IS-7 vs MAUS | 130mm BR-482B vs The Heaviest Tank Ever Made | Armour Penetration Simulation
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 сен 2024
- The German Maus was the heaviest tank ever made, with prototypes being developed towards the end of WWII. Meanwhile, the Soviet IS-7 had its first prototypes made shortly after the war. The simulation presents the impact of the IS-7's 130mm BR-482B projectile on the lower cheek of the Maus, from close range.
The turret cheek of the Maus has been modelled as 232mm thick, in line with Warthunder. However, the only existing Maus was assessed to have a 220mm thick turret front, but there are various sources out there which state that the planned thickness was supposed to be higher -some even stating 240mm. It has been modelled as 220BHN good quality RHA.
As the hardening profile is not available for BR-482B, the first set of simulations show the result of the projectile having very good quality metallurgy -similar to some post-war Soviet shells (like later versions of 100mm BR-412D) which have a maximum hardness in the nose of ~650BHN. As this may have not been the case for the IS-7 in the late 40's, the last two visualisations show the same scenario with the hardness reduced to ~450BHN maximum, with poorer WWII Soviet metallurgy.
Amazing thumbnail artwork from: JEROLPOA sketchfab.com/...
![My most EXPENSIVE GRIND experience [Is-7 feat. Object 279 ] Compilation of the BEST actions !!!](/img/1.gif)
What happens when two rival nations decide bigger is better...
German tank desing : bigger tank better!
Soviet tank desing: bigger gun better!
Rival nations?
@@Progress_or_Barbarism Nazi Germany Vs. Soviet Russia?
yeah..?
Rival? German nazzi tried to kill or slave every Soviet citizen
@@smsus-fn4wsYeah, but maus was probably the worst design. cause is 7 had better effective armor, gun, speed, RoF. There is really no competition
wow, the explosive chamber was still in tact after it penetrated. i guess the turret crew would have had a significant emotional event, to quote the chieftain
a very, VERY significant emotional event. Inside that proyectile there's a surprise of almost 200 grams of TNT
@@juancortapan7845 yes
IIIMOOOOTIONAL DEEEEMEEEGE
I remember back when that was funny.
@@juancortapan7845only possible because short range scenario.
Real combat distance maus would be immune to puny IS-7
That round gave 0 f***s
On such a short distance only....
Watch out who you insult
@@foxy-48514 what ?! Train ? Vibration? I don't get it..
Why censor word fuck
@@foxy-48514where you heard this BS? You better provide real reference or GTFO
Zero F's about Hitler's wonder weapons
Skill issue, should have angled the turret
Heh, WT.
@@Ghostmaxi1337no
@@cherno8336 Bro, wdyw?
@@Ghostmaxi1337WoT
@@seba27113 Angling in WT id far more important, considdering that 1 Pen can end your run.
SY, you have really gone out of your way to make this channel incredible. I remember watching with only a handful of videos up, hoping more would come out, and you have just relentlessly pumped out content for your audience. It's so entertaining. Especially the research you do to validate some of the observations made in the simulation, with photos of real world evidence and testing backing it up.
Really appreciate it! Thank you for sticking around for so long!
It would be interesting if you showed this simulation sped up in the end, as if it was the real impact. I don't know if we would see anything since it happens so fast, but it would be cool to have an idea of how powerful these shells are
There is actually a way for you to see how this would look like. First, take a screenshot before the shot has landed. Then, take another screenshot when it has stopped moving. Switch between these 2 screenshots and you would know how it would look like in real speed.
@@somedudewithgrassgrowingou4177funny but also completely true, nice
Nice that you included a version with the actual quality of the Soviet steel at the time. Would be even better if you added a version with a firing distance of around 600 metres, which seems to have been a more typical combat distance.
Yeah. Looks like a more direct hit would have gone through even with bad quality, but at long ranges I can see it being deflected upwards of it hit higher than dead center.
