On that subject, I’m surprised there aren’t any suggestion on the Thumper on this forum. It would be nice to compare the penetration values of each of these early 140mm guns.
We already have the one from the Panzer 87-140 :
Not that it matters that much, with these penetration values, you can pen approximately anything (except Stalinium ERA, I guess)
Those numbers for the Pz87-140 are fictitious by the way. They assume a 1,000mm penetrator can somehow fit in a 1,000mm shell segment (140mm ammunition being two-piece: 1,000mm + 500mm).
That whole suggestion has glaring inaccuracies. Leclerc T4 and the American 140mm projects are realistically the only viable 140mm additions, the rest never having actually achieved sufficient stabilisation of the cannon.
Well, if there’s one person who I can trust in this matter, it’s certainly you. Ah well, it’s sad though that such a gloriously, overly long canon wasn’t as neat as the suggestion portrayed.
So there are sufficient datas regarding the Thumper’s pen ? That’s actually reassuring.
Apologies for the wait, it escaped my mind. I wouldn’t know to be honest but it should be in the same ballpark. All the 140mm projects were supposed to penetrate a 1,000mm @ 60° target.
Leclerc was designed for possible up-gunning from the outset. Everything from the turret drives to even the muzzle reference system supported the 140mm cannon.
CATTB and Thumper used a brand new turret to support a larger cannon.
It’s only the Leopard 2s which were not sufficiently stabilised as they never had any major redesign to support the larger 140mm.
If ever added, this would penetrate any mbt wherever it hits. It’s stated to penetrate up to 1000mm of rha.
one detail, i’m pretty sure the 70% increase is compared the ofl 120 f2, the DU penetrator of the leclerc (690 irl, so 1173mm that need to be converted into WT calculations), not the f1 tungsten rod.