Does sloping armor increase it's protection?

[@npuma490]

this is what i miss about youtube, no clickbait,straight to the point liked and subscribed

[@johndowe7003]

you miss the old days of youtube where people made videos for fun and didnt try to make it a job / career

[@beastmaster6486]

@@johndowe7003 I miss the Filthy Frank crew n the Fortnite-free youtube :'(

[@johndowe7003]

@@beastmaster6486 yea

[@Piterixos]

Lol, this title is actually a clickbait because it suggests that contrary to absolutely the basic physics and common sense the answer could potentially be anything else than "Yes"

[@beastmaster6486]

@@Piterixos Dude, let's face it, you have no fucking idea what your talking about, and you're trying way too hard to look smart. No, not everyone knows that sloping armour plates reduces the chances of shells penetrating them, some people, like me a long time ago, wondered why tanks look so funny nowadays, instead of the Panzer III look. And clickbait is a marketing strategy used to get more ''clicks'' by using misleading titles and/or thumbnails (in the case of KZbin). In no way the title or thumbnail of this video are clickbait. The title just promises to anwer the question writen on it, it would only be clickbait if said answer wasn't given. Not everyone is smart enough to know these things or interested enough to learn them, but at least those people don't suffer from illusory superiority syndrome which, you guessed it, you do!

[@deusexbaby5555]

We didn't even scratch them.

[@finnishwehraboo8377]

You have a hole in your rigth wing

[@acesians4652]

blunt. r/whoooosh

[@Gixxer_Freak]

Critical Hit!

[@maticsega3311]

Attack the d.... wait only normies here

[@thatdeathstepguy8719]

We killed them.

[@AJ-170SkyStriker]

T-34 was the first tank to have all sloped armor. *FCM-36 wants to have a word with you*

[@jackalmountain6523]

yes, T-34 wasnt the first to use the idea, but the first to really prove the effectiveness of the concept on the battlefield. It had a much bigger impact on the adoption of sloped armor than interwar french designs that remained relatively untested

[@Talashaoriginal]

Don't forget the FT17.

[@kademiller7185]

Or the A7V

[@Xander_Zimmermann]

Yay! A fellow tank nerd. I knew I couldn't have been alone. My fave tank right now is the T34/76 mod 1941 with the 76mm F34 gun. 😀😀😀

[@AJ-170SkyStriker]

@@Xander_Zimmermann I like the M3A3E2 Sherman Jumbo with the 76MM M1 cannon. Pretty beautiful tank If you ask me.

[@AllMightyKingBowser]

No angle: "Penetration!" Angled: "That one didn't go through!"

[@garyaustin7987]

That one bounced

[@timmy4226]

We didn’t even scratch them

[@TexasViking_INFP-t_5w4]

That's gotta hurt!! *Just damages track* :[

[@DELTAFORCE747HD]

They knocked out our loader 😵

[@ChankaTheOne]

@@DELTAFORCE747HD careful you've got a hole in your right wing !

[@tthutch3898]

Straight to the point, very interesting and informative. New sub.

[@Bialy_1]

He said about T-34 and did not mention "BT-2 tank of 1932 - Walter Christie's tank design built under licence in the Soviet Union"...

[@Bialy_1]

+When a round hits a piece of metal at an angle, it ‘normalizes’; it will slightly correct its angle of penetration(that correction is specific to the bullet type and shape.

and it is false

[@NotLilWien]

Germany when they use sloped armor on the Panther "You know, I'm something of a scientist myself"

[@maruftim]

@@pound2175 lol

[@daveswarhead2611]

But Germany used flat armor on purpose.

[@alecjones4135]

@@daveswarhead2611 yes. Easy for production. Hence why pz4 was one of the best Germans tanks for the war.

[@daveswarhead2611]

@@alecjones4135 I am not 100% sure but I also believe they considered the flat armor strong enough for what it had to face regarding enemy guns. Same with the Tiger.

[@bagen3268]

Panzer I has sloped armor. Having it all around on a design like PzKpfw. III drastically reduces interior space which also decreases the crew's efficiency, especially considering radio and ammunition as well as for running gear.

[@redrackham6812]

Excellent test. I would just add that sloped armor not only increases the effective thickness, but it also makes it easier to deflect an incoming projectile. If the armor is perpendicular to an incoming projectile, then the normal force exerted by the armor on the projectile needs to be at least great enough to reduce the projectile's velocity to zero. If the armor is sloped, however, the normal force exerted by the armor on the projectile need only be great enough to reduce a vector component of the projectile's velocity to zero, that component being cosine of the angle of the slope of the armor off the vertical (which would be equal to the sine of the projectile's angle of incidence to the armor). To put it another way, as the slope of the armor increases, the less it needs to change the direction of the projectile to send it skittering off.