More like 800-1000m for heavy tanks
There should also be a version with the actual quality of German armor at the time. Since late in the war, German armor had inferior characteristics due to lack of additives, being either too soft or too brittle.
A simulation on the effect of armor hardness would be neat. Maybe at different obliquities and projectile types like sharp and blunt AP as well as APCR.
Like T-34 and IS-2 high hardness compared to softer armor under different circumstances.
Both soviet and late war German tanks had armor deficiencies, so there's no gold standard for comparison.
@@Einwetok dont think ive ever heard anyone say bad things about american armour quality, and soviet armour issues were mostly fixed by the 2nd half of the war
@Einwetok late war soviet tanks had quite good armor due to US supplied high quality steel. Especially late war IS-2 had good quality control.
@@chost-059 You seem confused, there's been no mention of American armor quality. Both Russia and late war Germany had similar problems. Their industries were disrupted and supply chains were an issue. Read a bit.
@@nuraly78 The United States did not supply armored steel. The USA supplied rare alloying additives in the USSR.
I cant begin to tell you how I cool I think your channel is. You bring to life things that could have happened but probably never will and I think its awesome. PS. The Maus is my favorite tank.
Armor angles slightly from 0 to 30°:
AP shell: I have chosen death >_
Yuck, Wehraboo
I would love to see test using the 12.8/8.8 cm apbcds experimental shell, or maybe other German ww2 experimental apds shells
Thank you for the projectile quality comparison at the end very insightful
0:40 Devoured by an angry armor dragon!
This is congruent to what I experiencend when meeting a Maus with my IS-7 in War Thunder. Penetrating shot through the Maus turret cheek and then the shell fuzes and performs a major emotional event.
I dont know if you know this, but the Is 7's 130mm S-70 gun is a naval gun
IS-7's projectile penetrated the Maus turret, but couldn't do same with King tigers forehead in the same simulation. NICE!!!!
Just 185>235
Bro made this to win a war thunder debate after his round didn't penetrate
What a beautiful simulation. Would be great to see more WWII vehicles put to the test like battleship armor
Then Kaboom! All the crew inside the turret would be dead due to the explosive filler of the shell. Don't know about the hull crew though.
Considering they're at the entire other end of the hull, separated from the rest of the crew by the whole engine and transmission assembly, I think it'd be pretty safe to assume the 2 guys in the hull would've been fine.
@@TheChieftain1117 They still would likely bail after such a catastrofic hit in the turret, no one is mad enough to stay in a tank after such a hit, we can safely assume the Maus would be fubar
@@TheChieftain1117 it does not matter where they are, the turret was still penned and the crew is right there.
Except the HULL crew isn't, which is what I was saying.
Bailing wasn't even mentioned in the original comment. Of course they would, this ain't War Thunder; you can't operate a 188 ton tank with 2 people.
Very interesting and maybe you can try doing this 130mm vs M1 Abrams Leopard 2 Challenger 1 provided they need to fight Object 785 with 130mm
Somewhere was Jagdtiger vs M1 Abrams LFP
abrams can destroy even an 85 mm projectile in a frontal projection, BUT for this you need to get into an unprotected gap between the hull and the tower
@@user-nb1nx2rm8xв боковую проекцию Абрамс возможно уничтожить даже попаданием из 30 мм пушки.
@@user-nb1nx2rm8x Like you said its pretty much impossible to do. Though I don't think it will even destroy it, it might disable the turret ring but it wont destroy the tank. The ring is made up of 3 parts that are 200ish mm RHA LOS. The fact its also a full size round would make it hard to go through that.
130mm guns is from Navy destroyers those things are Super OP
Do you work with Dejiman at all? You two are the largest channels of this genre and you both released a maus/E100 vid on the same day
The answer seems obvious enough, unless you are suggesting that this is a mere coincidence. It's not the first time either they release videos on (broadly) same topic on same day.
Ну то, что оба этих канала содержит один хозяин, это очевидно.
