And isn’t the DM63 a shell for 105mm not 120?
Different shells.
The code:
DM-> Deutsche Modellbezeichnung (German model)
1st number- generation of shell
2nd number- type of shell
DM63 is the 6th shell of the 3rd type (AP, APDS, or APFSDS) for any German cannon. There are 105mm, 120mm, and probably 20 and 35mm DM63s which are completely unrelated.
Second number meanings
1=HE
2=HEAT
3=AP
4=Incendiary
5=Smoke
8=Practice
0=Dummy
I forgor the rest and don’t wanna look it up
4 Likes
What TyTheGuy27 said he was faster
1 Like
L28A1 isn’t worth it, It’s just the Tungsten Alloy version of L27A1 which is Depleted Uranium.
Britain is developing a new shell for the Challenger 3 though
1 Like
Ich bin schnell
Pass auf das du nicht am Ziel vorbeischießt. ;D
With how they calculate shell pen, L28A1 might net slightly more pen in game, but IRL, DU is generally better except at certain ranges where the shells have begun loosing speed or something
1 Like
And gaijin doesnt and will likely never model anti-ERA on rounds because
drumroll please
It nerfs Russia hard without really impacting any other nation negatively except China
cough regenerative steering cough
6 Likes
DU performs better at certain velocities (generally lower ones) thats why M829 series shells tend to be lower velocity but heavier than DMX3 series shells.
DU is also pyrophoric while tungsten relies purely on kinetic energy or an added incindiary element (something the DM53 is missing in-game iirc)
DU self sharpens while tungsten needs some specific alloys to allow that function iirc
DU is cheaper (if you have access to it, since its a byproduct of nuclear power generation)
4 Likes
Both self-sharpen, but Tungsten Heavy Alloys usually have a higher adiabatic shear instability threshold, so they need to travel at a much higher velocity to self-sharpen (above 1700m/s is where you tend to start seeing them do so).
The specific Tungsten alloys that were engineered to do just that, were created in order to bring this capability to lower velocities. This is why at tank cannon levels, WHA & DU projectiles of similar densities will perform more or less the same, but at auto-cannon levels DU will greatly outperform WHA.
Of course you can always ignore that capability, and just make your Tungsten alloy really dense (ex: DM53) to bridge the gap.
2 Likes
Thanks for the correction :)
Is DM53’s penetrator unusually dense then?
Pretty much. It is to my knowledge the only German APFSDS (along with DM63 & 73 ofc, since they’re the same penetrators) with a density of 18.5g/cc, all previous projectiles were created with alloys that averaged 17.5g/cc.
Oh wow, thatd make them just short of DU’s 19g/c^3. I suppose they’re getting dragged down in WT by that fact then?
DU alloys sit at 18.5g/cc to 18.6g/cc, so that would put it pretty much at DU’s density level.
2 Likes
Any idea what the WT performance of DM53 would be if gaijin gave it the appropriate density?
To the tune of 5% higher, or… a DM53 from L/44 would perform better than the current DM53 from L/55.
Thatd put the L/55 one at around 684mm, above the ~670mm point where its pen starts to matter over other nations top rounds, and just under the new Russian wonderweapon’s top shell
Yes.
Just saying Tungsten can also be Pyrophoric if its a fine powder and well thats what u partly get at penetrations.
If I remember correctly from the documents I have, dm53/53a1/63/63a1/73 all use the same penetrator. The main differences are propellent used and the gun they’re fired from.
120mm dm53 is the original fired from the L44. Dm63 is the designation when fired from the L55. A1 version is with the Insensitive scdb propellent. And dm73 has a newer granulated version of the scdb propellent, that produces more pressure and can only be fired from the L55 A1 gun. That one has a muzzle velocity of 1790m/s.
1 Like