Ah well. It was more a figure of speech than anything else but I agree. Should have been there a long time ago. If it had actually come out back then, I could have gone to the SHD myself and done the work.
I saw theFrenchtank state that the shells name OPF MLE stands for Obus Perforant en Fonte Modele, which translates to Cast iron Armor-Piercing shell.
So yeah it’s in the name.
I’m not sure yet
My.bad on this one you can remove the "en fonte " pf stand for perforant but i also saw a shell called OPf RC - Obus de Perforation de Rupture Coiffé ( ap shell capped ) and the real name for french sap being OPFA - Obus de Perforation en Fonte Aciérée ( Armor Piercing shell made with Cast Iron Steel bodies) . From what navweaps say OPF can be both AP or SAP so my bad .
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNFR_projectiles.php
1 Like
No problem!
it dose seem a shame that she is not getting a AP shell as the explosive filler is not brilient for a SAP shell given it is on par for AP shells
3.6% CM ratio is anything, but AP filler territory.
But French 340mm CM ratio is 3.9 and that’s APCBC shell in game. So with this logic 330mm with lower 3.6 CM ratio is more of an AP than 340mm APCBC?
Maybe French just like large TNT filler for their AP shells?
1 Like
Both French 305 and 340 mm APCBC were proposed to reclassified as SAPCBC to follow convention with the 330 mm shell.
So basicly we are getting a huge nerf for all "top tier " french ships just to follow a very probable mistake ? Nice .👍
9 Likes
Mmm, nerf weakest battleship shells. Beauty
3 Likes
also i would really like to know the how and why the shells are so different for exemple :
the scharnhorst having a 283 mm shell that weight 330 kg and have a velocity of 890 m/s with an explosives cavity of 2.2% it have a minimum of 579 mm of pen
the dunkerque having a 330 mm gun so 50 mm more ! with a weight of 560 kg so 230 kg more and a velocity of 870 m/s so -20 m/s have a cavity of 3.6 % and only have a minimum of 540 mm of pen ??
Where is the logic behind that ? only because it’s considerate as a SAP it’s nerf the shell that much ? or is it a story of propelant ?
i know the german where very good about balistic but being capable to be more efficient than a shell going almost the same speed but being almost twice heavier and 50 mm bigger for only a “type of shell” seems pretty weird to me especialy when the difference is only a cavity being 1.4% bigger
so either the germans are overperforming and i doubt about that OR the french shell are underperforming and not just a little …
also for a me a real SAP round would be like the japanese ones where the HE filler is almost 10 % OR the french SAP round that we have for the Aigle for exemple having a 6% HE filler or the Colbert having a 6.5% one or the Emile Bertin with his 5.9% all of them kinda make sens but an HE filler of only 3.6 % being SAP seems a bit weird
4 Likes
Well that doesn’t sound good for French navy.
These guns don’t perform that well already.
They should rather change 330mm to APCBC for now. And after few years or so when br’s will be more decompressed and we have Yamato’s fighting Iowa’s , and Richelieu’s at the top tier… that’s when they should think to change 300mm-340mm to SAP or not.
Because right now 6.7 is basically 7.0, so you’re still fighting top tier ships most of the time. Nerfing already underpeforming navy is not a good idea.
Rather change 330mm to APCBC. It’s not like this shell will be meta breaking. It just gonna give France a better chance at the top tier. Just for balance reasons.
4 Likes
If 330mm would be changed to APCBC , it still wouldn’t have very good pennetration . Around 600mm at 1000m 0°. But that’s workable at least.
The shell is fast and heavy, so that’s not crazy to think it would have this kind of pen. And it still would be worse than Alaska lghter and much slower shells, or Kronshtadt slightly faster but much lighter shells, hence the small AP cap on 330 guns.
So it still would perform worse than proper AP shells of smaller calibre.
2 Likes
None of the above, but rather the small AP caps are the culprits. Compared to with other nations’ “true” AP caps where they are 10-15% of the complete shell weight, but here it’s only about 3-4%.
1 Like
i know that im annoying but can we see where the dev get the blueprints of the shell ? and can we see it ?because if we can see that in fact we are all wrong then there are no need to speak more right ?
also if it’s just a story of hardened shell cap then wouldnt it just be an APBC ? and not a APCBC it would still be an upgrade.
1 Like
Here:
The body without the AP cap and ballistic cap is 530 kg. The ballistic cap is around ~10kg, the K device was also 9-10 kg. That leaves roughly 20-22 kg for the AP cap.
dont tell you guys are serious … if im not wrong you guys are talking about the balistic cap !!! NOT THE AP CAP or the HARDENED SHELL CAP !!!
3 Likes
You guys are beating a dead horse now, this was all already discoussed.
See Dunkerque discussion - #14 by Jareel_Skaj
and Dunkerque discussion - #12 by Jareel_Skaj
as well as the responses to the bug reports:
1 Like
The hardened AP cap looks like it’s still on in the first image. Referencing the sketch from “French Battleships 1922-1956” by John Jordan, the shape of the projectile only has the ballistic cap removed.
2 Likes