point out to me again where you got the dimension stats of the penetrator round from again.
As far as i am we only see the weight , velocity in the game and the used tungsten coefficent is just known.
all other factors seem to just be confused rambling by you.
just please dont tell me you tried measuring the hangar penetrator showcase as proof…
Well, it’s actually just math
Using the L-O formula, you can get 576mm (Leclerc’s OFL 120 F1 penetration) via a 585mm long rod, 22mm diameter, 4kg mass, tungsten’s 17,500kg per cubic meter density, and the 1.790km/s speed. I used the base hardness Gaijin did for the target. I’d love to explain the actual process of doing said math, but it’s quite long.
However, in order to fit 4kg of tungsten into a 585mm x 22mm long rod, you’d need a density of 17,987kg per cubic meter cubed. That’s not accounting for the grooves and frustum.
The biggest giveaway of 585mm is when Gaijin had OFL 120 F1 at 3.8kg, and then changed it to 4kg
Now, assuming they DID up it from 585mm to 600mm, as is commonly cited, then 4kg and a 22mm diameter with the same speed would result in 590mm of 0 degree penetration at 10m
Yes, I ran the math on all of it. No, I do not have a life.
3 Likes
I could run the math by hand if you have more on DM53 for me to use. Typically more reliable than a flat out online calculator due to the amount of assumptions they make
Not saying I doubt the DM53 claim, but that it supports making an irrefutable report for Gaijin to change
Now as much as everyone has their Opinion of the Leopard 2A7s either Positive or Negative here is what I personally think as someone who has been primarily playing the Leos.
The Leopard 2A7s are still quite a competent MBT however everything Around the Leopard 2s has changed while it Has not which is one of the Problems. Obviously of course the Armor Problems (The Hull Armor having at max 640mm RHA equivalency and the Turret Armor being worse than the 2A6s). It should definitely get some Buffs (especially a Reload Buff since even a Level 1 Crew on the other Manually Loaded MBTs can almost Outreload an Expert crew with full Reload skilled).
i am not sure if you are just overcomplicating it for yourself.
the diameter and length can be adjusted until they fit the density requirements as well
i would be happy if we did get the damn DM rework promised 2 years ago to fix the damn armor holes and bring them up to standard between the data and models
Diameter would need to exceed the 22mm official figure in order for that to work. Unless you go with 600mm length, in which you can get it a 22.08mm width, which is close enough. 600mm x 22mm however gets to 3.9991kg
22mm x 585mm does fit the old 3.8kg number Gaijin used though
It’s definitely overcomplicated, but the result is very solid
I did a lot of math to make sure I didn’t screw something up
The Thing is that in terms of Firepower you can only get like 10mm either less pen or more Pen. For Example if we add DM63 to the Leopard 2s its gonna have a Lower Velocity than the DM53 which would give it ~10mm less Pen while on the DM73 having a higher Velocity would only give it ~10mm More Pen while only being usable for the L/55A1 (Meaning the normal L44s and L55s Cannot use it due to higher Pressure)
Honestly the Leclere or Arietes are the most
“underperforming” compared to IRL.
1 Like
The WAR Kit is just… yeah
Me stating the Leopard 2A7V is heavily underperforming =/= Me stating the Leopard 2A7V is the only underperforming MBT.
And if you disagree with it being the most underperforming, feel free to provide evidence that supports another MBT missing more armour, penetration or mobility.
Every single MBT in the entire game has overperforming acceleration, that’s just how War Thunder works.
The Leopard 2A7V has underperforming acceleration relative to War Thunder’s standards of acceleration.
It’s because Gaijin refuses to use correct density values for the various in-game penetrators, and instead just dumbs everything down to: ‘‘It’s DU Alloy, so that automatically makes it 18600 kg/m³’’ or ‘‘It’s WA, therefore it must be 17500 kg/m³’’.
Density should be 18500:
Spoiler
2 Likes
The title of the forum page held more regards in terms of what I was addressing, but okay. Also, I have
Also, ‘every single MBT is overperforming’ in acceleration?"
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/HgmaEsdZnJDF
Waiting for them to EVER model the Hyperbar which will provide the larger benefit than the other engine issues
Also, DM53 not only means many other tanks are underperforming, as they also use it, but there’s more statistics that could get changed with a higher density
Someone did Report the Density of DM53 a few years back and yet it was labelled as a “Not a Bug” for apparently having an Impossible Density. (Whatever that means)
“Developer’s response: The document does not explicitly state that the DM53 uses an alloy with a density of 18.5 g/cm3. Furthermore, with such a density, a 23 x 685 mm cylinder would weigh 5.27 kg, which is impossible since the weight of this projectile in flight is 5 kg, and it is worth considering that the tracer, fins, and ballistic tip also have some weight.”
I’d bet money that they’d “not a bug” my OFL 120 F1/DM43 report if I used that exact logic, btw
I mean;
mass is figured out via density by pi multiplied by half the diameter squared (for the radius) multiplied by the length
That DOES get 5.265kg.
But the real question is are there sources suggesting higher than 5kg too? Where does 5kg come from specifically?
Def not lol. Easily goes to the Merks and Type 90 and Type 10.
1 Like
Calling the most OP tank under-performing is most german main thing to do.
3 Likes
It’s not op by any means but it’s armour is heavily underperforming. It’s still the best tank but it’s underperforming alot.