Jump to content


Photo

Equivalent Hits Table


  • Please log in to reply
1 reply to this topic

#1 Glen Rose

Glen Rose

    Private

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 02 June 2007 - 12:18 AM

There are a couple of things about the Equivalent Hits Table I would like clarified. When dealing with guns of 11" or larger I find most of the results make sense. However when dealing with smaller caliber guns I sometimes find the results don't always make sense. For example the U.S. 8" gun can penetrate class BC armour @ 30000 yds. now what happens if the target has class BD armour? would I still apply the 1/2 hits has shown on the Equivalent Hits Table for this armour class even though it is an inferior armour class? The U.S. 5" gun can penetrate class CL armour @ 18000 what if the target's armour class is CS, do I apply the 1/2 hits for this? In situations like these should the Equivalent Hits Table only be refered to if the target's armour class is superior to the nominal listing? Finally, the U.S. 3" & 4" guns have a x1/2 result against DD's, AK's & CVE's. Does it ever apply to DD's? or is it strictly for use when the targets are AK's or CVE's?

#2 Jim O'Neil

Jim O'Neil

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 232 posts
  • LocationSE Arizona, Sierra Vista/ Ft Huachuca area

Posted 02 June 2007 - 11:06 AM

OK, I am NOT the school solution, but let make make some observations that may help-A 6" projectile weighs 98-130 pounds depending on countrya 5" projectile weighs 50-60 pounds depending on countrya 4" projectile is 28-33 pounds and a 3" projectile is around 12-14 pounds.Since explosive weight is 10% or less of the shell weight, you can see where the smaller shells do a LOT less damage. They normally also can fire faster, so they makeup for some of it using rapid fire, but the reason Navies kept increasing the size of DD Guns, is that they perceived the lack of power of the smaller shells. They expected to be able to get only a few hits, so they wanted them to count. The desire for 6" anti-torpedo boat guns becomes clear if you look at it like this. As AA duties became desirable, they hadto go the other way for better rates of fire, as rapid fire allowed a better adjustment based off the last shell(s) fired.as for armor, if it pierces BC armor, it pierces anything thinner, but the shell effects aren't much increased by the restraint of the armor.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users