Jump to content

Leclerc S1 vs S2


Vince_Grant
 Share

4 hours ago, totolescargo said:

Are you saying that depending on how "far" the barrel is from the axis of the auto loader, the reload time will vary between 6 to 5 seconds ?

Yes.

4 hours ago, totolescargo said:

For instance, does it mean that a Leclerc with it's barrel positioned as high as possible (+20° of elevation) will take a whole 6 seconds to reload ?

Well, for one; the maximum elevation for Leclerc is 15deg; secondly, the resting position for the gun to receive the round from the autoloader is -1.8deg.

This means the greatest distance the gun would travel vertically to reload would be 16.8deg. As the vertical elevation speed for Leclerc is 30deg/s, the approximal travel time for the barrel from max to rest position would be no less than .56s.

The longest reload time would be no less than 2x.56s travel time + ~4s loading time = 5.12s. There are small variables that would alter that time, but the longest possible reload sequence (fully elevated to 15deg, down to -1.8deg and back) would be no less than 5.12s. (I say no less, because of the very small acceleration time to 30deg/s vertical.)

5 hours ago, totolescargo said:

EDIT 2 : Is this the cover for the Jane's you just linked ?

image.png.9453b194761bb05ea5c2a0a7e5e81a

And, yes, correct.

5 hours ago, totolescargo said:

To be honest, because of that typo, I'm unsure about using it as a source in the bug report.

It was a comparative post, meaning some may have used Jane's as a source, showing it as 10rpm cyclic, instead of the 15rpm irl. I don't think the typo is so much of an issue, reportwise, as you can show with the IDR article as backup that it was merely a typo in Jane's, and still backs up the 10-12rpm practical reload data anyway.

I myself would still use the Jane's section anyway, and just point out it was a typographical error on their part.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LeGrandSarrazin said:

Well, for one; the maximum elevation for Leclerc is 15deg

Really ? I could swear it's +20°. That's one more thing Gaijin got wrong then ...

At this point, I'm thinking it would be quicker to make an exhaustive list of what Gaijin has done correctly around the Leclerc MBTs than making an exhaustive list of what's wrong with them ...

 

2 hours ago, LeGrandSarrazin said:

This means the greatest distance the gun would travel vertically to reload would be 16.8deg. As the vertical elevation speed for Leclerc is 30deg/s, the approximal travel time for the barrel from max to rest position would be no less than .56s.

The longest reload time would be no less than 2x.56s travel time + ~4s loading time = 5.12s. There are small variables that would alter that time, but the longest possible reload sequence (fully elevated to 15deg, down to -1.8deg and back) would be no less than 5.12s. (I say no less, because of the very small acceleration time to 30deg/s vertical.)

I see, just as I expected.

That's a perfect explanation, thank you.

 

2 hours ago, LeGrandSarrazin said:

It was a comparative post, meaning some may have used Jane's as a source, showing it as 10rpm cyclic, instead of the 15rpm irl. I don't think the typo is so much of an issue, reportwise, as you can show with the IDR article as backup that it was merely a typo in Jane's, and still backs up the 10-12rpm practical reload data anyway.

I myself would still use the Jane's section anyway, and just point out it was a typographical error on their part.

Very well, I will keep that in mind !

I'm planning on adding a lot of different sources of various "quality" to the bug report and there are certainly "worse" sources than this one.

 

Thank you for your time.

Edited by totolescargo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Zeluar said:

Then you cannot have a 0.5kg weight increase.

Unless the rod is actually longer?

4 hours ago, Zeluar said:

Weight.

You know DU and Tungsten have different densities, right?

4 hours ago, Zeluar said:

L/D ratio of 22:1 would force us to think that the penetrator is 600x27mm, however, a DU rod like this would weight 6.3kg (more than M829A2/DM53 etc) and there would be no weight left for the sabot, fins, etc, this is simply impossible. The trajectory of this thing would be terrible, furthermore, the velocity would have to drop significantly (we're talking about a weight increase of about 62% between penetrating rods (stupid), we know that there is about 0.2kg less propellant as well. For example, DM53s velocity dropped by whole 70m/s when compared to DM43A1 just by adding an additional kg of weight. If we use DM43 - > DM53 velocity loss per weight gained as a metric, OFL F2 would have to lose about ~180m/s of starting velocity, making it leave the barrel at 1610m/s instead of 1740m/s or 1780m/s that is usually cited. This would actually make F2 slightly worse (by 15mm) instead of better.

