who let gaijin cook up these calulations
6 Likes
1- You are shooting at them from the sky, negating great deal of the angle.
2- At 0m, which is literal point-blank, which is something that never happens.
3- You are still getting 700+mm values, which despite the “penetration possibility is low” instead of none, is actually none.
4- Why is what other tanks are or aren’t relevant anyway when it comes to whether Oplot is correctly modelled or not? It’s simply absurd that Oplot has lower armor effectiveness than T-80U’s even though it’s thicker, heavier and more advanced. I can’t see why other tanks are relevant here.
4 Likes
It is impossible to penetrate in game play
The more you know, the funnier it gets.
HCHKSV-19 somehow get’s better CE values than HCHKSV-34 which has more explosive in it
UPD:
Also 310 + 380 + 380 = 600(I know it’s not angled. Still very funny)
Spoiler
7 Likes
And the same KE values, despite 34 being specifically intended to have better performance against KE threats (hence the comedically large explosive mass)
It’s about the same against projectiles I think(tho it has bigger cumulative projectile). 34 desined to cut throug 60mm RHA UFP of integrated ERA module(can pen 60mm of RHA but cannot slice that funny gun dart in gaijin’s opinion)
1 Like
What were you expecting from a 1990s tank based on soviet technologies ?!
There’s nothing useful. Everything you can find about ХСЧВК is only promo-photos and videos.
But once again, all this shit depends on the angle, which is not calculated correctly in the game
Got accepted, said to be a known issue. Now we pray🙏
5 Likes
Wow, at first glance I thought the thing is modeled properly, but now I realized how much of a bullcrap it is lol.
I have a gut feeling devs misinterpreted what are ERA characterestics should be in hull and sides of the armor.
Yapping
First of all, let’s understand what ERA stands for what.
So the image has two cutaways of 2 cartridges: the upper cartridge is HKChPWSH 34P and the lower one is HKChPWSH 19A. They are visualy distinguishable: the upper one is 250x125x36 mm and the lower one is 250x125x26 mm. They also have a different size of “knives” for cutting through the projectile as well as different weight of explosive filler (as was shown earlier in the thread).
Now, the funny part I think devs are wrong to an extent is the perception of individual segments of ERA.
What do I mean by this? Well, those who checked out the closed bug reports stating wrong ERA (namely Duplet) effectiveness can see that bug report managers show a screenshot from manufacturer’s brochure covering Duplet-2M ERA, that shows that 2 tiles of ERA together provide a protection against 3BM42 of up to 60%. As mentioned earlier, the ERA on the hull and turret from is supposed to be HKChPWSH 34P, which devs identified as Duplet. It is not entirely wrong, to identify each block as such…
however, let’s take a closer look at other cartridge which devs also represented: HKChPWSH 19A, also known as Nizh-1M.
As we can see from the same format of brochure covering Nizh-1M (aka HKChPWSH 19A), 1 tile of such ERA provides protection against 3BM42 of 50%.
To remind you:
- HKChPWSH 19A, 250x125x26 mm cartridge, is Nizh-1M
- HKChPWSH 34P, 250x125x36 mm cartridge, is Duplet-2M
Do you now see what is the problem here?
How come a single cartridge 30% thicker and greater explosvie mass with perforation element, according to Gaijin, provides the same KE/Chem protection (in game), or rather less than a much smaller one in reality (according to manufacturer itself, that all of them quote)?
Returning to the bug reporter interpretation of things: they say that 60% is a right number. It is right… but for a single tile of Duplet-2M. They pull out the brochure that shows 2 tiles in the photo, but it makes no sense that 2 larger tiles of ERA provide ALMOST IDENTICAL KE protection to 1 tile of smaller ERA. It is impossible how ever you look at it. And what’s the funniest: if you pull, like bug report managers, these brochures, you will come to conclusion that 1 large cartridge provides 2x less all-around protection.
As I said, I believe bug report managers and devs misunderstood what that brochure stands for.
They think 2 tiles of HKChPWSH 34P represent Duplet-2M together and their efficency is colectively 60% against KE, but how come 1 tile of HKChPWSH 19A boasts 50%? It will make sense that these stats, in the Duplet-2M brochure, stand for a single tile of Duplet-2M, like it is for Nizh-1M. I guess the portrayal of 2 tiles together in brochure is for illustration purposes, to make sure people understand that HKChPWSH 34P cartridges are not used by themselves, but in a tandem (duplet). And Duplet-2M stands for an upgrade over Nizh-1M (see size difference), and the manner of usage (either in composite or as add-on only).
And the fact that bug report manager stated that Duplet = 2 x Nizh is wrong to an extent as well, because Nizh-1M is HKChPWSH 19A (earlier development), and Duplet-2M is, in fact, HKChPWSH 34P (later development). And Duplet-2M is not a colective term for 2x HKChPWSH 34P, but for each tile independetly. And Nizh ≠ Duplet, as, for the matter of fact, they share all dimensions exept 1 (height, 36mm vs 26mm), so they are indeed interchangable with earlier K-1 cartridges and slots, as it was supposed to be designed by manufacturer itself.
Second thing I can’t get over is normalisation of ERA. Even with messed up numbers Gaijin used, how come 140mm KE from angled tile provides 66.6mm KE at 0°? I know that effectiveness of ERA depends on the angle, but riddle me this: angled Relict has 200mm KE, but, at the same time, its 0° provides 140mm KE? I very much doubt it is the case, especially taking into account previous statements.
Last, but not least, is base armor. I know we don’t have IRL blueprints of cutaways, but from photos alone we can make a conclusion that there is more armor to it than what devs modeled and programed.
Probably all that text is not so useful and wrong, but what is seen right now feels much more wrong.
12 Likes
In addition, not coming from some manual, but from logic itself: why on Earth would Ukrainians stick 3 heavier tiles of ERA together in order to achieve protection similar to that of 1 tile of relict?
Just think about it for a moment.
4 Likes
We sorted out the situation a little
It turns out that Gaijin calculated the efficiency of ERA Doublet together with a layer of 50-60mm steel.
That is, two layers of dynamic protection + a 50-60mm layer of steel = 280mm
One layer of ERA “Нож” reduces penetration by 50% (457-60%=228mm)
It turns out that according to gaijin, 1 layer of steel (50-60mm) + 1 layer of ERA adds only 52mm of protection
15 Likes
So you’re saying that the Duplet-2M will provide 120% protection against KE?
It doesn’t. There is an important note that it says up to, not absolute. And due to this, Duplet-2M does not provide 120% but less.
I just state that Duplet-2M, which uses heavier 2x 34P, cannot have less protection than 1x 19A (Nizh-1M)
What I am rethinking at the moment: the text I wrote is mostly wrong. HKChPWSH is element whoose principle is used in Nizh and Duplet, however the model of element in Nizh is 19A (smaller knives, less explosive), and its derrivative is Duplet which uses 34P (bigger knives, more explosive).
Thus it is impossible that Gaijin programed both ERAs which use the same principle but vastly different proportions of insides practicaly the same.
Duplet is stated up to 60%, nizh-m1 is 50%
If we take it as an axiom that 60% is provided by 1 HKChPWSH 34P element, and 2 are installed in Duplet-2M, then we get 120% protection from KE.
Up to 120% protection? So is there a chance that the projectile will fly back or what?
Can you make a report plz?