If you refer to the recent SB thread, I couldn't understand why he was so unwilling to post references, after all, His Last Command has bayonet charges. Then I checked my notes, and saw the bit about how it was a desperate move, an "antique" tactic, and that the terrain and close proximity of the enemy, plus the requirement to dig them out led to it. and they "still" shot the fuck out of them as well.

God... My frustration with the bayonet charge tactic isn't the fact that its a WW1 tactic that's not really being used by the IG or SM(Ignoring specialised chapters). Its the fact that fans are annoying PROUD of it and go berserk with the idea that hth combat is prevalent in the Imperium.
I recall such a wankage going on with this guy over Roughriders...... Ok, the IG had cavalry regiments which serve as scouts and are even organised into heavy cavalry units. So?

Don't these fans see how stupid wanking over such a tactic is? Its like arguing that because the IG have guns which can shoot through walls, they're uber elite troopers!

As long as you ain't pointing them words at me Pilgrim, I've got no quarrel with ya

I should point out just for hilarities sake, that the Death Korp Rough Rider squadrons apparently ride beasties that you could happily describe as "Equinuus Astartes"