Leopards does not beat it out in reload except if you’ve paid Golden Eagles to ace your crew, so that doesn’t count, since the majority of Leopards players are not going to spend 2300 GE for that. It also beats Chinese tanks, the other russian tanks, the challies, the oplot etc. Therefore, the BVM’s reload is by all means MID.
(Not counting reverse) The leopards have worse mobility, the Abrams have worse mobility, and pretty much the same as the type 10. The type 10 does have better reload, and technically ~35mm more pen, however, it’s a paper tank. The type 10 needs to aim for weakspots, whereas the BVM can pen the type 10 anywhere.
All that with armor that challenges the 122 is crazy…
FALSE leopard beats it out in reload with an expert crew, 6.3 seconds more or less.
It doesn’t beat iut
Ariete
Lecleec
Type 10
Leopars
Abrams
Cr2 for the firsr 5 shots
Or merkavas
It’s actually below average.
All of them are 6.3 and below.
The bvm overall loses out in mobility due to capability or lack there of multiple directions
It’s faster in a straight line but the leopards are more mobile in more directions.
Yeah no, the 3bm60 actively in game eith me has screwed me a few times against type 10s as wwll as tkx.
Ive no idea what this means but the only T80 you have you used you’re negative in, the 80 U also arguably has newer/ better composites.
Well, yeah its a technical term that many people might not know exists, nor how a deflagration differs from an explosion.
Neither the US 105 M68 or 120mm M256 series guns as used on the M1 are certified to load a “HE” shell, so it’s not a concern.
The 105mm M456 uses Comp. B (-2) , which is not sensitive to flame or shock, but is flammable so will preferentially gradually burn in the presence of an excess of Atmospheric Air instead of react with available oxidizer with a lack of sufficient initiating impulse, such as an interaction with a HEAT jet.
The 120mm M830 uses Comp. A (-3) which is similar to the above explosive.
Performance can be seen in the following videos and compared, and should be obvious that the warheads don’t detonate when struck, but burn.
That video isn’t a penetration though, it’s an internal detonation with the blast doors sealed.
Given the violence of that explosion, and if the blast door was open during an penetration, most of the blast would funnel into the screw compartment, likely killing most the crew instantly, or all but the driver.
Also I could hardly understand the speaker but it sounded like he said the propellant was the first to burn off which was a huge fire.
I’ve seen burnt out abrams detonating in the Middle East, or others where they were saved by blowout panels, having the fire melt into the engine bay, totally crippling the tank. It pretty much only saves crew on the situation it’s closed and isnt pierced by a round internally, in the crew compartment.
And yes I’ve seen MPAT. It’s multipurpose… but they never declared it is detonation proof.
Even with considering it to be on par with a leopard’s reload, it still beats or is on par with the:
ZTZ99A, T90/T72, Challenger, Leopards
And is beaten by the
Ariete, Leclerc, Type 10, Abrams, Merk
Which places it pretty solidly in the middle… perhaps slightly below average, but still very much mid. And even if it was slightly under mid, all of the pros still outweigh this
Saying that it loses in lack of movement in multiple directions is very misleading, and pretty much false as it only loses while going backward, not any of the other multiple directions. Which I’ve already pointed out as one of the flaws. In every situation where you don’t reverse, the BVM objectively has the better mobility.
You whiffing shots or being ghostshelled does NOT mean that the BVM can’t pen the type 10, it very much can pretty much everywhere
What I mean is that the BVM armor provides a similar protection experience as being in a STRV122 against the rounds present in-game. If better rounds are added this will of course change
Pen, yeah. Reload? The same essentially. Turret armor? Not relevant, both can be penned in the gun mantlet only. Leo has gen 2? BVM has gen 3. All round mobility? Objectively wrong, if the Leopard only beats the BVM in one direction (reverse), while losing in every other direction, then the BVM has the better all round mobility. Not the better reverse.
Fair, but even with an expert crew, I don’t see how your average German toptier player would sink 4,400,000 SL into simply upgrading his crew for four tanks total.
Also I got the Wiesel 1a2 recently, that thing is goated even without the tandem atgm. Thing was like a mini maus, I got hit like 13 times before dying XD.
Plus it’s so tiny! And quick! I love it.
My 5.7 lineup is all experted, but they’re all premiums too. All the premium T-34-85s, YaK-3(e) and the TU-1
How? it’s effectively in its own compartment, even with the door open there is no immediately free path into the fighting compartment.
And the propellant is not the warhead is it? Which is where any potential for an explosion (not a deflagration) would come from, and would need to be properly initiated to have a similar blast effect to the warhead normally detonating.
You have? There are lists of documented “lost” Hulls, None were specified to have come from specifically detonating ammo, only later Airstrikes or being burnt-out / cooked off ammo after being abandoned. But then, being impacted by a shaped charge is very different from being exposed to the shock front of a detonation.
a single 15~28mm diameter hole isn’t going to do that much, especially considering other design elements of the rack itself, that prevent a free stream path to the fighting compartment, as detailed in the quote above.
I was referring to the propellant. But I would still believe it could detonate. “To prevent” vs “Will prevent” they aren’t even sure of it themselves.
Have you ever fired a shotgun? Yes/no the answer doesn’t really matter. If you hold a shotgun at the hip, and I mean just hold it up, not brace for it. When you pull the trigger that shotgun will fly backwards out of your hands. As would a shell out of the rack if it is cooking off. The fire is going somewhere and the path of least resistance is where it will go.
E.G. flying at Mach Jesus into the crew compartment in a fiery blaze along with other shells likely.
Even with a tiny 15-28mm hole, that’s a lot of hot fire coming still coming into the crew compartment, and that’s not even considering that the blast door could be bent after piercing the bulk head in some angles y the projectile / shells causing damage.
It would be interesting to see a true test of this, but likely it wouldn’t likely never happen.
“Lost” is a polite way of saying destroyed. It’s merely a play on words to look better.
Even looking at abrams casualties against drone, I had seen an cookoff where the abrams turret actually had blown upwards lifting the whole rear of the turret upwards and forwards slightly. It wasn’t as bad as a Fully loaded T-72 mind you, but nobody survived.
That implies that the casing remains whole, and that the propellant would burn as it would when contained and fired properly in a gun tube. Which if it’s in the rack is not the case; its known that US ammo uses combustible cases(cellulose) for the wall of the majority of the cartridge(see below), and the lack of an igniter means that the burn would not be as consistent. So there would be a much reduced maximum pressure build up vs normal firing; as the unsupported cellulose would rupture and burn before sustaining excessive built up pressure .
Going back to the bullet analogy, an “out of battery” failure, ends up with a very different end state vs normal firing. which the casing often rupturing at a seam.
Could you show me where I said the USSR was bad? And another thing, what’s the problem with dying and respawning with a KH38 or Lmur?
They press W and kill everyone? Where is this happening, in which BR? Tell me, because I also want to play in this BR
Have you ever played as USSR?