Clearly not enough armor. They should have made 100m thick armor. 100m on top too for airstrikes.
Sure, cause Germany definitely had the time and resources to waste like that 🙄
@@bigg4319whomp whomp.
@@bigg4319womp womp
Do maus vs frontal cheek of is7
If the Maus found itself in a situation where it is only a few hundred metres from its enemy, hopes and prayers will be just as effective as its armour.
Maus vs is-7 please
I'm not sure about in being able to pierce M103, even with good shells
What's the distance the shell traveled?
~350m
Could you make simulations of bombs against ships and tanks?
I love your channel. :)
Can you do something stupid like the maus' 128mm gun vs and L3/33 CC?
No
Post war tank Vs wartime tank. Result is completely as expected
Stalinum ammo💀🗣🔥
could you test the LOSAT missile??
I would guess that even a non penetrating hit would damage the bodystructure of the tank to a degree.
when a 122 mm is 2 projectile hit a tiger or a Koral tiger, even if they did not break through, the welding sites diverged, and here 130 mm and a much more powerful gun, so the result is obvious😊
For some reason, quality of latewar German armour is assumed to be perfect.
80cm Gustav Gun vs Maus would be awesome.
My question is how many Maus would a modern sabot round go through before stopping. I assume it'd cut through the armor like butter, but enough to go through the other side?
Modern sabot could easily deal with the total armor thickness of the maus several times over, but the empty space inside and equipment like the engine would probably make it unstable. I predict it would stop in the first or second maus depending on luck.
Can you do this one exactly again but the side armor on the maus turret
Ninja VS Knight….coming soon!
It would be neat if you simulated M193, M855, M855A1, and M318MOD1 against things like body armor and car windshields.
If the round was the tiger II‘s it would also pen (238mm pen)
was an APCR developed for the 88-mm and 128-mm german guns..?
88 yes, 128 dont think so. But there was a prototype 128mm APDS which essentially fired the 88 projectile out of the 128 gun though
@@SYsimulations when and which units got the 88-mm APCR..?
@@SYsimulations
The 128mm APDS fired a modified 88mm projectile with a thicker cap, to prevent shattering.
The maus crew forgot to angle the turret.
Let’s do Maus vs a 16 inch naval gun
Make a simulation of firing is2 ammunition. By tigers, panthers or even pz4. ty
Do you think in the next episode you could put in a link to where you get this?
Do this with a 20pdr APDS, that would have been in standard British service tank in this hypothetical tome period
I mean regardless of the distance, the Maus would have no real chance of going through the IS-7 frontal armor right (Since it uses the same cannon as the Jagdtiger and it couldn't easily penetrate the IS-3)? Considering how this round just said "Screw your armor" at 350m away, I doubt it would be too much different at 500m or more, but if it did struggle all the IS crew needs to do is close the distance and the IS-7 wasn't all that slow (This is all if both of the vehicles worked fine).
absolute weakest part of the maus when its turned its armor to you vs absolute best tank cannon in the era and it still struggles to penetrate
What era best tank cannon? 130mm wasn't there...
@@AKUJIVALDO late ww2 before the 50s
Those round simulations looks like my sister at night (she always go at her night shift idk why she said that when i showed her the video and i wonder why🤔)
awesome sim
I would love to see a contemporary round hitting the UFP of the T80bv with the contact one package. Source say that the t80b has slightly weaker armor than the t72. Plenty videos have been done with the t72 but i havent seen much for the t80bv
I assume you are talking about tbe 60 50 hull vs the 60 45?
The little bit of steel provide more protection simply because 50 > 45.
Where can I test out these simulations myself?
Its ANSYS
But isn't it strange how the soft 130mm shell barely penetrates the armor but the 122mm flat shell went easily through the Tiger IIs 185mm turret in Dejmian XYZ Simulation?
Maybe you can also do the same simulation with a 122mm BR-471B vs. Tiger II (H) turret and then everyone can fight who is right 😂
At what range?
