MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > The Carrier Forum

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 28-05-13, 00:28
Ian Patrick Ian Patrick is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 56
Default Another photo...

Another test mark from a different carrier, SA Railways LP2A 2515.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 100_3577.JPG (120.0 KB, 39 views)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 29-05-13, 20:08
45jim 45jim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Woodstock, ON
Posts: 154
Default Armour Testing

Gentlemen,

No armour plate destined to be assembled onto or into a vehicle is proofed by actual ballistic testing. Any marks you see on your carriers either are a result of mechanical testing of the hardness using conventional test methods at the steel works or a result of "life experience" during the past 70 years.

Armour plate is produced just like any other blend of steel. It is composed of a carefully balanced mix of iron, carbon and other additives smelted into ingots. Later, those ingots are either cold or hot rolled into plate which is further heat treated to achieve the hardness and mechanical properties set down in the relevant specification. The standards, methodology and instruments used to confirm the hardness of armour plate are the same used for any production run of steel.

Armour plate production today is not much different. Plates are manufactured and heat treated in "heats" and a sample of the "heat" is tested to ensure the hardness meets the standard and metallurgy is scientifically examined, also a sample is sent to a ballistic test range to verify its performance. As the volume of successful testing increases the amount of testing will be reduced. Early in production every lot may be tested but later it may be every two or every three, depends on the demand of the customer.

Ballistic testing is "destructive testing" while hardness testing (in steel anyway) is considered "non-destructive testing" so there is no way that shot plates are going to end up on a carrier. As you can imagine with any scientifically designed standard, hardness is calculated as "averages" so many impacts may be taken on a single surface to get an accurate reading. Ballistic testing is the same, we often fire 10 rounds (or more) at a target at various velocities to ensure we have an accurate value of the Ballistic Limit (BL).

If you are curious, you can look up MIL-A-46100, this is the NATO specification for 500BHN armour plate steel. It details everything including the type of testing required and the ballistic limits samples must achieve. You will notice that the plate is tested for Brinell hardness, Impact testing (Charpy V-notch), bending test and finally ballistic sample testing. This is not a classified standard.

There are certainly other blends such as RHA (rolled Homogeneous armour) which is somewhat softer and more ductile than 46100, but this standard originated in WWII and closely reflects what was used on the carrier.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 30-05-13, 15:49
carrierbarry carrierbarry is offline
Barry
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Watford, London
Posts: 216
Default Ha ha !!

Rick

Those dent marks are just from your driving.
I've seen you in Tesco car park.

Ha ha !!!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 30-05-13, 20:52
eddy8men eddy8men is offline
AKA Rick Wedlock
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: manchester
Posts: 715
Default

hey barry if you think the carrier is bad you should see my works van

rick
__________________
_______________________
1941 mk1 mortar Carrier
1941 Mk1* Carrier
1942 Mk1* Carrier
1943 T16 Carrier
1945 Mk3 Dingo
1941 Mk3 Covenanter
1941 Mk4 Churchill AVRE (now sold)
1944 Mk6 Cromwell (now sold)
1952 Mk3 Centurion
1952 ARV Centurion
1952 ARV Centurion
1953 Mk3 Centurion (breaking)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 31-05-13, 10:40
David Herbert David Herbert is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland - previously Suffolk
Posts: 563
Default

Rick,

Your van doesn't count, it has been used by builders, who are widely known for their destructive properties. If it had been shot at it would be only partly destroyed. The Cromwell looks good though!

David
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 31-05-13, 20:38
Paul Dutton Paul Dutton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NORTH WEST UK
Posts: 256
Default

I thougt that living m manchester all vans wold have been `shot tested` at sometime in their lives!!!!
__________________
BETTER TO BURN OUT THAN FADE AWAY.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 15:06.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016