[@evil001987]

Based on what you're describing I would love to see a video to find out at what angle the round ricochets. Measure the "thickness" at that angle. Then take out a thinner plate which do not hold the required thickness to stop a round, but it is at an extreme enough angle to cause a ricochet, would that be enough and/or possible to stop it penetrating?

[@redrackham6812]

@@evil001987 I would love to see such a test too. I do not currently have the equipment to conduct such a test any time in the foreseeable future, but hopefully Jackal Mountain will read these comments and try such a test.

[@goose6440]

There are many rounds that work better on sloped armor it's the round the Abrams had used/uses

[@goose6440]

Such as apfsds

[@evil001987]

@@goose6440 I've been trying to google on it, but can't find any definitive answer. When some people say "better" they mean better than other rounds. When some people say better, they mean that it will not penetrate as well on an armor plate without any slope. Which is it?

[@thatonetanker5565]

“That one BOUNCED!!”

[@strider1246]

“We didn’t even scratch them...”

[@onyxon7740]

" RICOCHET!! "

[@ixfortz4722]

"sniper shooting spit balls"

[@re57k]

"We didn't penetrate their armor!"

[@Phapchamp]

"Weeee got em!!"

[@herbertgearing1702]

Sloped armor is more effective, but that comes with some complications. First, armor piercing shells of the size suitable for anti-tank usage tend to be traveling in a more parabolic arc than say 223 /556, they are also under fire from artillery (even more of an arc in flight) and rpgs with shaped charges. Secondly, the more you slope the armor, the less room is available for crew, ammunition, and systems typically. This is why you see such a wide variety of different solutions in ww2 despite the fact that tank designers were well aware of the advantages of sloped armor in the interwar period. Today after over half a century of refinement you see armor that uses various different approaches together - slope, spacing, and active armor. I think they probably still have some of the same arguments every time they try to design a new armored fighting vehicle, protection vs weight, crew comfort vs slope, mobility vs ability, fuel efficiency and range vs high speed and small target ect...

[@SpiffyNo]

Most of today's armored fighting vehicles have a main hull then multiple secondary armor mechanism like a composite armor of 90/45 with an air pocket between the 90 slab and 45 slab to absorb shaped blasts this method is usually found on tank m-raps have a 90 slab for a hull and to deal with RPGs they have a grating around the hull so the war head detonates before reaching the truck it's self there for rasing the survivability of the blast

[@Vatsyayana87]

Thats quite the ramble lol

[@dj1NM3]

@@SpiffyNo You might be surprised to know that spacing between armour layers is intended to stop the effect of HESH* AT rounds, as they require solid armour for the blast shockwave to propagate through the armour and spall the internal surface off, using that to shred everything inside the tank. *High Explosive Squash Head

and this is vid is completly false , sloped armor is not lighter than not sloped armor

[@U6kCtBuN]

@ make your own thread, 50 mm of effective armour is lighter the more the plate is angled.

[@chemiker494]

Amazing to see how even a slight angle of 15-20° makes a big difference. Of course 60° will give you 2x the LOS thickness, but you also need 2x the amount of plate to cover the same area. So this may be a sweet spot?

[@thebravegallade731]

Sloping also deflects shots.

[@xAlexTobiasxB]

No, it doesn't require 2x the amount of plate to cover the same area, it just means that the tank design will get more compact and smaller (lower silhouette), so it actually is a win-win situation because it forces the designer to make the tank smaller so it's harder to hit plus it has more effective armor

[@xAlexTobiasxB]

@ yea but then it would have bad armor design

[@Terraqueo22]

Also sure when designing a tank you gotta take in consideration the modules if they fit the design, crewmembers positions, viewports, tracks, engine, gun and yadda yadda. So in short... Its not an easy task

[@sylvain01]

@@Terraqueo22 exactly, if you design a tank to fit all of the modules and crewmembers behind a 90 degree plate, then angle it at 60 degrees like a russian mbt, you'll have to increase the place x2 to make it the same height

[@uss_liberty_incident]

I was expecting clickbait, but got a "yes" and very solid explanation right at the start. Very well done video. You're a breath of fresh air, brother.

[@ipo65]

Great video. Please note that sloping does not increase protection per weight. If you slope the armor at 60 degrees, you get twice the LOS armor but you also protect only half the vertical area. If your tank is 1 meter high and you want to protect it with 100mm armor. You can put a 100mm thick, 1m long plate or you can have a 50mm plate at 60 degrees, but you will need the plate to be 2m long to cover the same height. Sloping does increase the chances that rounds will bounce off.

[@singhakumar48]

This video is one of the best videos out there. These types of knowledgeable videos should be promoted not hidden but the sad part is You tube loves content that miss guide the masses.

