Why should it?
Why?
Arent You that guy that goes once in a while in the forums to whine about something for no reason?, yeah i remember you from the petard thread
1 Like
Cool you fixed a tank that was already a monster Gaijin, Now we can can get that German winrate up to 85%!
maybe now you can focus on tanks that actually need real fixes…
Fun fact that tank is still missig alot of armor in the front.
No tank should be able to pen it in the front exept in weakspots (and maybe the Obj292)
Again Germany OP thing. One tank = OP
What ranges are these tests conducted from?
NATO doctrine is to engage tanks at 3.4-5km away with their own superior ammo and FCS systems
Can this Leopard 2A7 handle a point blank shot of 10-100m from its own gun?
It’s hard to find information on testing.
If i remember right it should have about 700-730mm ke protection on the hull and about 1m on the turret front.
Sources were postet here in the forum
That is one of the reason that many were against it as the protection is crazy but it was instead nerfed to the ground
1 Like
~730mm KEP using c-tech insert, like strv122, 2a7v use d-tech, d-tech without addon(PSO should have this armor) should be around 600mm KEP, d-tech with addon(2a7v) should be the same as turret protection wise, so around 800-900mm KEP
I dont doubt the values stated but we really need 730mm Ke at 500m and thats what I cant find.
We risk having tanks that cannot be physically penetrated at the distances ingame we encounter and while on paper thats “realistic” most warthunder tank duels take place below 1km for gameplay this creates imbalance.
On Leopard2A7V Turret and Hull armor should have same amount of protection levels.
Irrelevant. The Leopard 2 TVM max in Sweden had achieved higher protection ratings against KE than what Obj 292s APFSDS can achieve (upwards of 730mm KE on the hull and 870mm on the turret), that’s already enough ‘proof’.
Can this Leopard 2A7 handle a point blank shot of 10-100m from its own gun?
Yes, what makes you think that a thirty-year-old newer Leopard 2A7V, with a more advanced composite array than what the TVM max had used in Sweden (it’s nowdays called Strv 122, btw), shouldn’t be capable of doing that? The TVM tested by the Swedes had been pittied against DM53 in fact, and it utterly failed to perforate it (not to mention, the real life DM53 is more powerful than the in-game one), even at spots that are considered weakpoints in War Thunder.
2 Likes
It’s fixing the armor holes that were making it less survivable than it should be, fixing places that shouldn’t be reallisticaly penetrated in the first place
Im aware they use a calculator and not realistic penetration values for rounds
So then should they use acurate armour values if the rounds that face them are incorrectly modelled?
DM53 is an old round now mid 90s we would be looking at DM73 which on paper should penetrate in the region of 670mm (ish) of RHS. That would mean the best Dart in the game would not be able to penetrate the current Leopard 2A7V which in itself is dated in comparision to the new armour arrays on the Leopard 2A8 and 2A7V+
Thats not good for gameplay
That is good for gameplay mishmashed armour models and “holes” are so frustrating!
Source?
Yes i would like that the piece of armor there that is supossed to protect me and that adds close to 4 tons of weight would actually work and do the job of protecting me and not being mere decoration
Cool, DM53 should be in the 680mm region, and DM73 by all metrics should be performing better than Obj 292s APFSDS.
That would mean the best Dart in the game would not be able to penetrate the current Leopard 2A7V which in itself is dated in comparision to the new armour arrays on the Leopard 2A8 and 2A7V+
Huh? How is 2A7V dated compared to the 2A8 and “2A7V+” (since when is V+ an actual variant?)
Thats not good for gameplay
Oh sorry, other nations having better CAS & jets than Germany is also not good for gameplay. Have you complained about that yet?
9 Likes
DM73 is touted to have a 8% increase in pen on DM53 I just did the math.
This is warthunder penetration values.