StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Crazedwraith wrote:

Batman wrote:

Big Orange wrote:And does the Clone/Stormtrooper armour really work at stopping blaster fire?

A DL-44 deep-fried Greedo and E-11s blow football-sized holes in permacrete walls yet Corran Horn survived a chest hit in 'Rogue Squadron' thanks to wearing a stormtrooper breastplate. Yes he needed a bacta dunk after that but why don't you imagine what that kind of firepower would have done to an unarmoured human.

Unfortunately an unarmoured human (Gavin Darklighter) survives a similar hot in the same book. So thats a pretty crappy example.

A fact that prompted Corran to to muse how Gavin did it because, as he put it, he 'didn't have a clue' how Gavin survived that.

It still happened.

Now, that I come to think off it, the roles really should have been reversed, then it would lead into the Horn's jedi energy absorb skills in I,Jedi

Crazedwraith wrote:It still happened.

And (at least to Corran's mind) it shouldn't while he happily accepted his survival being due to the armour. IOW, at least as Mr Horn sees it, surviving such a hit when wearing Stormie armour is something if not guaranteed then at least entirely possible while Gavin should by all rights be dead. Corran even commented on that in the book.

Now, that I come to think off it, the roles really should have been reversed, then it would lead into the Horn's jedi energy absorb skills in I,Jedi

While I hate 'I, Jedi' (and Corran Horn while we're at it) that actually makes sense. I agree.

Any reason we should assume they were shots fired from the same weapon or at the same power level?

Batman wrote:

Major Maxillary wrote: Another issue: What about shaped charges? Or HEAPI?

If you have to use those against individual infantry that's a statement about the quality of the armour in and of itself.

The swedes have a special round for the .50 M2 that is very effective against armor and has a nice explosive and incendiary capacity. ballistics equal to a 20mm cannon, in fact.

Also, according to the Guide to Weapons and tech, some rebel commandos used slugthrowers with special explosive rounds that did very nicely against Stormtrooper armor.

Feil wrote:Any reason we should assume they were shots fired from the same weapon or at the same power level?

If we want to keep the chest plate saving Corran, yes. We don't know what kind of weapon EITHER shot was fired from or at which power level but the stormtroopers in that sequence were generally using carbines which, again, strongly suggests E-11s.
We can't fairly assume Gavin was hit by a glancing low-power blow while Corran caught a full-force one dead on when the novel states nothing to that effect.

Major Maxillary wrote: The swedes have a special round for the .50 M2 that is very effective against armor and has a nice explosive and incendiary capacity. ballistics equal to a 20mm cannon, in fact.

There are rifle rounds that can realistically damage armoured vehicles? What other infantry level weaponry can destroy any first rate MBT?

Big Orange wrote:

Major Maxillary wrote: The swedes have a special round for the .50 M2 that is very effective against armor and has a nice explosive and incendiary capacity. ballistics equal to a 20mm cannon, in fact.

There are rifle rounds that can realistically damage armoured vehicles? What other infantry level weaponry can destroy any first rate MBT?

If you're thinking about locking horns with a MBT, you go for a shoulder launched ATGM or RPG.
Small arms are useless against MBTs. 20mm anti-materiel "rifles" can damage armored vehicles, even heavier IFVs if the shot hits a vulnerable spot. But I wouldn't bet on it.

-Gunhead

Gunhead wrote: 20mm anti-materiel "rifles" can damage armored vehicles, even heavier IFVs if the shot hits a vulnerable spot. But I wouldn't bet on it.

I can say that .50 M2 and 20mm rounds would work fairly well against armoured SUVs, range rovers and Humvees. And they could rip apart most WWII era tanks.

Big Orange wrote:

Gunhead wrote: 20mm anti-materiel "rifles" can damage armored vehicles, even heavier IFVs if the shot hits a vulnerable spot. But I wouldn't bet on it.

I can say that .50 M2 and 20mm rounds would work fairly well against armoured SUVs, range rovers and Humvees. And they could rip apart most WWII era tanks.

