This is the same penetrator as M829A2s…
Question is… what KIND OF assumptions did you have to take to arrive at 610mm with the tip, because it seems like you were going out of your way to absolutely low-ball it.
Well technically there was no difference between Mango-M and Mango so no point adding it.
Dude you makeing up story to blame people that have no power here that its their fault that your dream world never came.
Oooh oooh! I Know - sticks up hand.
Was it a report from the Tomsk Tractor Factory that said it couldn’t according to Soviet Sources?
From the same place presumably that said that M735 should be made out of rubber…
How many years has it been since the M735 nerf and Gaijin’s “promise” to fix it? Like 3 by now?
I hate to play devils advocate for Gaijin, but vehicles take more than 2.5 months to develop. So what you just said is delusional
Gaijin likely either started or speed up development the moment they added the BUK and saw it’s performance statistics.
3 Likes
The obvious question being (not aimed at you btw). Why not just FIX what was already in the game then - rather than give a certain tech tree ANOTHER new toy that throws the game balance out of kilter.?
4 Likes
This directly states the length is GREATER than 630mm, you do know what “>” means?
The tip is a solid steel construction with a length “greater than 100 mm”, while the main penetrator has a length of “about 630 mm, preferably greater than about 650 mm, and more preferably greater than about 670 mm”.
This was even stated in the very same document.
M829A3 also has an in-flight weight of 7.2kg, so a 630x25mm projectile would be way too short to weigh that much, even with a 100mm steel tip, the tracer, and the fin assembly - it would be short by about a kilogram.
A 630x25mm rod is 5.75kg in weight, a steel tip from maraging steel is 380g, we’re at 6.1kg, fin assembly + tracer will amount for about 200g (likely less), so yeah, we’re way too short of the reported 7.2kg in-flight weight.
Even a 690x25mm projectile is 320g too light, unless we assume the steel tip is longer than 100mm.
i said added. it was probably in development much longer.
the puma model/image was leaked years before it came to the game
pretty sure the f35 f22 are either in the works or possible even done, does not mean it will come next patch
and has a said before they could just have given it 1 or 2 types of missiles and it would probably be fine but nope they had to give it the entire load of 3 different missiles
Of course, but I used estimates that are clearly known.
I’m confused about the length of a round with a 690mm penetrator and a 100-150mm tip (I’ve seen different estimates).
You agree, right, that we don’t have clear data on a 690mm penetrator?
These are good observations, I will try to calculate the weight carefully.
Translation - you guessed and made it up.
You ever wonder why people don’t take you too seriously on this forum?
He himself has used the 690 value before
1 Like
I agree, you don’t have clear data.
Lol, caught red-handed.
6 Likes
Come on guys - everyone knows SOVIET milimetres are totally different from Western milimetres.
Like dur!
It is logical that I can take different assessments.
But trust those from more authoritative documents.
Here I was discussing the possibility of simply lengthening the penetrator by 100-150 mm and achieving the same penetration.
The only way for even a 690x25 (actually 685x25mm) rod to fulfill the requirement we’re talking about here, is for the steel tip to be ~150mm’ish in length - but we then just come in circles, because that then means M829A3 has more than enough power to absolutely demolish any tank with K-5 after even 2km range.
Similar as to how DM53 does it at >2km as well, but again, they work differently - DM53 works the way PanzerFaust-3 does (and it’s frankly disgusting, because they both absolutely demolish K-5).
It seems to me that you’re not taking into account that the effectiveness of ERA penetration is determined not only by the tip effect, but also by its simple kinetic impact.
You’re separately adding a 1.1 multiplier and separately reducing the effectiveness of ERA. Thus, you’re doubly summing the effect of the tip (and a little more from the shell thickness, but that has less of an impact).
I hope I’ve made my point clear.
In my opinion, it’s more accurate to calculate it this way:
A 630x23 (<24) shell penetrates 557mm of steel, roughly 437mm more than the K-5 (I roughly subtracted 120mm).
A 630x25 shell with a 100mm tip penetrates 20-30% more after K-5 (depending on the distance).
437*1.2-1.3=524-568mm.
What’s wrong with this calculation?
1 Like
Because the tip also adds perforation… that’s whats wrong with it. By removing it, you’re ignoring 100 to 150mm of penetrative material.
And of course, by assuming the rod is that short.