Making Russian Tank Protection more realistic

Conclusion

Russian
Penetration vs 260BHN Steel
3BM9: 140mm @ 2000m (60) [1962]
3BM15: 150mm @ 2000m (60) [1972]
3BM22: 170mm @ 2000m (60) [1976]
3BM26: 200mm @ 2000m (60) [1983]
3BM29: 210mm @ 2000m (60) [1982]
3BM32: 230mm @ 2000m (60) [1985]
3BM42: 230mm @ 2000m (60) [1986]
3BM42-2: 280mm @ 2000m (60) [N/A]
3BM46: 290mm @ 2000m (60) [N/A]
3BM60: 300mm @ 2000m (60) [2016]
3BM59: 315mm @ 2000m (60) [2016]

Foreign
Penetration vs 260BHN Steel
125-I: 245mm @ 2000m (60) [1993]
ZPS Pronit: 255mm @ 2000m (60) [1996]
M711/8: 255mm @ 2000m (60) [1996]
TAPNA: 270mm @ 2000m (60) [???]
DTW-125: 300mm @ 2000m (60) [1999]
DTC10-125: 330mm @ 2000m (60) [???]

1 Like

Yeah, WT’s BHN is lower 235 - 245… So we need to convert 260 to ~235, which 564 on BHN 260 goes to 590 on 235, and 585 on 240.

@ueberman

Be near mach 1 at all times, and don’t go straight on, they will never hit you.
It’s better to use a Tornado IDS for that reason.

@D00MBrInG3r777
Except I do play top tier almost exclusively. You even proved I do. Not sure why you post incorrect statements…
I was in a match last night in my EJ Kai, no Pantsir even shot at me.

@Stormwolf7
3BM69 is only usable on B3, true. But 3BM59 is a DU version of 3BM60.

They aren’t? They’re really that “bad” compared to 2016 US tanks.

You know things are fishy when Russia introduces their best rounds in 2016 with 564-571mm @ 0m vertical penetration but according to gaijin you need 640mm at 0 degrees to penetrate T-80U upper plate which is a tank from 1986.

With my realistic estimate
T-80U is only 506mm KE at 0 degrees vs apfsds and 3BM59/60 have 564-571mm at point blank range.

This is because when Apfsds defeats 506mm at 0 degrees, it also defeats 236mm steel equivalent at 68 degrees which is 630mm LOS along 68 degrees.

4 Likes

Yeah, WT’s BHN is lower 235 - 245… So we need to convert 260 to ~235, which 564 on BHN 260 goes to 590 on 235, and 585 on 240.

It’s 260BHN in the game per Gaijin’s own table for APFSDS:

3BM69 is only usable on B3, true. But 3BM59 is a DU version of 3BM60.

Didn’t you say previously to give SHARD to Leo 2s because DM83 doesn’t exist or so? Because if so, 3BM-69 is a lot more mythical than DM83 (so much so we haven’t heard of it since 2015 or 2016 - whereas we got an EDR article this year stating DM83 will officially enter service in 2024 if I remember correctly).

3BM-69 also cannot be used with the B3, it’s supposed to be longer than 3BM-59 and 60, which forces on them a rebuild of the hulls to accomodate for larger charges and projectiles, as well as longer and more powerful autoloader.

No, War Thunder uses 260BHN

Also the 3BM69/70 are so long that the hull width of Russian T-64/72/80/90 tanks isn’t wide enough to fit them in

This is why T-14 went with turretless design so that the 3BM69/70 ammunition could be placed vertically inside the tank.

Harrier Gr7 maxes out at about 0.9 mach. PGMs are still buggy and unreliable in my opinion and require deployment at alt to have an effective range, issues that the Gr7 doesnt need to deal with. Guided bombs dropped from extreme alt provide no guarantee of safety from any SPAA, including Pantsir

That’s why you use GBUs, not PGMs.
GBUs provide exclusive safety from SPAA as long as your ~13km away.

I mean sure, the problem is that first of all the Harrier is SUBsonic so you cant hit Mach 1 anyway, second I wouldve tried to evade IF I WOULD KNEW THAT IM BEING SHOT AT, since the tracking radar is undetectable by RWR (dont come me with IRST, doesnt change anything) and the smoketrail is so short, if you miss it youre dead since you dont even know a missile is coming, and I wasnt staring at the ground for the whole time so a clear skill issue on my part I guess.

Tornado Gr1 at least, doesnt perform well at alt in my opinion, struggles past 20k ft. or about 6000m. . To provide effective protection, by your own reasoning, you’d need to be close to the Tornado Gr1s Max height at least double that effective height, Maybe more like 40k ft or 12km . Yeah, you have the diagonall to consider, so you dont have to be that high, and you can loft bombs for further range. But In my experience, you rarely get to drop them from much further away than 8 to 10km. I could however, reliably fire off AGM-65Ds from 15-20km away and they are fire and forget. I dont have to try and keep my sight on the target whilst evading enemies. Including enemy fighters.

Wing sweep 70% is required. You could probably get away with 60% but I test in test flights before, and I haven’t tested 60% yet.

thats why Im using the Harrier.

1 Like

Still doesnt necessarily mitigate the issues of actually get up their whilst avoiding fighters. etc.

Also completely excludes the fact that clouds completely prevent T-Pod from locking on. Some maps, you’ll have to be way below that

I like both, and im only at 11.3 so trying to avoid artificially uptiering myself even more than I absolutely have to, but yeah, probably will run Gr7 more. Though with the Warped SP costs, I tend to just take a heli over a jet

good thing I bought the Rooivalk XD

Well that the problem Harrier can’t go Mach if go against Russians it better to use Tornado (but Mirage and F-14B is best choice since they can turn)
there the a option for Harrier I use for SEAD against Pantsir which is Maverick flying high fire mav and turn away.(and hope it hit or don’t get shot down or blow up mid air)
the problem is render range and tracking range of Targeting pod. while pantsir can track any plane beyond 18KM with no RWR warning but still for plane PoV you can’t even see Pantsir further than 14-15KM and can’t track the Target with pods far more than 15KM which is pretty much forcing to go closer

1 Like

Yeah, same. Though I think the Apache is going to get run as well once i’ve got it and spaded it. Not necessarily because its any better, but because it looks better :P

1 Like

Yeah, that artificial nerf drives me nuts. Should easily be able to lock onto 25-30km and fire at around 20-22km. Should easily outrange a Pantsir, but can’t due to limitations. Can’t even see ground targets too far out, which is really annoying.

Its why we really need ALARM, but that is another thread altogether

this game has in general a problem with render distance, we are now at the point where we reached the games limit, idk if its a engine problem or simply changing a number in the code.
In another thread about the Q-5L I already complained about that.

I think its intentional. An artificial nerf to mitigate CAS. At least in GRB. You can definetly spot ground targets a little further out at least in ASB. At least im fairly certain you can.

anyway this is getting off-topic.

1 Like