[@Nikarus2370]

NGL, that spacing between the first 4 shots was superb

[@Hoopty91]

At about 30yrds with a scope...? I don't think so.... But he also wasn't aiming for a tight group, but to easily distinguish between the different shots... If he was shooting for a tight group, I'm more than sure he could get with in a 4 inch group spread..

[@Hoopty91]

*and then it clicked* I see what you're saying now! He had a consistent 4 or so inches between each shot! Lol... I had to rewatch to figure out what you were on about...😝

[@chompers21]

It's not off vertical,it's off perpendicular, good video good demonstration.

[@meidou_saikou7253]

World of Tanks player: *look at the title of the video* welp, i dont need to watch this.

[@certified_baller]

smirlanda03 yea lol

[@filzhut6234]

Can't relate more

[@filzhut6234]

@@syaondri Doing our service

[@Tennoinu]

War thunder german players: Doesn't matter if your Tiger II faces a modern heat fs tank.

[@Abdototti06]

@@Tennoinu ikr tiger II'S shouldn't face cold war era HTFS

[@wildboar222]

Thank you for making this video, describing how armor angling works can be pretty complicated and this video perfectly showcases it

[@springer-qb4dv]

Awesome test. Thank you. There is only two videos like this on youtube and this is really useful - not for body armor, but constructing sloped defense shielding with AR500 armor plates (or even much cheaper 1/2 inch mild steel plates) to be resistant to nearly all common rifle rounds. Normal times, this is not very useful, but when SHTF occurs, you will need to protect yourself against looters and bandits armed with AR15s.

[@Owen-tk4qk]

I already knew it did but amazing video and happy KZbin finally recommended me something good for once. New sub

[@m.ars.5909]

nice test...should have done 50 and 60....informative

[@enchiladaplatter1]

i wonder if bounce shots are more prevalent at higher caliber. I don't think the material physics scales according to size so 45 might bounce a large shell

[@hakhakuuba5073]

Nice. Now I gonna to go surgery to make my forehaed 45 degree.

[@CZ350tuner]

There is an angle referred to as the skate or skip angle which the incoming projectile transmits zero impact energy to the surface it's colliding with. Barnes Wallis conducted experiments and found it to be 72 degrees. It's the angle at which a stone skips water, a bullet grazes a body and which a bomb can be skipped on water. In range tests the Germans proved that larger calibre AP projectiles are least effected by sloped armour whilst smaller calibre projectiles were effected the most, hence their move to bigger calibre AT guns. Installing a soft malleable metal cap to an AP projectile improves its ability to penetrate sloped armour.

[@dj1NM3]

...and then HESH rounds come along at the very tail end of the war, they don't care about armour slope angle at all nor impact velocity, relying on explosive shockwave to spall off the inside face of the armour to cause a bad day for the enemy AFV crew.

[@Neion8]

@@dj1NM3 And then spall liners and spaced armour come to ruin the party (except FV4005 which laughs in the distance because that doesn't kill tanks, it beheads them).

[@bengrogan9710]

@@Neion8 Spall liners can only do so much - they are essentially a kevlar weave liner mounted inside fragments bigger than around 12mm are still a threat

[@bengrogan9710]

@Andy Reid Minor correction - Energy is still transfered into a plate, it is the point at which the elasticity of the surface is greater than the ingress of energy - the bounce is the release of transferred energy deflecting whatever projectile is in question Even on bounces however Spalling can still occur on the inside of a tank

[@icarustanovic3097]

It would be cool to see layered armour, and same thickness not layered in these conditions. Thanks, super informayive.

[@evil001987]

I would love to see a video to find out at what angle the round ricochets. Measure the minimum required thickness to stop the round, in other words, the thickness at 12.5 degrees. Then take out a thinner plate and angle it at such an extreme angle that it causes a ricochet, but it is so thin that the thickness doesn't stop it, but the ricochet is enough. Clearly, if it stops the round, all of the kinetic energy goes into the plate and punches a hole in it. If it ricochet then it leaves with some kinetic energy. So it cannot bury as deep into the plate. Of course it might be more dangerous to intentionally cause a ricochet, so might not be good to make a video about it. But it is something that adds to the strenght of sloped armor so it would be really cool to see.

[@Freedomcustom]

there is no set angle any round is capable to ricocheting due to variables involved that factor into one occurring, u'd be basically asking someone to shoot enough rounds into a sloped object and hope for the best

[@rouged6566]

Me : Has played alot WT and WOT at the same time for some reason KZbin : here learn to play better on those games Me : Well yes but actually, no because russian bias making the armor indestructible

[@Neion8]

Russian design: unrealistically good/optimistic Russian build quality: Hahaha 'quality' Everyone else's design: Fairly grounded in reality, with the occasional oddball Everyone else's build quality: more or less on par with the design Gaijin & Wargaming 'Obviously Russians had the best tanks, look at this napkin, on it is a tank design we found in an ex-soviet archive, it has 300mm of perfect sloped armour everywhere and a 150mm gun and it still has 21 hp/ton and reasonable gun handling while being smaller than a golf cart. Soviet tanks best tanks.'