And I cry BULLSHIT on that one. Show us the numbers.

Batman wrote:

Big Orange wrote:

Gunhead wrote: 20mm anti-materiel "rifles" can damage armored vehicles, even heavier IFVs if the shot hits a vulnerable spot. But I wouldn't bet on it.

I can say that .50 M2 and 20mm rounds would work fairly well against armoured SUVs, range rovers and Humvees. And they could rip apart most WWII era tanks.

And I cry BULLSHIT on that one. Show us the numbers.

.50 cal and 20mm can threaten early WWII tanks. If using modern munitions, you can defeat mid-level WWII tanks with a 20mm round.
Doing this usually requires multiple hits which means using an autocannon and those are not manportable. Other than that I'm pretty much with Bats on this one.

-Gunhead

To add to the above, penetration through up to at least 34mm of standard steel is obtainable with some rounds of 0.50-caliber ammunition. Some modern 20mm rounds should penetrate more than 40mm, i.e. perhaps up to approximately a couple inches of steel.

.50 cal and 20mm stoping an MBT!? You're out of your fucking mind not even an rpg is going to to really do much. TOWs and Javlins are the only thing that's going to do it. The SMAW is only going to kill old cold war era mbts like the T-55. There are stories of P-47s knocking out Panther and Tiger tanks during WW2, with their 8 .50 cals, but that was by shooting next to the tanks and "bouncing" the rounds up into the bottom. Another version of the story has the p-47s flipping the tanks on their side. 20mm didnt really threaten WW2 tanks either, smalest round used efectivly in or against tanks was a 37mm and that was ony in the first year or so of the war. By the end even American tanks could stand up to that, point in case during one of the island landings in the pacific a US tank took a direct hit from a Japanese tank 37mm round. the driver said that the armour on the inside bent and "yellowed" the Us tank returned fire with its 76mm high velocity cannon and destroyed the Japanese tank.

I don't think anybody is suggesting 0.50-caliber or 20mm would stop a MBT, aside from maybe a post by someone else a number of posts back in this thread, not a recent post. WWII tanks mainly much improved over the course of the war, but some early ones had armor on their sides or rear that was not very thick at all. For example, some early models of the Panzer IV had 15mm armor on some parts. That compares to the link I gave with a reference for 34mm standard-steel penetration with the right type of modern 0.50-caliber round. It would be greater for the right 20mm rounds, as even depleted uranium 20mm rounds exist. Even then, repeated hits would be most relevant, like autocannon fire as Gunhead implied. Of course a MBT is totally different.

Sikon wrote:I don't think anybody is suggesting 0.50-caliber or 20mm would stop a MBT, aside from maybe a post by someone else a number of posts back in this thread, not a recent post.

Big Orange claimed exactly that WRT WW2 MBTs less than 10 hours ago. Not recent my ass.

yes modern .50 cal API or APIT and 20mm anti-armour rounds would no doubt go right through 15mm of WW2 armour and depleted uranium wouldnt even stop. but using modern rounds against 63 year old tanks is kind of pointless. Using WW2 rounds against WW2 tanks 20mm and .50 cal arent going to stop the tanks.

I did not mean 0.50-caliber or 20mm rounds would stop any modern MBT (that's ridiculous!), but they would perhaps severely damage many lesser armoured vehicles or lesser WWII tanks that were obsolete even in the 1940s like the Panzers I & II or the T-26 (not more formidable WWII tanks like the Panzers III & IV, Sherman or the T-34).

The Sherman wasnt that good of a tank anyway, nowhere near as good as a Panzer III-IV or the T-34. But yes .50 cal and 20mm are very useful against APCs and potentially IFVs though I dont know for sure. I do know that a MK153 SMAW will fuck up an IFV though.


Hmm how did this thread go from Stormtrooper armor to RL weapons/armor debate?

Would anyone like to comment on the Hand of Thrawn Empire Stormtrooper armor in Surviors Quest and how it can stand up to dozens of hits?

It depends on where you shoot at the MBT.