Many "would"s but nothing to back them up. I don't see any demonstrations behind these numbers :)

4 hours ago, Zeluar said:

Which again isn't true, you can check the weight the penetrator;

585x22mm (DM43/OFL F1) - 3.9kg for the WHA rod

585x22mm (OFL F2) - 4.36kg DU rod

600x27mm (what you're proposing) - 6.3kg DU rod

 

The L/D ratios also make completely 0 sense, DM43/OFL F1's diameter is only 22mm, to achieve an L/D ratio of 20:1, it would have to have a diameter higher than DM33 (or in other words - 30mm!), a rod of this size would weight 7.23kg (!!!!), just the penetrator would have the weight of the whole projectile (7.3kg) and that's without the fins and the sabot, that's just ridiculous.

 

Or, alternatively, the diameter would've to be 33.9mm and we know the whole projectile length (678mm) thanks to the Americans who export DM43A1 as KE-W A1, this would give us L/D ratio of 20:1, but again, the weight won't match.

 

For OFL F2, it would have to be 600x27.27mm but then, the weight would would be too high, how will you then fit a whole aluminium sabot, the fins and the tracer (the first one weights at least 2.5kg alone) into this, when the penetrating rod itself takes 80.7% of the whole projectile weight.

Where did you get that 6.3kg from? I hope you realize the rod isn't a simple cylinder and has thinner part, especially when you consider the sharp tip.

4 hours ago, Zeluar said:

Bold claim, lets see you prove it now.

No need, I can just report the use of multiple accounts.

  • Thanks 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

Unless the rod is actually longer?

Or it isn't and it increases in weight simply because it's DU?

 

2 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

You know DU and Tungsten have different densities, right?

I'm not sure if I should even be taking you seriously at this point.

 

2 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

Many "would"s but nothing to back them up. I don't see any demonstrations behind these numbers :)

Sure, considering you refuse to acknowledge F2 is not going to be a God-killer not was it really any better than DM43A1/OFL F1 at all, and was most likely aimed at getting indepented from Rheinmetall who produces/produced Tungsten rods for DM43. I also haven't seen any real evidence from you 'xcept for "L/D" ratio's that are plain stupid in perspective of what we know about the projectiles today, fx, DM43 cannot have L/D ratio of 20:1 because its too thin.

 

2 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

Where did you get that 6.3kg from? I hope you realize the rod isn't a simple cylinder and has thinner part, especially when you consider the sharp tip.

You're aware that this is the weight of a rod that your sources reported, i.e 27mm diameter with length of 600mm (only possible combination for L/D ratio of 22). Even if i take into account that the tip is thinner (it would be impossible to have an L/D ratio of 22:1 then), the weight wouldn't go below 5.5kg which is still too much (in fact, the weight then would be perfectly 6kg for the DU part of the rod itself). Where are you going to pack the sabot, the fins, the primer, the frustrum etc when the DU rod itself is simply too heavy to be true.

 

2 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

No need, I can just report the use of multiple accounts.

Go ahead, you know they will simply check it, but it's funny that you think i'd stoop that low, guess you really don't like people telling you that F2 is not as good as you think? :lol2:

I love how irony got lost on you considering after you said this, all of my comments/arguments here got plastered with confused emotes, are you sure you're not projecting yourself onto me?

Edited by Zeluar
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok ... that seems like it escalated quickly. You guys shouldn't get worked up over this. I'm sure the  OFL F2 must have some merit or advantage, even if it's a small margin. Especially if it was adopted.

Edited by SturmWerwolf
  • Thanks 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, totolescargo said:

Really ? I could swear it's +20°. That's one more thing Gaijin got wrong then ...

Yea. It says 15deg max in both the IDR article and Jane's A&A 05-06:

Spoiler

unknown.png

IMG_20200717_191635.jpg

 

6 hours ago, totolescargo said:

At this point, I'm thinking it would be quicker to make an exhaustive list of what Gaijin has done correctly around the Leclerc MBTs than making an exhaustive list of what's wrong with them ...