[@certified_baller]

You still can’t pen my Is-7

[@lovepeace9727]

@@Neion8 well...in reality, after WW2 USA was scared of soviet tanks for a reason.

[@lovepeace9727]

@@Neion8 To be fair, War Thunder has no russian bias. I mean...soviet planes are good, but not OP at all and red tenks are extremely powerful, but on low/ mid tiers (from 1.0 to 5.7) Germany rules and from mid to top BRs (from 5.0 to 8.3) USA starts to bring a lot of democracy. USSR is good only on 5.3, 7.3 and 10.0 where you get T-80U ))) (wich is great tank but not match for Leo2A5.) Really, tell me how to play T-34-85 against jumbo and panther?

[@sethlance8009]

@@lovepeace9727 that's funny after ww2 we faught the Russian tanks in North Korea during the Korean war. Our tanks cut through Russian tanks like a hot knife through butter

[@Hairysteed]

Problem is, the more you slope the plate the less it covers. So you need more plating to get the same coverage.

[@peasant8246]

Quite right. But, under certain conditions, the protection provided for a unit of weight grows faster than the weight of the plate. A plate sloped at 60° needs to be twice as long to cover the same vertical area, but can be only 30-40% as thick, resulting in actually being lighter for a given level of protection or giving more protection for a given weight.

[@certified_baller]

No Angle : Penetration Angled : That One Ricochet!

[@viet_cong_momiji2324]

*war thunder in a nutshell*

[@SuperLusername]

i dont know why I am even watching this, I know how this works and can easily calculate the effective thickness of the the plate at every angle. But still I like watching people shoot stuff...

[@gingfulglider693]

Evilsamar who doesnt

[@samualwhittemore228]

Its not a linear function.

[@brendonmoore3505]

My tank comes with slopped armour vs I angle my tanks armour and facing. Two very different things people are getting mixed up here.

[@blitzwithspartan6175]

Brendon Moore That’s why a T34 at 30° angle on the whole tank gives it a significant increase, but people do mix it up

[@transamman305]

A few months back I commented on one of Matt's vids from demolition ranch stating that I thought it would be an awesome test to shoot steel plate set at different angles to demonstrate the theory of armor plate on tanks. I never got any reply from him and have always wanted to see angles in action, considering I'm a huge tank buff. Thank you so much for this vid. You basically did exactly what I wanted to see! Keep it up.

[@anthonybluhm4724]

Don't need to watch. Answer is YES.

[@bubsmcgee6048]

Okay.. But what if you angled it At a... 90 degree angle?

[@elmothewise3915]

Explain how you thought this joke worked

[@GnLeugim]

Good testing, but you should repeat the same angle more than once. at least three shots at each angle for a better data set. specially at those threshold angles-

[@Steelmage99]

I support the above statement. Please do it again....FOR SCIENCE! :)

[@Omer-di1bl]

Its not only thicker. The chance of deflecting is also higher

[@LiezAllLiez]

Yep. Very few WW2 rounds could even latch onto a plate angled at 60 degrees. Now its a different story... HESH, HEAT, powerful APDS. Everything goes through. Might as well plant a 105mm gun on your APC to save money. Youre not saving any lives anyway.

[@lovepeace9727]

@@LiezAllLiez "everything goes through" *Laughs at turrets of Abrams, T-90 and Leopard2A7*

[@Zee-fg9du]

it's a different story for the side, rear and especially the turret for certain tanks the ammunition is stored on the side, to fit the engine thickness of armor on the rear is reduced and to fit the gun and radio equipment armor on all sides of the turret is reduced aswell.

[@Zee-fg9du]

@@LiezAllLiez sloped armor only makes sense to use on the front if used on the turret ap or he shells could ricochet under the angled turret and into the upper hull to the bottom hull, thus enabling a shot trap depending on the size of the shell.

[@prich0382]

Should of tried 60 degrees off vertical as that angle is exactly twice as thick

[@jesperviktorsson8027]

Dangerous...

[@pedruu]

That's what she said..

[@foxythefox356]

You'll heard this voice then “That one ricochet” or “That one bounce”

[@jesperviktorsson8027]

@@foxythefox356 wot gang?

