the architecture of this here is bad the old one was structured fine
3 Likes
No, what is wild is the massive amounts of copium you’re delivering.
That’s a Russian tank that was destroyed in Ukraine. It’s one of many thousand. Deal with it.
4 Likes
Essentially the issue here is
T-72B hull composite is 215mm thick and sloped at 68 degrees
The hull array in total is 574mm LOS in total thickness
You need 530mm at 0 degrees with APFSDS to penetrate T-72B hull without Kontakt-5 ERA in WT as of right now for years now…
The thing is, when APFSDS defeats
530mm at 0 degrees
It penetrates
247mm at 68 degrees - 660mm LOS
At 68 degrees the APFSDS defeats 660mm LOS since it normalises vs sloped armour.
So essentially, currently in game the base hull of T-72B which is 574mm LOS of composite offers 660mm LOS of steel equivalent protection which is impossible and not even feasible.
11 Likes
No APFSDS round is incorrect.
Abrams has its correct 680mm, and so forth.
You can see all the data on a post I made under The Academy The comprehensive APFSDS penetration datasheet
That includes all in-game data for penetration at 2000 meters.
2 Likes
So there will be intelligible proof? Or a couple of photos is your bet?
1 Like
Calculation:
50 + 35 + 50 + 35 + 50 = 220*68/100 = 150
220+150 = 370+250 = 620 - Upper frontal protection at 68 degrees and 0 degrees heading
you lost me, plus we are only doing the base hull, no ERA included
4 Likes
You’re the type of person who could see a video of the tank being blown up by the Ukrainian army and you would say that it was fake/staged.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t force it to drink.
8 Likes
An interesting idea, but no, I don’t belong to them, I see a mismatch of facts, this already speaks of deception. If you don’t care about it, it’s your right, as they say, it’s not for me to discuss it, everyone has their own head on their shoulders)
In this case, it will be 370 mm, if without dynamic protection, at 68 degrees and 0
T-80BVM without ERA
220mm thick composite at 68 degrees - 587mm LOS
188.4mm effective steel protection at 68 degrees - 503mm LOS
When APFSDS defeats 404mm at 0 degrees, it penetrates 188.4mm at 68 degrees
Can you calculate in the comment how you get 587? Because I get 370
220mm / Cosine (68 degrees)
Thats 587mm line of sight
100mm / Cosine (60 degrees)
Thats 200mm line of sight (T-54 / T-55)
Alternatively you can use this
90 degrees sine = 0 degrees cosine
60 degrees sine = 30 degrees cosine
30 degrees sine = 60 degrees cosine
1 Like
Seriously you are showing made up tank stats by gaijn as an argument, seriously wow
11 Likes
you do realise that 370mm of armour at 68 degrees would be nearly 1000mm LOS?
Heres the screenshot of the mod stating it as a fact to close a bug report.
(im not gonna comment on the quality of the bug report itself)
5 Likes
Some Soviet tanks stored extra ammo in fuel tanks. The carousel is not in a fuel tank. Yeah, sometimes the mods are difficult to work with.
1 Like
Which addresses ammo not in the carousel.
You’ll note staff never mentioned carousel ammo.
BTW, expert crews likely reduce chance of ammo detonation by a lot for all tanks.
Also dude calling me a troll for criticizing Soviet vehicles… lol
Update: Starting to play T-80 again to see how many people aim for ammo.
I say that cause only one person aimed for ammo so far & of course they killed me cause they aimed for my ammo.
Other people aimed for turret, UFP, etc, and I’m showcasing my entire tank to players.
No hill peaking, no meta Gran Turismo 5 racing lines using tanks. Intentionally reckless, always showing the whole tank, always showing side armor of some kind.