Feels that way sometimes :lol2:

6 hours ago, totolescargo said:

see, just as I expected.

That's a perfect explanation, thank you.

Sure thing.

6 hours ago, totolescargo said:

Thank you for your time.

Ofc, my pleasure.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SturmWerwolf said:

Ok ... that seems like it escalated quickly. You guys shouldn't get worked up over this. I'm sure the  OFL F2 must have some merit or advantage, even if it's a small margin. Especially if it was adopted.

The entire argumentation is around penetration against RHA. The penetrations against complex composite armor arrays is left out because Gajin doesnt consider something like that, composites ingame just have an assigned RHAe value and thats it.

Meanwhile IRL you will find nobody who still armors with pure steel since everyone uses composites. Modern rounds are optimized against specific composite arrays that they are most likely to face.

  • Upvote 2
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Zeluar said:

Or it isn't and it increases in weight simply because it's DU?

Or maybe its geometry is different as obviously indicated by the different tip alone?

8 hours ago, Zeluar said:

Sure, considering you refuse to acknowledge F2 is not going to be a God-killer not was it really any better than DM43A1/OFL F1 at all, and was most likely aimed at getting indepented from Rheinmetall who produces/produced Tungsten rods for DM43.

Never said the F2 would be a god-killer, though it’s definitely better than the F1 and significant enough to be given to the Leclerc S2 in game, and not just a "DU F1". Why would France try to be independant from Rheinmetall and then use US DU? The point of the use of the F2 was to increase penetration, as stated in the source you provided.

8 hours ago, Zeluar said:

I also haven't seen any real evidence from you 'xcept for "L/D" ratio's that are plain stupid in perspective of what we know about the projectiles today, fx, DM43 cannot have L/D ratio of 20:1 because its too thin.

No need for more to prove the dimensions are different.

8 hours ago, Zeluar said:

You're aware that this is the weight of a rod that your sources reported, i.e 27mm diameter with length of 600mm (only possible combination for L/D ratio of 22). Even if i take into account that the tip is thinner (it would be impossible to have an L/D ratio of 22:1 then), the weight wouldn't go below 5.5kg which is still too much (in fact, the weight then would be perfectly 6kg for the DU part of the rod itself). Where are you going to pack the sabot, the fins, the primer, the frustrum etc when the DU rod itself is simply too heavy to be true.

The 27mm could very well refer to the thicker part of the rod in one point in particular such as the sabot junctions, or the rod itself might not be entirely DU. Doesn’t matter since the round itself is obviously different in geometry from the F1 as shown previously.

8 hours ago, Zeluar said:

Go ahead, you know they will simply check it, but it's funny that you think i'd stoop that low, guess you really don't like people telling you that F2 is not as good as you think?  :lol2:

Who else would upvote your comments? :lol2:

8 hours ago, Zeluar said:

I love how irony got lost on you considering after you said this, all of my comments/arguments here got plastered with confused emotes, are you sure you're not projecting yourself onto me?

I have no time to waste creating multiple accounts. Maybe you should consider that your arguments are coming out of nowhere and these confused emotes are legit, especially when they probably didn’t come all at once like the ones of the previous posts.

  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, __RED_CROSS__ said:

 

 



 

 

 

550 mill/s = 31º

 

Nice document you've got there.

 

Is it regarding the Leclerc S1 & S2 series ?

Because from what I've read, the Leclerc S.XXI has a higher electrical turret output, giving it a turret rotation rate of 40°/s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, totolescargo said:

Nice document you've got there.

 

Is it regarding the Leclerc S1 & S2 series ?

Because from what I've read, the Leclerc S.XXI has a higher electrical turret output, giving it a turret rotation rate of 40°/s.

No, all Leclerc's have 40deg/s rotation speed. Says so in both docs I posted.

And, yes, it's been reported.

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 5
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

Or maybe its geometry is different as obviously indicated by the different tip alone?

Incredible, the tip is thinnier, still cannot be longer as indicated by the weight.

