Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
SteadyAsSheGoes

Custom armor schematic "Republique". Is this right?

48 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Banned
141 posts
753 battles

Do I have this schematic labeled correctly ?

I havent done the turrets yet but I have a few questions about that too I'll post up later

Thanks 

Republic_armor.jpg.f063537e7d8752a3de18bd6b6c1dbc4a.jpg

Edited by NoSpot_NoShot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
406
[-NOM-]
Members
548 posts
10,498 battles

There are very few people who know the hidden armor values of ships, and fewer still that know how to find said info. So if you want hidden armor scheme verification, than it may be a bit. If its the normal values that are displayed in-game, well, you know where to find those.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
262
[WHARF]
Members
513 posts
20,011 battles
3 hours ago, NoSpot_NoShot said:

Do I have this schematic labeled correctly ?

I havent done the turrets yet but I have a few questions about that too I'll post up later

Thanks 

Republic_armor.jpg.f063537e7d8752a3de18bd6b6c1dbc4a.jpg

question...are you listing the decks at 242 to 262 or am i getting it wrong?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
141 posts
753 battles
8 minutes ago, dadeoo said:

question...are you listing the decks at 242 to 262 or am i getting it wrong?

 

yes I was allowing for SS hit or miss at 19mm

Edited by NoSpot_NoShot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,885
[PVE]
Members
9,038 posts
25,436 battles
4 hours ago, NoSpot_NoShot said:

Do I have this schematic labeled correctly ?

I havent done the turrets yet but I have a few questions about that too I'll post up later

Thanks 

Republic_armor.jpg.f063537e7d8752a3de18bd6b6c1dbc4a.jpg

This sounds like a question for @LittleWhiteMouse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Retired WoWS Community Contributors
12,953 posts
11,269 battles
2 hours ago, NoSpot_NoShot said:

Anybody?

Close.

A shell hitting the broadside of Republique heading towards her citadel has to contend with:

  1. 32mm external hull armour (total: 32mm)
  2. 400mm (total: 432mm)
  3. 70mm turtleback  (total: 502mm)
  4. 40mm or 50mm citadel wall, depending (total: 542mm to 552mm)

Note this does not account for armour angling which will increase the effective armour even further.

The upper belt can be bipassed if the ship lands short in water, however the water eats a lot of the shells energy so it's questionable if it's worth while.  I doubt very much that shells are capable of diving deep enough to plunge under Republique's belt and still strike her citadel though it MAY be possible in extreme cases like when she's in a high-speed turn.

Be aware that it's impossible for a bow shot striking over the waterline to plunge down to penetrate the lower portion of Republique's citadel (with the 235mm athwartship).  There's a hidden 50mm horizontal plate that divides the two layers running all of the way to the bow.  The shell will simply ricochet off this plate and skip off into the upper section of the citadel.  A shot that strikes the water first and bipass this 50mm plate and then contend with the 235mm athwarthship.  There's a similar story to the rear but the plates are even thicker, protecting the steering gears.  These also incorporate some turtleback style protection making sub-surface hits less likely to citadel via this vector, so only the rear 370mm upper plate is vulnerable to citadel hits.

Edited by LittleWhiteMouse
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
141 posts
753 battles
33 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Close.

A shell hitting the broadside of Republique heading towards her citadel has to contend with:

  1. 32mm external hull armour (total: 32mm)
  2. 400mm (total: 432mm)
  3. 70mm turtleback  (total: 502mm)
  4. 40mm or 50mm citadel wall, depending (total: 542mm to 552mm)

Note this does not account for armour angling which will increase the effective armour even further.

The upper belt can be bipassed if the ship lands short in water, however the water eats a lot of the shells energy so it's questionable if it's worth while.  I doubt very much that shells are capable of diving deep enough to plunge under Republique's belt and still strike her citadel though it MAY be possible in extreme cases like when she's in a high-speed turn.

Be aware that it's impossible for a bow shot striking over the waterline to plunge down to penetrate the lower portion of Republique's citadel (with the 235mm athwartship).  There's a hidden 50mm horizontal plate that divides the two layers running all of the way to the bow.  The shell will simply ricochet off this plate and skip off into the upper section of the citadel.  A shot that strikes the water first and bipass this 50mm plate and then contend with the 235mm athwarthship.  There's a similar story to the rear but the plates are even thicker, protecting the steering gears.  These also incorporate some turtleback style protection making sub-surface hits less likely to citadel via this vector, so only the rear 370mm upper plate is vulnerable to citadel hits.

I'm trying to find the 70mm turtle back, is that not on the armor layout in game? Thanks for your reply

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Retired WoWS Community Contributors
12,953 posts
11,269 battles
20 minutes ago, NoSpot_NoShot said:

I'm trying to find the 70mm turtle back, is that not on the armor layout in game? Thanks for your reply

It is (unlike some of the other geometries) but you have to look for it.  Like so:

1hcxdUt.jpg

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
141 posts
753 battles
10 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

It is (unlike some of the other geometries) but you have to look for it.  Like so:

1hcxdUt.jpg

 

oh.... its on the other side. haha, thank you for point that out. That hidden 50mm plate is sandwiched between the bottom of the turtle back and the top of the citadel? As it is the bottom of the turtle back ect.

Edited by NoSpot_NoShot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Retired WoWS Community Contributors
12,953 posts
11,269 battles
4 minutes ago, NoSpot_NoShot said:

oh.... its on the other side. haha, thank you for point that out. That hidden 50mm plate is sandwiched between the bottom of the turtle back and the top of the citadel? As it is the bottom of the turtle back ect.

