GM Wiesel Armor?

MajorH

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
866
Reaction score
0
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Country
llUnited States
I have completed research to add 7 Wiesel vehicle variants to TacOps v4.

APC, Wiesel 2 ISC
APC, Wiesel 2 Cmd
APC, Wiesel 2 Ambulance
Mortar, Carrier 120mm Wiesel 2
SAM, Wiesel 2 Stinger
FSV, Wiesel 1 MK20 (20mm autocannon)
ATGMV, Wiesel 1 TOW

I could not find any official info on Wiesel armor except the claim that it is proof all around against 7.62mm ball. In TacOps terms that would be 20mm to 26mm armor - front, side, and rear.

I stumbled across a note in a forum where a German soldier (a Wiesel 1 MK20 driver) said 30 to 50 mm (one+ to two inches) of steel. He did not respond when someone on the forum asked for elaboration. :)

I found a photo of the hull of a Wiesel 2 under construction with front and forward side edges of the armor visible. There was a workman in the picture, touching the hull, which provided an excellent sense of scale. The exposed armor edges appeared to be about the same thickness as the width of his thumb. My thumb is 25mm wide (one inch). I didn't see anything in the picture that looked as thick as 50mm of steel unless that number was produced by factoring in slope.

Comments?
 

kbluck

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2003
Messages
707
Reaction score
0
Location
Folsom, CA
Country
llUnited States
Doing some very simplistic weight analysis:

If you assume a rectangular box of the same dimensions as a Wiesel, we find that this box will have an armor volume of 1,026,775 cc. Multiplied by a typical steel armor plate density of 7.86g/cc, we find that this empty box would weigh close to 5000kg.

Given that the real Wiesel has a base weight of less than 3000kg, it seems pretty clear that the thicker armor is ruled out. In fact, the armor overall is probably thinner than 25mm, and relies on ballistic shaping for much of its protection.

25mm is pretty optimistic penetration for run of the mill 7.62mm, IMO. Even modern super-duper AP rounds are likely to get that performance only at extremely close ranges. For example, Bofors claims 15mm @ 300m for a round very similar to the M993 7.62 tungsten-core AP round. A PKT firing API will penetrate only 10mm @ 200m.

Perhaps your source meant "proof" against 7.62 ball at typical engagement ranges, for which 15mm of steel or even less with good slope would suffice.

--- Kevin
 

MajorH

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
866
Reaction score
0
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Country
llUnited States
I decided on F/S/R of 25/25/25 for both KE and CE, but I could be talked into backing it off to 20/20/20.

Now I am trying to come up with values for the early Warrior and the current Warrior.
 
Last edited:

Gary

Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2003
Messages
362
Reaction score
0
Location
England
Country
ll
Major H,

Warrior armour thinkness is as follows:

Hull
Front 100mm @ 135 degs
side 85mm @ 90 degs
Rear 25mm @ 90 degs
Top 25mm @ 0 degs
Belly 25mm @ 0 degs

Turret
Front 105mm @ 128 degs
Side 85mm @ 90 degs
Rear 40mm @ 90 degs
Top 25mm @ 0 degs

This does not include bolt on armour used in Kosovo, Op Granby, Op Telic.

Gary
 

kbluck

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2003
Messages
707
Reaction score
0
Location
Folsom, CA
Country
llUnited States
MajorH said:
I decided on F/S/R of 25/25/25 for both KE and CE, but I could be talked into backing it off to 20/20/20.
Given that a NSV firing API is listed to penetrate up to 20mm @ 100m, and the endless optimism of vendor marketing materials, I'd be surprised if the armor really was >=20mm that the vendor would not be claiming 12.7mm protection. I really believe that 20mm should be regarded as a upper boundary of the likely real values --- I just don't see how any more steel than that could possibly fit within the known weight of the vehicle. After all, you still have to get an engine and power train in there, which all by itself probably accounts for nearly 1000kg before even starting on the armor.

I personally think about 15mm all around is more likely. That would adequately protect against *most* 7.62mm fire, although it wouldn't be completely invulnerable. That would be consistent with BRDM-level protection. Let's consider the BRDM for a moment. Assuming 14mm all around, the BRDM-sized box comes in at 1,024,154cc. That is pretty close to the volume of the 25mm Wiesel box we calculated originally. Yet, the BRDM comes in at roughly twice the Wiesel's weight.

I do think that if a Wiesel gets hit squarely in the side from a GPMG at close range <100m firing real AP ammo, it will probably get some penetration, "proof" claims notwithstanding. However, the considerable frontal slope will probably double the effective frontal protection to ~30mm.

--- Kevin
 

MajorH

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
866
Reaction score
0
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Country
llUnited States
>Warrior armour thinkness is as follows:
>Hull
>Front 100mm @ 135 degs
>side 85mm @ 90 degs
>Rear 25mm @ 90 degs

Hmmm. I had been leaning toward F/S/R vs KE of 72/36/36 and 132/66/66 vs CE for the early model.
 

Redwolf

Member # 3665
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
5,113
Reaction score
43
Location
MA, USA
Country
llUnited States
Gary said:
Major H,

Warrior armour thinkness is as follows:

Hull
Front 100mm @ 135 degs
side 85mm @ 90 degs
Rear 25mm @ 90 degs
Top 25mm @ 0 degs
Belly 25mm @ 0 degs

Turret
Front 105mm @ 128 degs
Side 85mm @ 90 degs
Rear 40mm @ 90 degs
Top 25mm @ 0 degs

This does not include bolt on armour used in Kosovo, Op Granby, Op Telic.

Gary
These are roughly the values of a German WW2 Tiger tank which comes to 60 tons. I would rule out that the side armor can be 85mm for the Warrior.

Maybe the sides are spaced armor with two 20mm plates with 45mm in between?
 

Gary

Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2003
Messages
362
Reaction score
0
Location
England
Country
ll
Maj H,

The Armour thickness for Warrior is correct. However At the bottom of my message I said it did not include the bolt on armour. It does include the bolt on armour which is now standard for operational deployments. Without the bolt on side armour is 20mm.

Gary
 

Paul L

Recruit
Joined
Oct 16, 2003
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Country
llUnited States
Armor of the Weisel is only about 7-10mm thickness...its the angle of impact and the fact that its probably some very hard steel used.

7.62mm API can be defeated by 8mm 500 BHN plate at an angle of 20° while 6mm VHS plate will defeat 7.62mm API at 30°. Weisel armor is very angled ...30° all round. A german told me that armor can withstand multiple impacts of 7.62mm ball at any range or angle. Given a 8-9mm penetration for ball that suggests >10mm RHAe or ~ 6mm VHS plates [Armox 500]. frontal armor looks like 60° , if its also 6mm VHS thats going to stop a 12.7mm API at a range of 0m.

Where did those Warrior figures come from? Armor on hull is aluminum and looks very thick indeed [4-8cm] , while the turret is made of armored steel...big difference.
 

kbluck

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2003
Messages
707
Reaction score
0
Location
Folsom, CA
Country
llUnited States
Armor of the Weisel is only about 7-10mm thickness...its the angle of impact and the fact that its probably some very hard steel used.
That sounds about right to me, weight-wise. The fact that they keep the real number classified also suggests a somewhat exotic alloy.

In game terms, I assume it is translated into RHA equivalent thickness, including slope. I still think about 15mm all around with 30mm on the front thanks to slope is about right in terms of game effects. I think 25mm all around is definitely too much.

--- Kevin
 
Top