oh yeah lets say the T80BVM now gets pen’d frontally by anything from Type 10 up to DM53 now what would you think about it? yes the armor its wrong it should be higher and the same goes for the 2A7V, so you are putting as an argument that why would it need more armor since i cant pen it with my 3BM60 but other shells can pen it, anyways at the end you’ll have to aim at the weakspots like everyone else does when aiming at the STRV 122 weakspots
It says up to it does not mean that everything they make is of that density. This is not even close to sufficient for a bug report. They have always required specific information.
What do you mean its not enough man, @FurinaBestArchon provided them with the needed source, what else would be needed?
in the report there is already information referring to the density of the tungsten that its obviously being used in the DM53 by the company making DM53
specific information about it being used on DM53/63/73, as said. Production capabilities in general are not production capabilities of a specific shell.
Rheinmetall at the moment produces only 2 APFSDS projectile families;
- DM5X+ family
- PMC308 (Puma, that btw is at the moment underweight BECAUSE the density is also too little, and we proved it back on the old forum).
Why did they name drop 18.5g/cc if neither of those achieves said density? Your mental gymanstics are beyond me at this point.
4 Likes
obvious is not specific, gajin has never accepted “obvious”
Because it’s an advertisement? Because they’re advertising their capabilities?
“By anything from Type 10 to DM53” It is quite limited range, tbh. Cause it will be only three shells.
Not my.
I still have to aim to quite limited numbers of spots, where i can OS Leo2. More armor just makes it harder because of some randomness
Right? They’re making an advertisement for THEIR PRODUCTS, the tungsten alloys they make your PRODUCTS out of, and they specify that those PRODUCTS are made out of an alloy that achieves 18.5g/cc density, what else is there to it?
You’re coming up with every possible excuse at this point just to argue that they couldn’t have possibly gave out the density of their alloys like that, but they did.
3 Likes
so lets say your company is making toys of this specific wood from this specific tree and they give the information of the properties of the wood of this tree but they never specify on what toys they are using the wood but in their toys they say they are using that wood now does it make sense that this 2 wood they refer to are the one they are using for their toys?
Huh??? You’ve got to be kidding me right now. The way a projectile is made, or its geometry is IRRELEVANT to the density of their cores. The reason those two projectiles have a higher density is because it was specified that they’re made out of Class IV Tungsten alloy (alloys belonging to this categery almost always sit at 18.5g/cc), that’s the same type of alloy DM53 (which is btw called WSM 4 - 1) made out of.
3 Likes
I’m not saying they couldn’t possibly, I’m saying the information is not specific enough for a gajin bug report. You’d be better off finding a listing of what alloy DM53 uses and bug reporting it with that.
Well… Marketing? Developers were never lying about their goods, right? So its possible (not saying that they are)
The lanz-odermatt equation was made to be used with long rods only, not slugs. This is gajin’s jank as approach of applying it to slug rounds.
I literally just told you why they’re denser! Am I witnessing an actual reading comprehension issue happening in real time?
2 Likes
Man let me tell you. This is some high-level of mental gymanstics lol
1 Like
You’ve clearly never bug reported to gajin, they require at all times, specific information.
1 Like
that’s not a slug that’s a long rod entering more into the segmented department there you know what even is a slug?
1 Like