most of the fragmentation will end up in third or half distance of fragmentation radius. minority of fragmentation will end up past that
maps in enlisted are cluttered with indestructible objects, so that most of the fragmentation will end up in buildings.
for bomb to reach that fragmentation radius in game, it needs to be dropped on area with clear sight and without any obstacles between it and soldiers for 120m. tell me how many of such areas exist in game?
so 10% of being incapacitated is negligible? 0.1% for radius of 425m, 10% is for radius of 250m.you get 100x increase when going from 425 to 250m, so how much is risk for 120m?
btw i will put data for mk82 cause i am too lazy to search for ww2 bombs
btw if you check number of fragments in the game for 500lbs bomb it is either 8.5k or 13.1k.
I hope you do understand that your “book” is from WW2 era and we are quite alot past that.
Here is some murricans shooting 1/4" plate.
So either the 1/4" steel penetration requirement is outdated and completely false or ~80 years ago humans were quite different kind of breed.
It’s already been stated: MK82 the lethal zone is 80x30 meters. Why don’t you look further at what GICHD includes in the injury probability? Oh my God, glass fragments—they might scratch innocent passersby.
9mm cannot penetrate it, likely due to the lead core. .223 easily penetrates 6mm mild steel. As for using 6mm mild steel in fragment tests, this is a standard that is still in use today. If you are good at searching, you will find that current papers still reference it. If you are skilled at using Google, you will discover that even the most advanced bombs today are still tested with thin steel plates or aluminum plates, not the ballistic gel you might imagine. My suggestion is to read more instead of making assumptions.
Bro, if I fall on the ground, I might not be able to move for 10 minutes, but this is a game, right? In this game, a character can still be lively after getting hit by a single .45 round.
Sure, to count hits. But saying penetrating 6mm of steel is requirement to consider deadly would generally mean shotguns and most handguns cant kill anyone.
So thermobaric bombs are also incapable to kill anyone ?
Id say it depends entirely what you are testing.
If you are testing shrapnell bombs, then steel might be used to count the hits. Also sure, these days you can attach relatively cheap sensors to steelplates to get general idea with what kind of force the shrapnell hits the plate at what target.
But as said, at 100m that shrapnell probably wont penetrate 6mm steel plate but sure would be deadly to human.
This is the testing standard for bomb fragments. Do you understand? Don’t try to argue with the standards and textbooks. The book has already made it clear enough.
The standard for evaluating lethality is kinetic energy. This is explained clearly in AD389318 (1962). At this specific kinetic energy, fragments can penetrate this thickness of soft steel. Similarly, if you convert it to different materials and different projectiles, the fragment materials are different. Tungsten alloy spheres are different from steel fragments, and they are also different from lead-core handgun bullets.
The way you cited it is problematic. This is an article discussing the threat area of bombs to civilians and friendly forces, with extremely broad standards, even including injuries from glass shards. It is not discussing the lethal area of bombs. On the contrary, it states at the beginning that the lethal area of the MK82 is 80 meters… So, the lethal area of the MK82 is only slightly larger than that of the M64.
So this article actually further indicates that the bomb’s power in the game is exaggerated.
Unfortunately, I couldn’t find the chart for the 5-inch HVAR rocket. The file only contains the 4.5-inch T22/M8. The power of the rockets is also severely exaggerated… Oh, by the way, just a moment ago, I used the M8 rocket to kill 27 enemies .
Newer books mention that the use of mild steel as a standard for personnel casualties has been replaced by more refined injury criteria. However, to be honest, using mild steel to measure bomb effectiveness is still quite common; many papers do this. This book also uses it to assess the lethality of bombs during the Cold War later on.
This is just a World War II game, using World War II bombs. We have found information from that era. I think that is accurate enough; no modern person is going to test the real effectiveness of World War II bombs. People from that time already tested them and documented the results.
I suspect it might require killing the driver or damaging the fuel tank, since trucks at that time had no armor. In some documentaries, you can see that they called for using a .30 caliber carbine to destroy vehicles.
I am quite sure. The requirements for the effectiveness of modern shrapnel are still similar; it’s an empirical approach. Shrapnel needs to achieve a certain kinetic energy to be lethal, and at that time, the testing method used soft steel. If it didn’t reach that kinetic energy, it would be categorized under injuries, considered not to have a sufficient kill probability. The documents provided ranges for both lethal (1/4 soft steel) and injury effects. It’s similar to the difference between a 7.62x51mm bullet and a .22LR
At the same time, kinetic energy does not directly determine penetration power. The 6.5×25mm CBJ-MS has low kinetic energy, yet its penetration exceeds that of the 7.62 NATO. However, the lethality of the 6.5×25mm CBJ-MS against personnel is quite poor and cannot be compared to the 7.62 NATO. The lethality against exposed targets depends on kinetic energy rather than penetration power. You should understand that shrapnel is made of steel, not lead core; it easily penetrates 6mm soft steel (which is very different from armor steel).Penetrating 6mm soft steel only indicates, based on experience, that its kinetic energy exceeds 58 foot-pounds.
Penetration of 1/4" steel ? Yeah no it aint.
If you are good with google, you can relatively quickly find out how massive differency there is in requirement to penetrate 6mm steel and human skin.
Are you saying a bomb that havent exploded thus havent fragmented most likely wont kill anyone ?
Thanks.
I believe according to your own studies you provided 1/4" is requiremen against trucks.
Which again is fairly different from ahem humans.
As well as at the time rifle requirements regarding terminal ballistics had such requirements as it had to penetrate say 5cm of wood planks or something similar.
Which is again outdated.
Irony is that with small arms, you dont want to get full penetration which is considered as over penetration.
Good example would be 7.62 tokarev.
.
