Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: The Digital Mage <mn3rge@****.AC.UK>
Subject: APDS Vs Hardened Armour?
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 13:01:39 +0100
On Thu, 8 Jun 1995, Walter Stim wrote:

> The Digital Mage said:
> >Actually, against Hardened Armour APDS are useless (well almost), they do
> >*not* half arrmour, in fact their *power* is reduced by half (I think).
> >Check out the firearms against vehicles bit in SR2 combat.
> >
>
> If APDS rounds are halved vs hardened armor, what effect do
> normal rounds have? APDS are supposed to be "Armor Piercing".
> Is this a rules oops? What does everyone thing.
Actually I shouldn't have said check out SR2, in fact I should have said
check out the APDS description in SSC2, it says in there that against
Vehicle Armour (it does not say Hardened therefore re Gel Armour and
Critter's armour the GM has a bit of leeway) the Power of the round is
halved, I don't think it specifically states that the Armour rating is
*not* halved as well, but then it doesn't say it is.
In the back of SR2 re Sourcebook updates, does it give anymore detail?
I've always thought there was a difference between what could Pierce body
Armour, and what could Pierce hardened vehicle Armour, I assumed APDS
only worked against body armour. Trying to explain FASA's rules.
Can anyone get an "official" ruling on this, does "Armour Piercing"
mean
the ammo will better penetrate *any* type of armour?


The Digital Mage : mn3rge@****.ac.uk
Shadowrun Web Site under construction at
http://www.bath.ac.uk/~mn3rge/Shadowrun.html
Message no. 2
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: APDS Vs Hardened Armour?
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 1995 02:15:43 GMT
> I've always thought there was a difference between what could Pierce body
> Armour, and what could Pierce hardened vehicle Armour, I assumed APDS
> only worked against body armour. Trying to explain FASA's rules.
> Can anyone get an "official" ruling on this, does "Armour
Piercing" mean
> the ammo will better penetrate *any* type of armour?

From a ballistics point of view, to penetrate armour you want maximum possible
velocity, a very hard projectile, and a very high ratio of mass to area.
This is why APFSDS rounds from tanks are so long: to put as much weight
behind a small striking area as possible.

"Greased" and sharply pointed rounds will defeat woven Kevlar armour.
However, since even 4/2 armour (Vest with Plates) has hard inserts of
ceramic or other material, APDS would appear not to rely on this mechanism
overmuch and to be nearer the "true" APDS of tank/anti-tank ammo. Feasable,
to be sure: I could buy saboted ammo for my .45 automatic, at present
legally. (It's noticeably more accurate at longer ranges, or so I am told).
Of course the actual projectile is just a 5.56mm rifle bullet, a lead-core
copper-jacketed bullet: not a tungsten or depleted uranium penetrator,
the point that accounts for the scarcity of APDS.

Looking at current practice and extrapolating, a bullet that would perform
well against rigid personal armour would also perform well against vehicle
armour, and would completely ignore soft personal armour or flak curtains/
spall liners. OTOH, a bullet designed to perform only against soft armours
(Kevlar weaves etc) would be no more or less effective against hardnened
armour than any other.

I do let APDS be very effective against armour: 7.62mm MGs firing APDS have
destroyed BMPs, and .50cal SLAP (Saboted Light Armour Penetrating) has
allegedly disabled main battle tanks with shots through the rear armour,
whereas normal FMJ ammo would have bounced in those cases.

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 3
From: Peter Bailey <pbailey@*****.IPSWICHCITY.QLD.GOV.AU>
Subject: Re: APDS Vs Hardened Armour?
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 1995 16:01:43 +0200
Hi There,

> On Thu, 8 Jun 1995, Walter Stim wrote:
>
> > The Digital Mage said:
> > >Actually, against Hardened Armour APDS are useless (well almost), =
they do
> > >*not* half arrmour, in fact their *power* is reduced by half (I th=
ink).
> > >Check out the firearms against vehicles bit in SR2 combat.
> > >
> >
> > If APDS rounds are halved vs hardened armor, what effect do
> > normal rounds have? APDS are supposed to be "Armor Piercing".
> > Is this a rules oops? What does everyone thing.
> Actually I shouldn't have said check out SR2, in fact I should have s=
aid
> check out the APDS description in SSC2, it says in there that against
> Vehicle Armour (it does not say Hardened therefore re Gel Armour and
> Critter's armour the GM has a bit of leeway) the Power of the round i=
s
> halved, I don't think it specifically states that the Armour rating i=
s
> *not* halved as well, but then it doesn't say it is.
> In the back of SR2 re Sourcebook updates, does it give anymore detai=
l?
> I've always thought there was a difference between what could Pierce =
body
> Armour, and what could Pierce hardened vehicle Armour, I assumed APDS
> only worked against body armour. Trying to explain FASA's rules.
> Can anyone get an "official" ruling on this, does "Armour
Piercing" m=
ean
> the ammo will better penetrate *any* type of armour?

