look at this :
В брошюре отмечается, что у Т-80БВМ "доработан стабилизатор вооружения и механизм заряжания под боеприпасы 3БМ59 “Свинец-1”, 3БМ60 “Свинец-2”.
Как следует из открытых источников, бронебойный оперенный подкалиберный снаряд “Свинец-1” имеет сердечник из карбида вольфрама, “Свинец-2” - сердечник с урановым сплавом. По разным данным, “Свинец-1” способен пробить 700 - 740 мм однородной брони на дистанции 2 км, “Свинец-2” - 800 - 830 мм на том же расстоянии.
In fact, the Russians claim that it has more than 800 mm pen but in the game it just has 580 mm pen , gaijin should fix it .
if you have more docs , please send it .
this is the only “official” image i found from someone from discord, 300mm at 2km 60°
war thunder ofc will make it weaker because of the calculator they use, something more believable would be 700mm at 0m 0°
800mm pen at 2km away. now that is some bonkers numbers for 125mm APFSDS.
Do you know how much pressure is needed from the shell for the type of speed required for that to be possible?
i HIGHLY doubt that the T-80BVM canon can handle those pressures (open source numbers put the 2A46M-1 barrel at pressures around 650.0 MPa (94,270 psi) Pmax chamber pressure).
The 3BM60’s round (projectile + sabot) weighs 8.1kg
I’ve seen several open sources (can’t find them at the moment though) state an exit speed of 1700m/s for the 3BM60.
Now compare to a NATO round. the DM53 round (weighs about the same at 8.35kg) fired out of a standard L/55 barrel (i.e not the upgraded A1 version. it is however longer so has an easier time to accelerate the round and keep peek pressure longer) creates a pressure of about 550MPa and thus has a speed of ~1750m/s
lets assume that the numbers in WT are correct for the DM53 penetration. at 2km it penetrates 600mm armor at 0 degrees.
Both rounds weigh about the same, have about the same dimentions and have about the same speed.
Meaning that you are talking about a 30% increase in projectile penetration by design and material of the projectile alone? there is just no way.
Edit:
According to the makers own numbers it penetrates 300mm at 60 degrees and 2km away. Which becomes 600mm at 0 degrees and 2km with easy trigonometry.
First off, 3BM60 currently has 666mm of penetration at 100 meters with standard testing: 60 degrees.
Second, they use the Swiss mathematician’s equation for fairness and accuracy.
3BM60 has accurate pen currently.
The only way it gets more pen is if you prove its rod is longer and/or has higher velocity out of the barrel.
They use the same formula for all shells. So if some shell uses special alloys or whatnot it won’t get any bonus(will be counted as tungsten or DU, nothing else). I think this has happened with the xm1’s shell and probably with the obj292 152mm
if you want a tip with that DM53 had unconsistant pressure at times depending on temperature and could go all the way up to 1850 m/s but that would strain the breach over the time and the density its 18.5 kg/m3
DM53 will be best example in that case, current penetration values when its fired from L55A1 should be 700MM and if we use best possible outcome it should be ±1000MM.
The Walker Bulldog’s M339 AP round is a chunk of solid tungsten carbide and the only benefit it gets is the weight. I should probably be glad its treated like AP and not APDS or APCR given what Gaijin has done to those rounds.
That seems to be a typo in the description of M339 on some TMs. In reality it is just a steel shot.
The core of a 90 mm HVAP round is 47.6 mm in diameter, 168.5 mm long, and yet weights 3.6 kg. It is an extremely dense material which is part of the reason why it is used in subcalliber munitions. A full body tungsten carbide shot for a 76 mm cannon would weight well over 10 kg.
This document (Ammunition End Items and Components) specifies the components of the M339 round, including what material is used and such. The body is explicitly stated to be steel.
