I have several elements which prove that the penetration of OFL 120 F1 can be corrected on Warthunder !
the result of 718 will be for 10 meters.
if I follow your logic in the games (575, 573, 565, 557, 547, 537) then with results like those I obtained (so approximate ) we should have (718/716/ 708 /700/ 690/ 680),
Moreover , I did a calculation with the AI which takes into account all the known characteristics of the OFL 120 F1 and I obtained a more coherent result (in games it gives us for an angle 0° (651 / 649 / 641 /633/623 /613) for the penetration
2 Likes
100 meters in-game: OFL 120 F1- 662mm at 60 degrees.
2000 meters in-game: OFL 120 F1- 620mm at 60 degrees.
It’s accurate.
1 Like
i dont have for 30 and 60°
1 Like
The penetrator isnt 120mm in diameter?
1 Like
just going to point this out mate, 120mm is the bore of the cannon, and sabot width, the projectile is about 1/6th of that, usually 20-30mm. You’ve made this theoretical round nearly 1.5m long, which just isnt feasible. 984 is the nato standard round length, not the actual length of the penetrator which you’d need to either source or measure from photo’s. 600 brinell hardness is also incredibly high (usually 200-300) and i see you’ve set that so you dont get an obscenely high penetration value.
I don’t have the right values, it’s just (everything to review!!) thanks again, however I have seen many times on the internet that the ofl 120 F1 can penetrate more than 600 so…
idk, not that wikipedia is a good source but it lists the penetration at 2k at 560, same as DM43, warthunder has 537 at 2k so, seems kind of moot.
F2 is listed as 640 at 2k and SHARD is probably classified
I could be wrong but I don’t think the penetrator of 120 F1 is almost a meter in length either
edit
420mm frustrum length? Seriously?
I was really wrong hehe !!! All config at review
580mm with apcbc off which is still more than what we’ve got ingame
they could also give us other nato ammunitions
I don’t know where did you see that. The Leclerc in the game can’t even penetrate 580mm at 0m with 0° of angle
No MBT at top BR has flat armor from the front even 250mm thick let alone 500.
It’s why we use 60 degree citations. And the thing for that is plate thickness / cos 60.
Also @foxy48514
Willi Odermatt for APFSDS.
1- Wikipedia isn’t a source.
2- Wikipedia is using 60 degree angled pen.
310 / cos 60 is 620mm of penetration, over that of the wikipedia 600mm claim.
