Okay but it doesn’t match live fire tests which i’ve provided, which means it’s wrong. Don’t care who made the source, I care about the actual info in it.
You should know that the penetration of shells is not fixed and fluctuates within 15-20%, especially for cumulative ones.
Source? Because it absolutely does not. I’d give you 5%.
Also to achieve the 70% your source claims the penetration loss would have to be over 20%. Would be one hell of a bad shaped charge. An even worse once considering it does it twice in the live fire test - one penetrating 30mm residually and one 45. These are irregularities of sub-5%. (in fact using the 600mm number, let alone 750, a 15mm difference is a 2.5% irregularity)
Read the results of the 9M113 test. I don’t really want to waste my time endlessly, considering that you gave completely incorrect figures for the PG-7VR at 900mm and used anonymous tables not from the manufacturer.
If you think you have good sources, please submit a report, but I’m afraid they won’t be enough.
Did they update the armor on the dev yet?
yes
1 Like
How is it?
~620mm UFP on 68 degree
I’m not finding your sources for you?? that’s not how this works at all???
And your PG-7VR penetration figure magically changed mid-conversation. Doesn’t exactly instil confidence. Please try to avoid hypocrisy and actually focus on the info. Even using 750mm and using 600mm your source does not remotely match performance.
My table actually matches the live fire tests I provided, which you continue to conveniently ignore as much as possible. The live fire tests also demonstrably prove the manufacturer values you’re so reliant on are not consistent with irl performance.
If the current armor is ture BR should be burffed I think
Seems kinda bad ngl
I have a quick question, is the era on the sides different than the era found on the turret? As how does 3 layers of era produce less ke and ce protection when angled when compared to the side era?
No. There are two ERA blocks, one intended for the large specialised mountings using larger shaped charge, and one intended for more ad-hoc fixings like on the roof. Sides and front should be fitted with the same charges.
Turret uses HSCHKV-34 only. Sides has 34 + 19 + 19.
for the references
So has gaijin decided era angled produces less ke and ce protection then or am i missing something?
19 is also what is fitted on the roof though, which provides…
more than what is fitted on the turret face. This entire protection layout is a mess as-is.
Yeah. Duplet math is fully buster
2 Likes
Are the stats per tile or is it for the entire frontal array of 3 layers? As this is just stupid otherwise.
Oh thank god, thought they had made it so the frontal turret 3 layer array was giving the 140mm ke and 310mm ce.