the guy made an error in conversion or something because the second value of 7.1kg or ~15.65lb is nowhere listed in that document but the following is
1 Like
there is so many different sources i got confuse
because like https://www.fbcinc.com/source/Northrop_Resources/120mm_M830A1.pdf federal business council stated 7.1kg
i rather trust the offical technical manual for army ammunition data sheets than a marketing flyer
unless i made a mistake somewhere and there are more explosives in a sabot than the propellant
1 Like
yeah but Direct Fire Ammunition Handbook at Page 123 is also a manual
i tried to find on DTIC but there is no mention about stuff either
i think you made a mistake
i dont think anyone is right here
because 0.4kg A II is not sufficient enough to become HEAT
0.8kg of tnt is extremely low, like ww2 heat low
bruh
man
i dont know anymore
i dig further and further and more rabbit holes are found
do you think these are all decoys documents
because every document stated differently and nothing is right
im honestly losing it
well i dont think you should use something that fails to do a proper conversion between imperial and metric
and it is also listing the wrong explosive
2 Likes
then pls tell me where,
the only possible mistake would be that there are explosives somewhere else in the sabot besides the propellant
yeah like thats what im thinking
but like base on ur calculation
0.4kg Comp A II is not enough at all to blow up obstacles or have enough explosive to deal with armored target or helis
its basically rpg-4
which make no sense
mpat is used to deal against fortification, light vehicle, helicopter or low flying target
but low explosive mass wont cut anything
the M830 also has a balistic cap which would certainly help
so its basically explosive sabot
but then idk how it make sense to use sabot against airborned target either
yes but it has proximity fuse that can reach 10m radius
also i think theres plenty vid of it shooting stuff and its way lethal
so im honestly dont know
i cant find anything else
Same propellant type yes, but not same amount. It’s very likely the APFSDS rounds use more propellant, this can also be seen by their obscenely high chamber pressures (with a lighter projectile too I think).
Anyway there’s quite some conflicting sources on M830A1 I guess…
The Northrop Grumman brochure also gives a different weight. And the M1002 brochure (practice round) says it uses a different propellant altogether, so it’s rather useless as well.
2 Likes
so many sources, so many different statements, so many different numbers, measurements, calculations, i did a fact check and m830a1 use 2 differents packages, etc…
but in the end m830a1 is gonna perform worse ig…
its good irl tho
even if we assume the 7.5kg are correct we would still get
8.48kg - 7.5kg = 0.98kg or 980g which is only like 15g off of the 966g that gaijin is changing it to
so its like back to square one
m830a1 when it came out has the same explosive mass
yeah it is likely overperforming rn compared to the irl one
yeah but then we dont know what is the irl one like
and mind you rn its not really good either
i frequently try to use it against helis and they deal basically zero dmg
crit and they still flying
there is also the posibility that gaijins consultant has found the exact explosive mass in some document and has forwarded that document to gaijin
i was just wondering why such low number for a heat round
it just kinda bother me
also why nerf i mean its not really good already