posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 08:15 PM
Your information is rubbish and in accurate.
I beg your pardon, do you care to elaborate or is it just plain old slander?
In any case, if you so strongly disagree, please feel free to contact Janes publication and Mr. Leland Ness, because it’s their information, not
I spoke with a German ballistic scientist about those German tests and he confirmed that the 120mm DM 53 was able to defeat any K-5 covered
russian tanks at any range they chose to engage.
This is very interesting, what is his name, when did you speak with him and what else did he say?
I’m very curios about this part: “was able to defeat any K-5 covered russian tanks at any range they chose to engage.”
What is “any range” exactly?
I'll let you in on a secret. Spaced plate armors and flyer plate armors have been shown to be able to reduce penetration based on rod
diameters. But the strength of the rod can counter act this and the sectioning of the warheads can truncate this effect.
That’s a secret, to whom? And since when, WWII? That’s as much of a secret as the “magic” of the shaped charge warhead.
Back a few years they were testing a teflon shaped charge that didn't detonate ERA type armors instead cut a whole through them to allow the
follow on main charge to cut through the main armor.
That must have been really “a few years” back, because I’m not sure exactly how teflon is supposed to cut through metal plates of K-5.