[@foxythefox356]

@@jesperviktorsson8027 kinda cause I play wotb

[@BigLiftsITA]

Your test was with an horizontal angle, but it's worth noting that an inclined armour is not always the best: at long ranges bullets also have an angle, so vertical armour might not be too bad actually, while sloped armour ( vertically angled ) could get more easily penetrated.

[@dannyw9868]

Excellent, informative and well demonstrated... Thank you!

[@MareWT]

IS-3 in WOT *exist* APCR :Am I joke to you

[@cmooisthename]

Marko Stalker get through the turret, I dare you.

[@xqusyte554]

jpanther 2 has the best front head armour when i covered the body and only shows the head it keep on bouncing

[@LiezAllLiez]

Yeah... if one ever existed.

[@justinmahar5208]

Great demonstration bro, good on ya. Certainly amplifies in the mind some of the bigger guns impacting heavier armour. Top job cobber.

[@rednaxninety3659]

Tiger I: I just made my tank armor thick that’s all

[@dam11232]

Thicc

[@phil20_20]

Everyone talking about sloped armor seems to be neglecting the fact that a sloped piece of armor is longer in relation to the horizontal protection it affords. In relation to the vertical armor it is meant to replace, the weight is the same as the shorter piece of thicker verticle armor.

[@rampie00]

Good video! Love to see that there was quite a bit of science behind the armor sloping in tanks

[@daveybernard1056]

Needs a paper "witness plate" behind the metal, to show any spall off the backside.

[@7150285]

Not only having sloped armor makes the metal thicker, but also it cause bullet deflection. Edwin Sarkissian was shooting his Titanium at 45 degree cause bullets to ricochet upward. His channel proved this fact.

[@elblitzb]

Awsome test dude, thanks for the time you used to show your point. Like old videos on youtube: clear, short, fun. Thanks a lot.

[@seanroberts7695]

The plate is vertical the whole time. The degrees are off perpendicular. If it were off vertical the plate would be tilted forward or back. Good demo and point made well done

[@Onyxar]

So warthunder is right

[@lovepeace9727]

Soviet bias is real.

[@hilmanabdan2015]

Really wish he made a slow motion video of the impact, still a great video nonetheless

[@augustussohn893]

Pretty freaking cool, man. I have tried to describe this to my sons (we are all tank nerds) and this visual worked perfectly!

[@johnnycampbell3422]

Good job on a well constructed and clear test. You could add info on deflected/ escaped force, but I'm not sure the math would hold interest as well as the video as is. Thanks.

[@Bialy_1]

Yea the test ignores the fact that the projectile during impact doing something called normalization and changing its angle of penetration...

[@Vatsyayana87]

i disagree, he does ok tests but not good in my opinion, for example, this video, the plate is held by one side, meaning the further to the left that he shoots the more the plate will deflect and lessen the impact, every shot is having a different experience therefore not keeping the consistency to be a good scientific test. None the less it demonstrated beyond a doubt the effectiveness of angled armor. but so does just thinking about it for 2 seconds..

[@johnlansing2902]

Thank you for your work during the tests

[@dmkfwolf2669]

Sorry for the late!And i'm glad that you like the idea of angling armor ! Good video as always thank you for the work! :)

[@leakahoshi5049]

Next suggestion, leopard 2a4 angled turret armor, the one that supposed to destabilize armor peneration rounds

[@bengrogan9710]

The angled plates on the Leo are outer cladding to only stop 30mm ifv rounds The plates underneath are flat like on the Leo 2a3 - the plates are superhardened but can be brittle and the 30mm could waken them via chipping

[@bigdave-vm3lx]

Nice factory fresh Panther tank at 0:46

[@mickcoomer9714]

Thank you. Best vid I’ve seen on the subject.

[@josipcuric8767]

We hit them, but we didn't penetrate their armour.

[@brickbuilderx2316]

I would have liked to see a shot at 60 degrees from vertical, at which point, the relative armor/plate thickness is double the thickness of the plate a 0 degrees.

[@HeyLookItsThatGuy]

World of tanks players already know the answer

[@hashteraksgage3281]

War thunder player knows better the answer

[@sauce4229]

Virgin player wants to know your location

[@AlbertRazzer]

World of tanks is gay. Its so unrealistic its not fun. And most of their tanks are just prototypes. And the swedish ones barely had models. Only blueprints

[@HeyLookItsThatGuy]

AlbertRazer thanks for the input Albert! Next up - Somebody who gives a fuck!

[@magoth23]

@@AlbertRazzer If you look to your right you can see an average salty War Thunder player. They are usually pretty insecure so they have to attack other games to feel good. Anyways you dont have to mind since their only argument to defend is that its more realistic. They are also about 12 years old.