@@AKUJIVALDO I think it was from 100m :D
What program do you use for these simulations? Blender?
This is impressive the guns calibre soviets had. MAUS/E100 pure homogeneous steel armor would have been quickly outdated at the begining of the cold war with the new HEAT shells/missiles.
Of course there are many other parameters to take into account such as the capacity of germans heavy tank to engage at long range distance, poor optical quality of soviets tanks or crew training.
isu152-2 with BL-10 gun and Obj268 versus Maus cheek turret, please
Hey if you could play it in real Time for a better effect I think it would look cooler
Crew knocked out
In my opinion, unless you have a really robust bridgelaying capability, heavy tanks are usually a bad idea. Their weight is just too much for them to be operationally or strategically mobile.
The one exception for me is the IS-2 which was the same weight as a panther but with more armor and firepower. This is also why I think western tanks need to go on a diet. 70 tons has so many problems. I think the west needs to get over their fear of heavy ERA. Replace some composite with the ERA and you will have a much lighter tank. Pair that with an autoloader(the kind in the k2, type 90/10, and leclerc, not the carousel types.) And an APS and you have a much lighter tank with the same protection level and firepower.
‘Heavy’ MBT’s in the 70 ton range seem much more survivable than Russian ‘medium’ MBT’s weighing 40-50 tons. Sometimes bigger is better
@@Tiberium_Tigertell that to Israelis. They are mounting "cope cages" on their tanks.
Tanks top and belly are the thinnest armour on the tanks.
@@Tiberium_Tigerигры - ложь). Выглядят - не значит являются. Кроме глаз, нужно иметь ещё и развитый мозг.
Советские танки воевали гораздо больше, чем танки НАТО. Поэтому, может создаваться и такое впечатление. У большинства западных танков больше масса из-за большей башни, которая должна в себя вмещать заряжающего. Больший танк - большая вероятность в него попасть и поразить, меньше возможности спрятать. Относительно массы, у танков НАТО малая площадь хорошей брони, большая вероятность поражения из-за, в том числе, гораздо большей длины, когда танк стоит под углом, а не строго лбом.
Советские танки более универсальны и больше подходят для большой войны. У них различаются назначения.
В автомат заряжания в развитой башне, так же, - легче попасть, т.к. он сложнее скрывается складками местности, тем более, если танк высокий.
NATO tanks are also built with defense and use of terrain in mind while Russian tanks cannot do this as well due to their size and gun elevation and depression. So while western MBT’s are bigger targets with softer armor in most places they are still more survivable due to their tactics and safety features. I doubt any Russian tanker would want to sit directly above the carousel loading system in a Russian MBT if they had the choice, it just makes it a death trap if you’re hit anywhere but the front. Even the Leopards and Challengers destroyed in Ukraine don’t have their whole turrets ripped off making the tank a total loss.
"Best" armored tank vs different caliber naval shells?
The armor slowed down the round well, but the crews may still be wounded.
it's still going around 150m/s
That shell is still travelling pretty fast and the amount of shrapnel it would have sent flying inside of the tank is generally considerable a much higher dose of iron than the daily recommended one for a human
Turret crew would be almost certainly dead, especially if the explosive filler went off, perhaps the gun breech could protect the person on the other side of them somewhat- and the driver way down in the hull may live.
apcbc explosive chamber still intact so i think it'd be a significant emotional AND physical event for the crew (200g of explosive)
@@WelcomeToDERPLAND obviously, the war thunder aphe is fake, the explosive area just make a bigger cone of spall, not a 360 degrees sphere of death
Artillery: It's free real estate
And I've been looking for the name of this program for a year now, and no one writes the name. I will be glad if you tell me, thank you in advance!
Question could modern apdsfs penetrate t95 armor and the metal shield thing around the barrel?
Я не понял, а что там отломилось внутри снаряда? Донный взрыватель? Тогда он не сработает?
