We also need to know the state of K5 on the tanks as well in addition to the amount of times they were fired at.
I tested that a long while back and it made no difference, I’d be curious to test it again and see if that’s fixed.
Regardless, an M1 without a commander will still out-reload any Soviet tank, even if we assume it’s fixed.
Slightly off-topic, but I was surprised to see the M1A2 with 2 crew reloads in 9.8 seconds, I always thought that 2 crew remaining doubles the previous reload time, which would be 10.6s (Expert crew 5.3 x 2 = 10.6 sec).
I’m using the ammunition symbol with the count-down animation as a reference point for the test, and got 9:83 seconds:
1 Like
Based on…? The 70 degree angle of attack is an assumption by you, it should also be noted that this was early on in the design, propellent improvements(and potentially sabot), led to this value being 730mm.
(with M829A1 being rated at 690mm using whatever metric was proscribed…)
Everything unclassified is basically mentioned in the suggestion.
Firing trials of L-27 may have taken place in the 1980s, but Germans probably got their T-80s in the 1990s.
Armen requested someone post this for him.
We have a decent understanding of L27’s dimensions based on this document:
Spoiler
A penetrator that is 605mm in length is simply not going to achieve >700mm of penetration at the vertical.
If someone has data on whether L27 was significantly improved from this point, and how this was done, I’d be happy to read it.
If you run the known and currently available data through Lanz Odermatt with Gaijin’s criteria (260 BHN target) at 70° angle of attack, ≈2000m distance, you get ≈695mm of penetration, that’s awfully close to the quoted figures in the document.
Furthermore, all other documents I’ve seen regarding British penetration values list 70°-75° angles of attack:
Spoiler
Spoiler
1 Like
Comparison to M829A1:
Spoiler
Exceeding initial requirement:
Performance Enhancement Options
Spoiler
Charge Improvements
Spoiler
Assessment of requirements and comparisons to M829AX
Spoiler
First source makes it clear the UK was not aware of M829A1’s actual performance characteristics at that time.
Second source doesn’t disprove my statement that it’s likely the criteria are for a 70° angle of attack.
Third source is just the bottom part of the source I linked, and doesn’t even begin to state that L27 would be capable of exceeding 700mm of penetration at (or close to) vertical angles of attack, even if all improvements were carried out.
This source also does not mention increasing the length of the penetrator, and a basic rule of penetration characteristics is that APFSDS projectiles do not exceed their own length in penetration at the vertical.
Fourth source is mistaken in regards to M829A1 penetration if it also uses a 70° angle of attack for basis of comparison. Known data for M829A1 puts it’s penetration in excess of 700mm even at 60° angle of attack, let alone 70°.
1 Like
Again your 70 degree value is entirely estimated, assuming not only the L-0 model and your version work, but also that the value isnt a numerical representation of average performance over multiple conditions for example.
Again you are entirely assuming this 70 degree condition. It would make sense if there is a heuristic or directly comparable and consistent way these values were obtained so that the requirements or capabilites can be directly compared.
Again nobody is claiming that any performance is against vertical targets, that would be ridiculous, it can only be read that CHARM 3 is positioned in between M829A1 and M829A2 in terms of penetrative performance.
This isnt represented in game, however 346(in game)
Please reply in one post, there’s no need for 3 separate notifications.
Gaijin uses a higher BHN for the target plate, hence penetration is slightly lower.
I’d ask you why you’d assume a different angle of attack, when all other sources for different projectiles consistently use the 70°(-75°) criteria.
You’ve also not given me a reason to doubt that the penetrator dimensions quoted in the first source are inaccurate.
The primary limiting factor in penetration is the length of the projectile, you’ve not explained to me how a projectile with such limited (relatively speaking) length is able to achieve such penetration values, especially in comparison with M829A1 which has a significantly higher L/D ratio.
Lanz Odermatt also provides us with penetration values that are extremely close to known penetration data in source material for other projectiles, I see no reason to believe Lanz Odermatt is suddenly incapable of providing decent results with known L27 data.
And I find their estimations of M829A1 and M829A2 to be dubious. The first source even states that concrete data was not available.
1 Like
322 [644] at 2000 meters, but yes War Thunder goes with penetration data over perforation data.
No, i play most countries and i need to say, russia is in the top 3, they have the best aa, cas and tanks cant be easily killed. They got a relikt buff aswell.
1 Like
Ah yes, played matches, the peak way of determining skill lol.
They are accurate, and initially the mv was circa 1530m/s around that time, in theory achieving that 673-693, so you can see how further improvements were made.
Well the tip design is unique to CHARM rounds, its possible that the tip improves performance, and L-O does not account for tips.
T95 can’t be killed easily, that doesn’t mean it’s meta.
Besides, that sounds more like you maybe not knowing where to aim, rather than them actually not being able to be killed easily.
I’ll just take the most recent match I’ve played as an example:
- T-90M: One-hit-killed.
- T-80UK: One-hit-killed.
- T-80U-E1: One-hit-killed.
- T-80U-E1: One-hit-killed.
- T-80U-E1: Breeched on first shot, then killed with 2nd shot.
- T-80U-E1: Breeched on first shot, then killed with 2nd shot.
- 2S38: One-hit-killed.
- T-80U-E1: Shot in the engine compartment, then killed with 2nd shot.
- BMPT-72: One-hit-killed.
The only shots that weren’t OHK’s are shots that would’ve never been a OHK on any tank.
2 Likes
Your game play and year of the abrams game play proves that gajinka has become a junky rng game, your first shot should have tracked the T80 as it would have taken out his right track completely, your second shot should have at least breached him, as for the year of the Abrams his first shot against the chally should have sent him in outter space. Enough of rng taking away frags from good players.
This is a realistic game play well done no ifs and buts there.
WT is a one of a kind game that requires skills other games don’t. It’s not a run of the mill extraction shooter like Tarkov, Arena Breakout, or Arc raiders. It’s not a competitive bomb objective shooter like Valorant, CS, or R6. And it’s not a tactical shooter/sim like RoN, Squad; Or ARMA.
WT is very unique in very many ways. It’s not a WoT, Blitz, or HEAT either…
insane russian bias again. they should die before you even shoot them