The power of APDS *is not* halved by hardened/vehicle armour.

Quote SRII page 277 "APDS ammo(SSC,p.63) halves the Balistic Armour Ra=
ting
and Barrier Ratings(when firing through only).Vehicle armour reduces th=
e
Power of APDS ammo by one-half its rating (round down) and reduces the
Damage Level by one level."

"reduces the Power of APDS ammo by one-half its rating" *is* the
important bit since it says "by one-half its rating", not by one-half.

Nuffsaid.

If its Blue n Yellow, SHOOT IT!!!

catch me
Message no. 4
From: P Ward <P.Ward@**.CF.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: APDS Vs Hardened Armour?
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 09:06:32 BST
> Quote SRII page 277 "APDS ammo(SSC,p.63) halves the Balistic Armour Rating
> and Barrier Ratings(when firing through only).Vehicle armour reduces the
> Power of APDS ammo by one-half its rating (round down) and reduces the
> Damage Level by one level."

Exactly chumliechen, it's a somewhat abiguouis use of the word it's, in that
the rogue "it's" could refer either to the halving of the power of the round,
or the reducing of the power of the round by one-half the value of the armour.

Thats the bit thats always annoyed me.

I use half the barrier rating

Oh, and don't forget NOT to half the body of the vehicle, bug body still
means less effective firearms, no matter what the load.

Phil (Renegade)
Message no. 5
From: The Digital Mage <mn3rge@****.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: APDS Vs Hardened Armour?
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 13:48:22 +0100
On Sun, 11 Jun 1995, Peter Bailey wrote:

> The power of APDS *is not* halved by hardened/vehicle armour.
>
> Quote SRII page 277 "APDS ammo(SSC,p.63) halves the Balistic Armour Rating
> and Barrier Ratings(when firing through only).Vehicle armour reduces the
> Power of APDS ammo by one-half its rating (round down) and reduces the
> Damage Level by one level."
>
> "reduces the Power of APDS ammo by one-half its rating" *is* the
> important bit since it says "by one-half its rating", not by one-half.
Thanks, I guess I just read the "its" to be referring to the APDS round's
rating, when -as you point out- it actually refers to the Vehicle
armour's rating. Sorry all. But one question, is that all the power is
reduced by? Does the Vehicle's body reduce it further -reading it now it
seems to suggest not.


The Digital Mage : mn3rge@****.ac.uk
Shadowrun Web Site under construction at
http://www.bath.ac.uk/~mn3rge/Shadowrun.html
Message no. 6
From: Mark Steedman <RSMS@******.EEE.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: APDS Vs Hardened Armour?
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 15:39:54 GMT
The Digital Mage writes

> On Sun, 11 Jun 1995, Peter Bailey wrote:
>
> > "reduces the Power of APDS ammo by one-half its rating" *is* the
> > important bit since it says "by one-half its rating", not by one-half.
> Thanks, I guess I just read the "its" to be referring to the APDS round's
> rating, when -as you point out- it actually refers to the Vehicle
> armour's rating. Sorry all. But one question, is that all the power is
> reduced by? Does the Vehicle's body reduce it further -reading it now it
> seems to suggest not.
>
the ruling is the vehicle then get composite armour equal to its
body, so by the rules yes this would get halved as well. It was
suggested that you don't as the type of ammo has little effect on the
size of target but that is taken account of by the body based soak
roll.
ie the Banshee, to choose something really nasty
body 6 , armour 18 - as if i needed to say it.
so
regular ammor, powers of 18 or less bounce, and 24 armour, 15 dice
body, yep its about invulnerable, oh suprise.

APDS, powers or 9 or less ( 18 / 2 ) bounce, 12 armour ( 18 / 2 + 6 /
2 = 9 + 3 = 12) but still 15 dice + control pool if appropriate, that
still better be some shooting!!!

Mark


>
> The Digital Mage : mn3rge@****.ac.uk
> Shadowrun Web Site under construction at
> http://www.bath.ac.uk/%mn3rge/Shadowrun.html
>

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about APDS Vs Hardened Armour?, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!