For a second I thought you changed your mind n decided to change the target to an AK magazine 💀
0:40 set playback speed at 0.5, watch how evil barracuda enters the tanks and spits fire
Can you do the American m60a2 shileigh missle against MAUS
350m is very close on combat almost rarely the minimum combat distance as far as i know is 1000m up to 1800m and some claim to be 800m which i think the is7 shell would definitely still dented the maus but not penetrated
If the soviet optics and gub precision would actually allow for aimed hits above 800m.
Chances are Maus would due to sophisticated cripple IS-7 long before it would even reach 800m.
@@WotansCryif you did not know that the IS 7 was designed so that it could not be penetrated by the projectiles of the mouse cannon in the frontal projection, which was confirmed by the shelling
Yes and no. At the time the mais would have been fielded, combat would largely been in towns, so it would even have to face rocket launcher from roofs. Not quite the best position and in field, the allied jabos...
@@user-nb1nx2rm8xwhat kind of shelling? Simulator,game or reality?
@@WotansCry It did allow for it.
In real life maus turret 250mm u can find lot of information about that
Can you make Panzer 4 H bullet hitting the side of the T-34-85???
can crew get injured by these tiny shrapnel pieces?
The warhead is inside and it contains explosives.
Cool
Can you make video about object 279 please?
Can u test T80BVM against DM63?
Do maus vs is7 cheeks
Can you do IS-2 122 mm cannon vs MAUS? I cant test it on war thunder
Impossible to pen in any point from the front of the Maus. The best IS-2 can do vs Maus is side shot with little to no angle and closer than 700m.
It's an engineering embarrassment for 188 tons of armor.
350 meters is literally point blank, at the weakest Part of Maus armor. the embarrasment here is the author's bias of his engagement choice
After IS shot, everything would stop working for sure
What happen in Wot ?
Me use a Maus try to angle turret :
Spalling , every tankers nightmare
Thus demonstrating why superheavy tanks aren't worth it
How are your mesh generation specifications? Not saying it's inaccurate (most videos match real penetration well), but the FE mesh is a very important parameter.
So the 130mm of tanks like the IS-7 were essentially designed, to annihilate German superheavies. The project was being worked on during the war, and only culminated after it had ended of course.
well, I think we can safely assume that such a RIDICULOUS weapon would not have a big issue with this task.
Or you know, hit the damn thing from the sides, is not like you can miss it!
I wonder how long the war would have had to go on for the Germans to finally be able to develop decent turret armor
Decent turret armor?
You do realize that IS7 came in 1947?
Way after ww2
Even in 1948 germans would develop flat turret fronts that are as tall as burj khalifa
En qué aplicación haces esas animaciones bro
is this a point blank shot or from what distance is this simulated
it has the statistics in the beginning
350 m, so very close
@@Querulouss thanks seems I missed them
Would the shell still explode?
Это анимация? Или приложение? (Как называется 9
Maus forgot to angle the turret
It's no surprise that the IS-7 can pen a Maus cheek
On 300m distance you mean ...
Real combat distance no pen possible... .
@@WotansCryshh, or commies will start crying...
@@AKUJIVALDO stalinium won again
@@anonimotm8171stalinum in real life is fucking trash and brittle
@@WotansCryin real life the IS7 would never even in gauge they would just get behind cover and call artillery or CAS
What software it that
you should do a kv2 AP shell vs the maus front plate
No pen
su-152 ap?
@@kangaroo_jesus35 nah they dont have the penetration power but they might have the explosive mass
would it be possible to do simulations on the javelin or atgm missiles vs the tanks the russians are using in ukraine?
IS-7 was invented after WW2 and has nothing to do with bad quality!
S-70A gun probably wouldn’t have suffered with the same hardness issues as WW2 Soviet guns due to the fact it was first tested in the IS-7 in 1948.
i wibder what will happen if 3 FLAK 88 ROUNDS AIM FOR T-28/T-95 FRONT HULL
0:40 looks like a snake or dragon