[@TheSeraphim4]

Very well produced video. Keep up the awesome work +1 sub

[@filippofontanesi8925]

Very nice video and very well done, i'm curios to see how the spaced armor behave if angled, the only problem is that the saw blade are too thin and soft and they deform wen individualy hit, they need a back support so i suggest to use two of them join together to reduce this effect, an other suggestion is to leave more space between the plate in a way that the bullet can change direction and fragment

[@nuancolar7304]

It's quite simple: Sloping armor is thicker armor....because the projectile has to travel through more armor. One inch armor at 0 degrees is 1" but at 45 degrees it is 1 and 1/8" armor (perhaps a little more).

[@nggaknormal]

Actually no

[@nuancolar7304]

@@nggaknormal Actually yes. kzbin.info/www/bejne/l4Tdh4upm52fotU

[@darrylbuchanan7111]

Straightforward, informative video. I enjoyed and subscribed.

[@Snaxolotl71]

If World of Tanks has taught me anything, it's that sloped armor increases it's effective thickness

[@darwinci]

@@sniperstg2 looking forward to play some WT. any advices?

[@AksamRafiz]

@@darwinci be prepared for the grind, it is a long long road

[@theycallmehope7707]

I Belive It Is Not Even A Question

[@U6kCtBuN]

when wether the earth is flat or not is a question, you should know not to doubt how much we need to re test stuff like this. chances are you believe something i believe is outlandish and vice versa.

[@matthewuzulis5016]

I would be interested in seeing a comparison of a shot at 3/8" plate at 45 degrees vs a 1/2" plate at 0 degrees, much of the early talk about sloped armour was around increasing the thickness in which case 3/8" gives a 0.375" and at a 45 degree slope offers 0.53033" which is roughly 17/32" which is only 1/32" greater than 1/2". The additional benefit of sloping armour is that the forces presented are presented over a greater area thus reducing the penetrating capability. So the demonstration vs a 1/2" piece would be very intriguing.

[@bengrogan9710]

There are other considerations involved that aren't clear at 1st glance The thicker plate at some points will become better from other factors - namely frangibility the surfaces of a plate are hardened - hard surfaces are also more brittle: there is always a core of soft steel to absorb the force and flex with the impact to stop too much fracturing of the hardened layers of the surface At some points the physical mass of impact will allow a plate to shatter a thinner plate - either punching through or causing chips to flake of as shrapnel internally called Spalling, regardless of angle, where the thicker one would merely deform This is why the majority of ship belt armour is soft steel

[@matthewuzulis5016]

​@@bengrogan9710Yes those are additional factors to consider when looking at how a vehicle is armored in whole, however as this video is looking at the effect of sloped armor has it is a moot point to apply it to what I stated above. So long as the 1/2" plate has the same hardness as the 3/8" plate then my describe test would still be a viable comparison. There are a a lot of factors that apply to the armor of a vehicle. The only proper way to showcase the effect it has is to keep all other factors as neutral as possible. I do get they type of material used has a effect, so does how it is fastened, how much support it has, where it has, how many layers there may be, what type of round is used against it and so on. If all those factors were to be introduced all we could do is shrug and say "Yes there is improvement, but from what and how much each I have no clue". One reason I appreciate this test is how simple it is kept, while there are a few things that can be nit picked apart the test as a whole is a success. Same gun and round type, same steel shot only at different angles.

[@AmxCsifier]

This explains the seasons very well

[@booger2581]

Try 70° angle, it's probs gunna ricochet Also In WoT: "If the relative armor thickness is 3x less than the bullet thickness, the armour will be automatically penetrated no matter what." Try that as well

[@buatareddevils2636]

even at 45° it will mostly bounce it.. yea in wot in order to pen 40mm armor at very slope angling like strv 103-0 and 103B.. 121mm gun is required so tricky

[@landsknecht8654]

The concept of slope armor has been around for a long time. I wouldn't be surprised of the ancient Romans and Greeks had the concept first, but from what I understand it truly comes from medieval plate armor.

[@timothyryan4523]

Very interesting I liked a lot. Hope you do some more and keep the same format.🇦🇺🙋‍♂️

[@QED_]

Conclusive (bordering on overkill) demonstration. Props . . .

[@vaporhtrail4350]

The only problem I see with sloped armor is anti tank/tank shells. Because the shell arcs through the air at greater distances. I'm curious to see how that might effect the armor due to the angle being reduced. (Yes I know the shell looses penetration further and further away too)

[@Freedomcustom]

That's really going to depend on the type of tank shell and as for anti tank shells well the yeah they're designed with sloped armour in mind

[@bengrogan9710]

most tank rounds are quite flat in trajectory, you are only tanking a variation of around 4 degrees for anything in line of sight

[@nadivvv]

Sloped sloped armour were used in the medieval age, like the walls of the crusader castle Krak des Chevaliers, and Leonardo da Vinci's tank design.