You mean the bow plate?  It's here:

GRriqii.png

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
141 posts
753 battles
8 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

You mean the bow plate?  It's here:

GRriqii.png

Oh no I thought you meant the "hidden" bottom of the turtle back was 50mm.  I'm thinking its stacked on there like blocks whereas all sides have a thickness!?

Edited by NoSpot_NoShot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Retired WoWS Community Contributors
12,953 posts
11,269 battles
3 minutes ago, NoSpot_NoShot said:

Oh no I thought you meant the "hidden" bottom of the turtle back was 50mm.  

Nuh uh.  The only other 50mm plate worth mentioning is the citadel wall around the magazines.  Around the machine spaces it's only 40mm.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
141 posts
753 battles
8 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Nuh uh.  The only other 50mm plate worth mentioning is the citadel wall around the magazines.  Around the machine spaces it's only 40mm.

How about this one?

Republic_armor.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
141 posts
753 battles
29 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Nuh uh.  The only other 50mm plate worth mentioning is the citadel wall around the magazines.  Around the machine spaces it's only 40mm.

I forgot the rear hidden plate. I know you said its impossible but just for specifics. Does this look right now please?

Republic_armor.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Retired WoWS Community Contributors
12,953 posts
11,269 battles
11 minutes ago, NoSpot_NoShot said:

If a shell travels in this trajectory through the barbette armor would this be accurate?    

Republic_armor_barbette.jpg

Yes, but there's a problem -- no shells in World of Warships can typically make that trajectory.  Auto-ricochet mechanics will force a shell to bounce off from striking at too shallow of an angle.  Citadel hits from "plunging fire"  are possible but the ranges required are absurd.  In order to have a chance (and not a guaranteed one) of penetrating instead of automatically ricocheting, the shells need to be falling at an angle at a minimum of 30º to the parallel.  For most tier X battleships, you're looking at engagement ranges in excess of 24km for that to happen.  And like I said, it's by no means guaranteed at those ranges -- there's merely a chance.  Each time the shell strikes a horizontal plate that it cannot overmatch, another ricochet check is made.  Typically there are three such checks made in order to penetrate the citadel through a vertical attack (deck + mid-deck + citadel roof).  Thus, while possible, it's largely an academic consideration and not a practical one.

 

 

Edited by LittleWhiteMouse
  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
141 posts
753 battles
29 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Yes, but there's a problem -- no shells in World of Warships can typically make that trajectory.  Auto-ricochet mechanics will force a shell to bounce off from striking at too shallow of an angle.  Citadel hits from "plunging fire"  are possible but the ranges required are absurd.  In order to have a chance (and not a guaranteed one) of penetrating instead of automatically ricocheting, the shells need to be falling at an angle at a minimum of 30º to the parallel.  For most tier X battleships, you're looking at engagement ranges in excess of 24km for that to happen.  And like I said, it's by no means guaranteed at those ranges -- there's merely a chance.  Each time the shell strikes a horizontal plate that it cannot overmatch, another ricochet check is made.  Typically there are three such checks made in order to penetrate the citadel through a vertical attack (deck + mid-deck + citadel roof).  Thus, while possible, it's largely an academic consideration and not a practical one.

 

 

Thank you and how about this do I have the labeled correctly now? @LittleWhiteMouse

Republic_armor.jpg

Edited by NoSpot_NoShot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Retired WoWS Community Contributors
12,953 posts
11,269 battles
35 minutes ago, NoSpot_NoShot said:

Thank you and how about this do I have the labeled correctly now? @LittleWhiteMouse

Republic_armor.jpg

Penetration into the citadel through the upper belt is 542mm over the machine spaces (32mm + 400mm + 70mm + 40mm) and 552mm over the magazines (32mm + 400mm + 70mm + 50mm).  Penetration into the citadel through the lower belt is 492mm over the machine spaces  (32mm + 350mm + 70mm + 40mm) and 502mm over the magazines (32mm + 350mm + 70mm + 50mm).  

This, again, does not account for armour angling which will increase these values considerably depending upon the shell fall angle.

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
141 posts
753 battles
5 hours ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Penetration into the citadel through the upper belt is 542mm over the machine spaces (32mm + 400mm + 70mm + 40mm) and 552mm over the magazines (32mm + 400mm + 70mm + 50mm).  Penetration into the citadel through the lower belt is 492mm over the machine spaces  (32mm + 350mm + 70mm + 40mm) and 502mm over the magazines (32mm + 350mm + 70mm + 50mm).  

This, again, does not account for armour angling which will increase these values considerably depending upon the shell fall angle.

Thank you for clarifying that. Another question. Do we have a tool or formula that can be used to determine the armor thickness change per angle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
406
[-NOM-]
Members
548 posts
10,498 battles
34 minutes ago, NoSpot_NoShot said:

Thank you for clarifying that. Another question. Do we have a tool or formula that can be used to determine the armor thickness change per angle?

Good ole trigonometry. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Retired WoWS Community Contributors
12,953 posts
11,269 battles
1 hour ago, NoSpot_NoShot said:

Thank you for clarifying that. Another question. Do we have a tool or formula that can be used to determine the armor thickness change per angle?

Yep.

55 minutes ago, SirPent13 said:

Good ole trigonometry.  

It's this.

Also keep in mind that battleships shells normalize by 6º against each surface they strike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
141 posts
753 battles
16 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Yep.

It's this.

Also keep in mind that battleships shells normalize by 6º against each surface they strike.

How many mm does the penetration requirement increase per degree of angle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Retired WoWS Community Contributors
12,953 posts
11,269 battles
11 minutes ago, NoSpot_NoShot said:

How many mm does the penetration requirement increase per degree of angle?

It's not linear. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×