 

2 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

Never said the F2 would be a god-killer, though it’s definitely better than the F1 and significant enough to be given to the Leclerc S2 in game, and not just a "DU F1". Why would France try to be independant from Rheinmetall and then use US DU? The point of the use of the F2 was to increase penetration, as stated in the source you provided.

It wasn't US DU at all. It was French attempt at creating DU which then had impurities in it and was actually radioactive. If it was US's DU rods, there's be no problem (look: UK using US DU rods).

 

2 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

No need for more to prove the dimensions are different.

You do.

 

2 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

The 27mm could very well refer to the thicker part of the rod in one point in particular such as the sabot junctions, or the rod itself might not be entirely DU. Doesn’t matter since the round itself is obviously different in geometry from the F1 as shown previously.

Then L/D ratio is not 20:1 or 22:1 and your sources are bust. DM53 as its thickest (helical ribs) is only 26mm, considering DM43A1s rod is 22mm, F1/F2 at helical ribs cannot be higher than 26mm otherwise it would show in comparisons between DM43/DM53.

 

2 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

Who else would upvote your comments? :lol2:

People who found my arguments well-constructed and actually thought i'm right? Who would upvote yours then?

 

2 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

I have no time to waste creating multiple accounts. Maybe you should consider that your arguments are coming out of nowhere and these confused emotes are legit, especially when they probably didn’t come all at once like the ones of the previous posts.

And somehow I do?

  • Like 1
  • Confused 4
  • Upvote 4
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeluar said:

Incredible, the tip is thinnier, still cannot be longer as indicated by the weight.

Except it can?

1 hour ago, Zeluar said:

It wasn't US DU at all. It was French attempt at creating DU which then had impurities in it and was actually radioactive. If it was US's DU rods, there's be no problem (look: UK using US DU rods).

Source?

1 hour ago, Zeluar said:

You do.

No, I don't.

1 hour ago, Zeluar said:

Then L/D ratio is not 20:1 or 22:1 and your sources are bust. DM53 as its thickest (helical ribs) is only 26mm, considering DM43A1s rod is 22mm, F1/F2 at helical ribs cannot be higher than 26mm otherwise it would show in comparisons between DM43/DM53.

You were the one quoting Jane's, I just did the same :DD

1 hour ago, Zeluar said:

People who found my arguments well-constructed and actually thought i'm right? Who would upvote yours then?

Ah right, always the same 4 people at the same time, and right when you post :lol2:

1 hour ago, Zeluar said:

And somehow I do?

Certainly, because you have time to argue about a shell having similar dimensions to another one despite not having a single source stating it.

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 5
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LeGrandSarrazin said:

No, all Leclerc's have 40deg/s rotation speed. Says so in both docs I posted.

And, yes, it's been reported.


It took ~11 seconds for the turret to make a complete turn, so 550 mil/s ( 31° ) is indeed correct not 40°.

I’m mentionning the S2, the tank i was in.  :good:

  • Thanks 4
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

Except it can?

Prove it.

 

9 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

Ah right, always the same 4 people at the same time, and right when you post :lol2:

Then report me, gee, DM Smin to check me out since you're this salty.

 

9 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

Certainly, because you have time to argue about a shell having similar dimensions to another one despite not having a single source stating it.

Well, no, I don't. But you seem to have a lot of time on your hands.

  • Confused 4
  • Upvote 4
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Zeluar said:

Prove it.

No need to, there’s no proof it can’t either, and I’m not trying to prove it did.

7 hours ago, Zeluar said:

Then report me, gee, DM Smin to check me out since you're this salty.

No saltiness here, you’re the one who started talking about these confused reactions.

7 hours ago, Zeluar said:

Well, no, I don't. But you seem to have a lot of time on your hands.

5min here and there isn’t a "lot of time".

  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys its not funnny to leak classified Documents of modern equipment you put the lives of many on stake who work daily with the Vehicles! Keep in Mind that those documents will be deleted immediately alongside sanctions. Thanks for reading!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5
  • Haha 8
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Zeluar said:

 

It wasn't US DU at all. It was French attempt at creating DU which then had impurities in it and was actually radioactive. If it was US's DU rods, there's be no problem (look: UK using US DU rods).

