Mobius' Dispatches from the Front

Dec. 10, 2018
In making my mock Wiki gun tables I found some anomalies in the data.  These turned out to be most often typographical errors in the sources.  After correcting these I have to rebuild the various gun tables.  And I only have been working with the Russians and Germans.  No telling what I'll find when reviewing the other nations.

Dec. 4, 2018
To build the Panzerpedia tables I had to write a program to make HTML blocks from data files. 

Dec. 2, 2018
We need more living space.  Thus I'm annexing another 6 links on the menu to expand.   Besides the Russian data I'm going to have true data on Germans and Allied.  Not to compete with German tank sites which still feature real data but the data will in US units.

Nov. 30, 2018
I'm noticing the english Wikipedia entries of tank gun data is being taken over by WW2 Ballistics:  Armor and Gunnery.  Nothing against Lorrin Bird and Robert Livingston but their data is not real data.   It is calculated data.   I already dedicated one page to where their data is incorrect.  But, I'm thinking of having a number of pages here with actual data on it.  The Russian gun pages have all been taken over.  Check the last page.

Nov. 26, 2018
I can confirm that the Soviet firing tables of their AP shells were in error in WWII.  See last page for update.
NaaB is updated once again.   This time elevation angles were added to the output.

Nov. 12, 2018
There was a bug in NAAB that didn't re-initialize the shell factors after the first run.  Fixed.  Also, added a selection to display penetration in mm.  This changed the Armor and Gunnery analysis page.

Nov. 8, 2018
I added examples of WWII Russian tank guns.  Also I modified NAAB to change shell quality in case users on't agree with the default values.

Nov. 6, 2018
The Armor and Gunnery at the Copyright office appears to be real.  It is different than either o my copies and I can't explain why.  I added another page for it. 

Nov. 5, 2018
There was a bug in applying the drag coefficient in NaaB.   That has been fixed.
Also, noticed that both the Wikipedia and War Thunder is now posting penetration numbers for the 100mm BR-412/BR-412B and 122mm BR-471/BR-471 which are way out of the norm.   They say that the numbers represent US penetration standards.   But, I have never found US firing tables for these guns.  None that are from testing.  Several people have made them from calculations but they aren't true tested values.

Wiki 100mm
War ThunderWiki 122mm

Sept. 23, 2018
Rifle ballistics.  I'm taking on rifle ballistics for the German K98k and Russian Mosin-Nagant.
While this has little practical application for Panzer War as the table gets fiddlely at that scale it does work for Panzer Command.  As the bullets are used in the light squad machineguns this works for them as well. 

Sept. 3, 2018

Calculations on optics of sights.  Why did the British evaluation of light transmission of German TF-5b sight so much less than their evaluation of the Russian TMFD sight?

June 17, 2018
Wiki is wrong.  OK, yeah it often is.  But  US 76mm M1, M1A1, and M1A1C had 40:1 rifling twist. Only the M1A2 had the 32:1 twist.   3" M5 and M7 also retained the 40:1 twist. 
Updated the bomb table of NAAB2.1 with modern bomb GBU-39.

May 26, 2018
The NAAB2.1 program is changed slightly again.    I received an note from Nathan Okun saying that the elongation scaling should be limited to 18".   So this has been done.  There was another change made as HCWCLCR is updated to HCWCLCR5. Download NAAB 2.1 with bombing here

May 10, 2018
The NAAB2.1 program is changed slightly.   The diameter scaling is cut off at 20" right now.  One other idea may be have max scaling linked to elongation.
Download NAAB 2.1 with bombing here

April 30, 2018
I'm just going to cut off the scaling a 16" until I find a better solution.   You can download the NAAB 2.1 with bombing here

April 23, 2018
Whoops, I'm having a problem with the bombing section.  Using HCWCLCR the program fails when the bomb (shell) is too wide and the armor percent elongation is too low.   The scaling algorithm goes to hell.  Basically, it can multiply the NBL by 0 if the bomb is sufficiently wide as is the Tall Boy and Grand Slam and the percent elongation (PE) is lower than 25%.  No problem if the PE is 25% as the scaling algorithm goes to 1.
So here is the problem - the scaling equation.
IF ((PE < 25) AND (D > 8)) THEN NAVYBLM79 = NAVYBLM79 * (1 - (1 - SQRT(PE / 25)) * (D - 8) / 8).
So when the bomb diameter 'D' is 38" like in the Tallboy we have the multiplier = (1 - (1 - SQRT(PE / 25)) * (30) / 8).   Solving for PE we get.  8/30 = 1 - SQRT(PE /25) or  1-8/30 = sqrt(pe/25);   0.7333^2 = pe/25
Or PE = 13.444.   In this case  NAVYBLM79=NAVYBLM79 * 0.   I.e. NAVYBLM79 = 0.
Which means the Tallboy will penetrate an infinite thickness of pe=13.44% armor.
So wanting to see what the Tallboy will do to the Tirpitz with 'Wh' PE=18 deck armor I was surprised to find that it will penetrate over 50" from 18,000 ft. That is a little optimistic.

April 18, 2018
I thought I was done with the NAAB2.0 update but two things keep it going.   One is that it was requested that I add a bombing section.  This seemed a possibility by using homogeneous penetration calculations for deck armor.  Then use the ballistics from a free fall from the apogee of a ballistics curve.  This proved possible and the bombing section is in testing.   The other is that Nathan Okun said the program is missing the FaceHard 7.9 update.  I'm still looking