[@theflyinggasmask]

Or knight armor, every part of the knights armor was designed to deflect lance, spear and swords.

[@V4YGR3]

What about the steel? Rolled steel, soft steel etc... Doesnt that also play a factor? "Just a question"

[@iluminas2866]

yes it dose here from WW2 Balistiks: Armor and Gunnery cast to rolled armor i.imgur.com/cFJCDHk.jpg

[@V4YGR3]

@@iluminas2866 interesting. Its so that if you choose a more expensive methode to make the steel it doesnt need to be thicker then a simple methode. Right?

[@Markty07]

0:24 You're mistaken, sloping armor does increase weight as the size of the plate to protect the same square area needs to increase. In fact, you need as much weight to have the same effective thickness on a flat and an angled armor plate. However, with clever design, you can use the slope of the armor plate to require less armor elsewhere (getting rid of roof armor for example). However roof armor was rarely thick anyways, limiting the benefit of sloping (while sloping reduced the internal volume of the vehicle as a downside). I think the real question is, does a bullet pierce less effective thickness when the armor is sloped or does it behave the same as non sloped armor.

[@hanelyp1]

Point of history, some Civil War era ironclad ships used sloped armor.

[@CZ350tuner]

They also used rails bolted to the superstructure, bails of cotton encased in tin and oak beams.

[@berkayt5319]

As a 1941 german tank designer I find this useful

[@crazyrussianbot8012]

nice. for another test, check which angle is auto-bounce. maybe 70°

[@FretAndForget]

Wow! this us a great demonstration of this! very well done!

[@grandestcherokee]

Stridsvagen 103 was pretty cool ultra slopped armor

[@fatherofdragons5477]

The best armor is to not get shot in the first place. The stridsvagn 103 was meant for hit n run.

[@fatherofdragons5477]

To take fire you have to be in line of sight.

[@timothyring6836]

Your 2 penetrating shots were closer to the firming support of the log. You might try using a support frame that supports both ends of the plate

[@AliShuktu]

Not Russia but USSR. T-34 initially was made in Ukraine SSR. Kharkov city.

[@bruges1964]

Fun fact the m4 Sherman's front plate at its angle is only 20mm less then a tiger E or h1

[@afau1non]

but in the tiger commander's book, it's said that they were supposed to angle their tiger (something about the clock)

[@reahs4815]

@@afau1non Something all tiger players forget in War Thunder

[@reahs4815]

@Andrew Barnett So bad command and strategy then?

[@treyriver5676]

Sloped armor was used in the American civil war look at theside of CSS Virginia. Also USS monitor would have a sloping effect on anything but a perfectly perpendicular strike to the armor. Additionally world war 1 FT17 has sloped armor as has the German tank of world war I also the weight of the armor does go up because you have to have a longer plane of armor to cover the same distance the shortest distance between two points is still straight line if tpzIV ywere to slope the armor from the highest point down to the front of the hull it would weigh more because more armor is used.

[@BenJamin-en3jb]

Glad someone finally mentioned it. There is a sweet spot of maximum protection per weight of armor, but I'm too dumb to calculate it.

[@johnlogan9431]

Thanks, needed this information for our defense.

[@ViperZ6969]

tankers chilling until they invent "slopped ammo"

[@firefox5926]

musta had "fun" lugging that plate out there lol whats that ? gotta weight like ? 200lbs ?

[@kocovgoce]

the angle of the plate should be about 60 degrees

[@GewelReal]

"Big bulge" OwO

[@alldogsgotoheaven222]

You are the guy who always comments on napalm's videos

[@GewelReal]

@@alldogsgotoheaven222 certainly not always

[@kemsprite520]

Everyone knew about sloped armor before the t-34 it was nothing new

[@grammoore]

He said that.

[@kemsprite520]

@@grammoore me and 25 other people must not have heard him then

[@evil001987]

He states it was experimented upon and tested on vehicles, prior to ww2. He never says the t-34 was the first, he only states that it had a profound impact on its use, which is true.

[@kemsprite520]

@@evil001987 never said he said that it was the first to have sloped armor the t-34 did not have profound impact on tank design lots of reasons to not use sloped armor

[@bengrogan9710]

@@kemsprite520 I'm sorry but to say that the T-34 did not have a profound effect on tank design is flat out wrong the sloped armour is only one facet of why, but the fact it was quite heavily armoured for its size, maintained its speed well and packed a gun that could threaten German armour made it a threat the Germans where not fully prepared for and lead to many choices that would stick in may forces across the world for decades In real terms it was the first medium weight all purpose tank the Germans had the PzIII but due to the turret ring size only had low velocity guns for infantry support, the British had no all purpose design and was still sticking to infantry and cruiser tanks Its main drawback when it 1st revealed itself was simply the lack of radios

[@jeffk3037]

To confirm,Try with a RPG

[@Freedomcustom]

an explosive round of that type is gonna tear through most armour plating due to adding a 4th factor to the mix here, hence the this experiment is referring to solid rounds

[@jeffk3037]

@@Freedomcustom True! But it would be a hell of a show, in the name of science of course

[@foxythefox356]

Solid round = AP shell RPG = HE shell

[@chrisvig123]

Depends on the round...some modern rounds are actually more effective against sloped armor

[@mattjmwmatt]

Do you have any examples? I've never heard of this.

