Its probably the calculator gaijin uses because it apparently works better with aphe and other shells
OFL 120 F1 is rated 650mm @ 2000m
If OFL 120 F2 is rated only 640mm @ 2000m
It wound explain why France stopped producing it after only 1 year.
What are you smoking man
Using Wikipedia as a source…
Lanz-Odermatt Formula
OFL 120 F1 (Tungsten)
600mm x 22mm Tungsten penetrator
1790m/s at 0m
1690m/s at 2000m
Penetration:
325mm @ 2000m at 60 ° - 650mm LOS
OFL 120 F2 (Depleted Uranium)
600mm x 22mm DU penetrator
1720m/s at 0m
1620m/s at 2000m
Penetration:
320mm @ 2000m at 60 ° - 640mm LOS
2 Likes
Wikipedia cites secondary sources and I don’t work for the French military.
If you’re telling me the OFL 120 F1 should have 650mm penetration then okay? Buff it?
You’re factually incorrect regarding the usage of the OFL 120 F2 round unless you have a source otherwise eh?
Depleted Uranium only has penetration advantage up to 1600m/s striking velocity.
Like DU for 105mm guns with 1455m/s muzzle velocity and 1350m/s striking velocity was vastly superior to tungsten. But at velocities such as 1790m/s, the better self sharpening properties of tungsten alloy starts to surpass DU past 1600m/s.
This is again why the French stopped production of OFL 120 F2 after 1 year
They’ve been using it (having it on hand they claim to have not fired it) as recently as 2013
I don’t know why you’re presenting this as a failed round it’s the standard round for the LeClercs past 1996 when it was developed.
The most recent round “SHARD” has penetration values too large for War Thunder’s current modeling / system to make use of, OFL 120 F2 is a standard round with similar penetration to every other round current top tier NATO nations use excluding Britain.
Where is your source for this information?
Unfortunately
Lanz Odermatt gives same penetration figure for OFL 120 F2 as in your sources
OFL 120 F1
558mm @ 2000m at 0 °
326mm @ 2000m at 60 ° - 652mm LOS
OFL 120 F2
548mm @ 2000m at 0 °
320mm @ 2000m at 60 ° - 640mm LOS
I have no idea where Janes got such low figure of “560” for OFL 120 F1 from but it’s probably at 0 degrees whilst OFL 120 F2 is stated at 60 degrees LOS
You won’t find OFL 120 F2 in the nexter magazine
Your formula is probably wrong because the F2 penetrates more than that for sure.
The formula isn’t wrong
M829A2
690mm x 21.6mm DU penetrator
1680m/s at 0m
1560m/s at 2000m
Penetration:
352.5mm @ 2000m at 60 ° - 705mm LOS
Here’s that same formula by Willi Odermatt used for M829A2 ^
Well it states that it penetrates around 700mm, that’s more or less correct. So why so you say only 640 ?
Cuz that’s calculation for M829A2, not OFL 120 F2
OFL 120 F2 isn’t 690mm x 21.6mm DU penetrator, that’s M829A2
OFL 120 F2 = 640mm LOS @ 2000m [L/52]
M829A2 = 705mm LOS @ 2000m [L44]
I don’t get the numbers you are using. Also why wouldn’t you add the DU multiplier to the F2 ?
This is M829A2
This is OFL 120 F2
M829A2 has 690mm x 21.6mm DU rod
OFL 120 F2 has 600mm x 22mm DU rod
It should be unsurprising that the M829A2 is a lot better. It has bigger penetrator
I think the reason gaijin didn’t bother adding OFL 120 F2 is because the OFL 120 F1 is better
Well obviously something is wrong here because the F2 is way better than the F1 so something must be wrong with you formula/data.
The F2 has been used on all Leclerc since at least 2009.
I haven’t seen a single picture of OFL 120 F2 ever being used and the calculator, it’s not wrong. The formula is 100% correct.
Just to prove the tungsten penetration formula isn’t rigged…
This is 120mm DM63A1 with LOVA propellant.
685mm Tungsten Penetrator (5.0kg) with
1720m/s at 0m
1610m/s @ 2000m
When shot from L/55 gun
120mm DM63A1 L/55
Penetration:
350mm @ 2000m at 60 ° - 700mm LOS
The South Korean 120mm K279 APFSDS
Has 1760m/s velocity when shot from L/55
But it achieves same penetration as DM63A1 L/55
K279
350mm @ 2000m at 60 ° - 700mm LOS