By the way, the king tiger had 200mm frontal armour. That's a little less than a Bradley or Warrior with the add on armour package.
But I believe the materials of which this armor is made is quite different than the steel they used back in WW2. Modern tanks consist out of other materials, don't they?
THe frontal turret armor on the M-1 is about 750mm thick while hull is 540mm. THe glacis is only 50mm @ 82° [~ 350mm LOS]. Front side hull is only about 60-70mm thick base and a 50mm side skirt in the front half while the rear half of the hull is only about 50mm thick with a 10mm mild steel skirting plate. The side turret is about 400mm thick. Ballistic tests of modern armor, consistantly reveal a layered construction of special armor elements inbetween steel cover and backing plates. This special elements vary from ceramic to layers with rubber /polyurthen interlayers or even plexiglas alternating layers. The performance of these materials is tested on a routine basis and is known. Inaddition 'effects' that increase resistance to certain types of projectiles are also known and are evident in these layered constructions.These are type dependant and may not apply to something as massive as a 88mm shell. One thing thats apparent is that the thickness to diameter ratio plays a large part in determining resistance as does the ratio of the projectile diameter to the plate width. Most of these tanks are designed to combat threats with a diameter of 20-30mm and where not intended against 88mm size APC warheads ...so there resistance would be down drastically.
The officail records show a 5.1k kill yes, so I have to accept this at the moment. When I nest meet the colleague aI will ask him for his version..
King Tigers didn't have any infra red capabilities during WW2 as far as I know but they were working on an improved King Tiger with infra red capabilities(as in the Panther)and a new gun sight stabiliser for really accurate firing on the move. I believe this would have been put into production around May 1945 but the factories were overrun by then. I have heard of King Tigers knocking out T34s and nearly 4 km. Not bad for WW2 era!
Most MBt's of today, I'm sure it could take out a T-62 from the rear, not much of an accomplishment, but it probably could.
If a RPG can penetrate I'm sure a 120mm gun can. If you were try to destroy it then a grenade or 2 in the cupola with some petrol/gas/benzin would be better and quicker. Personally I think that story was one from a soldier who talks sh**.
I wonder if a KingTiger firing a DU round from its 88mm at close range can penetrate even the Challenger or the Abraham's Chobhram armor.
Ok, so the King Tiger could not really face up to an M1 or a Challenger, but how about to an M47/48, or even an M60? As far as I can tell, it has a better gun than the 47/48, and better armour. The M60's gun is better (?), armour for the M60 I do not know... Both the american designs are lighter & faster, but if the King Tiger was on the defensive, a la WW2...
I think you're both reading that I said the Abrams was hit from the rear. They never got around to hitting the rear before they changed their minds about destroying it. Yes, I've wondered myself why they just didn't torch the inside of the turret to begin with, but then again you've got to understand how us Americans think. If I've got to blow something up, I might as well have some fun doing it.
I think a King Tiger would acquit itself rather well (if it didn't break down) all the way up until the mid-late 70s when the Chieftain came along, and then the Abrams, Challenger, Leopard II, etc.
Yes. Its gun has enough punch to destroy a tank like the King Tiger from over 1000 meters. Front glacis plate, no problem.