 

 

OFL 120 F2 along with the OFL 105 F2 stocks were scrapped for ethical reasons, not because the rounds were faulty or more radioactive than they should have been. France scrapping it's DU ammunition stock has all to do with French politics getting more and more sentient about nuclear matters since the end of the 90's.

 

Depleted uranium is radioactive, DU rounds are actually easier to manufacture than tungsten alloy rounds on the top of being cheaper, OFL F2 ( and 105 F2 ) were perfectly fine rounds that have been withdrawn for purely political reasons under the Jospin government to please the yet to become ecologist/pacifist part of the left so they would shut it up during the presentation of the military programmation law which is a yearly exercise at the national assembly. In order to remain credible, a random paper was written about the stock ammo being more radioactive than it should be due to impurities which is very dumb since depleted uranium ammunition are made of civil worn out uranium which is refined to be pure and even if impurities had somehow been present in the alloy, these would not in any way have affected the radioactivity of the round.

 

And to close the debate about the OFL 120 F2, the dimensions are probably very close to that of the OFL 120 F1 simply going by the weigth of the round and the density of DU. That means running it through Gaijin calculator wil not give a significant boost in penetration... However IRL the tip has a vastly different design which probably provided a significant penentration power over the OFL 120 F1, but this is not modelled in the game and probably never will be.

Edited by Tantor57
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

No need to, there’s no proof it can’t either, and I’m not trying to prove it did.

Right, just dont be disappointed at your F2 when it comes.

 

8 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

No saltiness here, you’re the one who started talking about these confused reactions.

So i can't feel sad for a very well structured comment of a guy who makes sense to be basically shunned by people? You're the one who had latched onto that, get off your high horse since it's clear as day you're salty over there.

 

8 hours ago, Cedjoe said:

5min here and there isn’t a "lot of time".

And how do you know i'm not here for 5 mins either.

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 3
  • Upvote 4
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Zeluar said:

Right, just dont be disappointed at your F2 when it comes.

I won’t.

21 minutes ago, Zeluar said:

So i can't feel sad for a very well structured comment of a guy who makes sense to be basically shunned by people? You're the one who had latched onto that, get off your high horse since it's clear as day you're salty over there.

Salty over an argument with no serious opposition? Not really, no.

23 minutes ago, Zeluar said:

And how do you know i'm not here for 5 mins either.

Never said you were :yes_yes_yes:

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, JagdEnte said:

Guys its not funnny to leak classified Documents of modern equipment you put the lives of many on stake who work daily with the Vehicles! Keep in Mind that those documents will be deleted immediately alongside sanctions. Thanks for reading!

^ This, absolutely 100%. Do not post classified documents.

 

Please, think of your nation and fellow countrymen. Just to reiterate reality, outside the worlds of video games and internet echo chambers, real blood is spilled on battlefields across the globe.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 04/10/2021 at 11:57, JagdEnte said:

Guys its not funnny to leak classified Documents of modern equipment you put the lives of many on stake who work daily with the Vehicles! Keep in Mind that those documents will be deleted immediately alongside sanctions. Thanks for reading!

Who told you this is classified? how can you say that?

  • Confused 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there needs to be a recognition of the difference between classified and controlled. For example, I have access to US Army doctrine. Most of it is "approved for public release, distribution is unlimited." However some stuff (like the technical manual for the SEPv3) is not classified but its distribution is limited to DOD and Contractors only. So posting that on the forums would not be treason, just breaking the distribution code.

 

So overreacting, saying people's lives are in danger and causing an uproar just makes the situation far worse than it is. Look at the Challenger 2 incident. In reality it was a confusion over coding and the difference between what the specific unit classification office saw as releasable and what the overall MoD had released thus far. The MoD representative didn't even say that information was illegal to possess, just that it hadn't been released through freedom of information. There are other, unit internal, ways to get thing approved for wider release.

 

I understand Gaijin and the forum's staff fear of retribution but we must be careful not to make things worse through a freak out like with what happened with the Challenger 2 mantlet. These are traverse rates and depression angles, not nuclear reactor specifications or hell even the detailed makeup of composite armor. Let's have a bit of perspective and self control. 

  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...