The top and rear are typically the most vulnerable parts of the tank, especially early WWII ones.

Some explanations I've heard for the EotH stormtroopers' armor ranges from weaked blaster shots from the Vagaari's blaster due to Tibanna decay to possible use of quantum molecular armor.

In the book itself, one of the characters (I forget who, but it was either the Skywalkers or the Hand) speculates that without Tibanna gas, the blasters are weakened enough that it takes sustained fire to do any damage to the armor. I've never heard the quantum armor theory, though.

Pelranius wrote:It depends on where you shoot at the MBT.

The top and rear are typically the most vulnerable parts of the tank, especially early WWII ones.

Some explanations I've heard for the EotH stormtroopers' armor ranges from weaked blaster shots from the Vagaari's blaster due to Tibanna decay to possible use of quantum molecular armor.

*sigh* Infantry doctrine has gunners aiming at the joint of the turret, or the treads, and possibly an external fuel tank. The most likely target out of that is the treads, so you have a mobility kill. Still, it pisses the tank off and your in for a world of hurt.

Pelranius wrote:It depends on where you shoot at the MBT.

Well tanks are awfully vulnurable to anti-tank mines, even the first rate NATO level MBTs of today. The caterpillar treads, tank underbelly and perhaps the engine seem to be the most obvious weak points.

Some explanations I've heard for the EotH stormtroopers' armor ranges from weaked blaster shots from the Vagaari's blaster due to Tibanna decay to possible use of quantum molecular armor.

Maybe there are specilised Stormtrooper armour that can project energy fields?

early WW2 tanks yes top and rear would be your best bets with a .50 cal or 20mm. Its still going to be ineffective against later tanks, as for moder MBTs like I said earlier not even a SMAW is going to kill it. I can score a mobility kill by shooting the track, even lock the turret in place by shooting the ring it traverses on, but thats hard. Your best bet TOW2, Javlin or Hellfire. the SRAW will kill any MBT but its unreliable at best. Triple-stacked anti-tank mines with propane tanks and 155mm arty rounds will ruin your day and your tank as we've seen in Iraq.

Maybe there are specilised Stormtrooper armour that can project energy fields?

I dont think so though personal shields do exist. Quantum Molecular armor? sounds like technobabble to me. /shrug Clone Trooper armor is thicker and tougher then Stormtrooper meybe the EotH used a similar desgin? According to the dearly hated Karen Traviss, "katarn" armor could stand up to light cannon rounds and verpine shatter guns.

Batman wrote:

Sikon wrote:I don't think anybody is suggesting 0.50-caliber or 20mm would stop a MBT, aside from maybe a post by someone else a number of posts back in this thread, not a recent post.

Big Orange claimed exactly that WRT WW2 MBTs less than 10 hours ago. Not recent my ass.

Whether Kartr_Kana was replying to my post directly above or to someone else in the previous half-dozen posts was not explicit, depending upon how he interpreted posts, etc. That is what I meant by recent, not the less relevant chronological date. But this is off-topic.

EDIT: Also it looks like there is different use of terms. To me "MBT" regularly refers to a (modern) main battle tank, as opposed to all tanks. At least such is the classification I have seen in games, but discussing semantics more would be unproductive.

---------------

An upper limit on stormtrooper armor effectiveness against projectile weapons is that some rounds around 30mm or greater can be hundreds of kg * m/s momentum, giving the potential for a concussion upon hitting a stormtrooper's helmet regardless of armor performance. The lower limit is less obvious, as a 34mm steel plate could also do well against a relatively powerful spear. However, resistance to projectile weapons is probably not of great importance either way, given the existence of handheld blasters penetrating the armor.

A .50 HMG can chew the rubber and steel tracks off and effectively stop an MBT from moving further. which would make the tank vulnerable to everything you can throw at it.

won't destroy it, but very few things can nowadays.

Tanks don't have to be blown to crap to be removed from the fight. just rendering them immobile or blind is enough.

Now let's stop talking about this and go back to stormtrooper armor..