[@vuongkyvi]

@@mattjmwmatt High explosive squash head I think

[@reahs4815]

@@vuongkyvi Yea that one is better vs sloped but it does not penetrate the tank it only crates spawling on the inside

[@achimhanischdorfer3403]

@@mattjmwmatt APFSDS long rod penetrators are better vs sloped armor because they bulge and shatter the inside of the plate. www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php/M829A2 APFSDS composite slug penetrators are better vs flat armor because they use an "ultradense" and very hard slug as penetrator instead of comparatively "lightweight" steel alloy. www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=M735 WARNING: WALL OF TEST Long rod penetrators deteriorate when shot at flat armor plate because the tip deforms. The rod quasi imbeds itself into the armor plate. When shot at angled armor this bulges and shatters the inside of the armor plate allowing easier penetration. Against a thick flat armor plate that lessens the penetration effect as the rod deforms into a mushroom shape. Composite slug penetrators are usually made out of Depleted Uranium, Tungsten, Osmium or some other very dense and hard metal. They have very good penetration performance against flat armor because of their density. It allows them to 'displace' the armor they are shot at much like a stone displaces the less dense water. But against angled armor they bounce instead of imbeding itself in the armor. Leopard 2 A1 de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopard_2#/media/File:Leopard_2A4_Austria_1.JPG T80-B i0.wp.com/fighting-vehicles.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/T-80B-Tank.jpg An interesting side note: Because russian tanks are made out of very angled armor, the western powers use mostly long rod penetrators. DM33 for example is a 3.8cm thick and ~33cm long rod of Tungsten Carbide held with a Titanium 'shoe' to fill the diameter to 120mm so it can be shot out of a 120mm smoothe bore cannon. It was the ammo that was initially supplied with the Leopard 2. Western tank designers knew that long rod penetrators are bad against flat and thick armor. Therefore their modern tanks have many rather flat surfaces. That is why russian tanks use composite slug penetrators such as 3BM15. The Russians initially used 3BM15 in the T64B, T72 and T80B. One could say, that russian and western tank designers are playing a game of rock, paper, siccors with each other.

[@mandernachluca3774]

@@achimhanischdorfer3403 For your last comment, i am not sure if this is quite true, as the Leopard 2A5,6,7 have all sloped armor for the most part, as well as the Abrams. The reason for the Leopard 2A1,2,3,4 having relatively flat turret armor is, to my knowledge, the increased usable space and the fact that the spaced composite armor was already good enough. I would also say, that the long rod penetrator, especially for spaced armor, proves to be rather ineffective at penetrating sloped armor, as it tends to deflect. Also, wasn't there some talk about Rheinmetall developing a 140mm gun, wouldn't that suggest that common long rod penetrator aren't that good at penetrating current sloped armor? I mean, they could always increase the length of the cannon barrel and the powder load, a completely new cannon barrel should not be necessary.

[@lepmuhangpa]

Thank you for this test & information.

[@TCFE-om1ii]

it makes shell bounce everywhere

[@tecroach]

@Jackal Mountain what about Overmatching? even if the armor is slooped it can still be overmatched allowing shells to pen, unless the armor is too thin and at a VERY steep angle like 80~ then the shell won't pen at all.

[@kenfulkerson9567]

Use of 3/8 inch not bad cheap and somewhat effective against 5.56. 3 different types of 5.56 now. Would like to see caliber comparison, 7.62, 30.06, handgun calibers, shotgun slugs. By doing this can effect better home and personal defensive adaptations. Not a bad presentation, however without a hard stand movement of the plate gives unknown results as to flexing or movement during actual impact, you should measure how much possible movement after each shot for better results of plate displacement / movement.

[@everythingphil9376]

Great experiment! Curious how M855A1 would react, or even M955 AP rounds!

[@wildcat20021]

how many shots on the same spot to get through the 45 and 30 degree angles?

[@whiplash8277]

Nice job. I am surprised a 5.56 full metal jacket easily penetrates 3/8 steel...I would have expected NATO 7.62 to pass thru easily, but not the 5.56. Good work.

[@exterminater267]

The answer is yes. Sloped increases its thickness and the angle causes deflection.