It can be seen in this graph, the penetration values on USSR APFSDS shells are very wrong. They can remove stuff like 3BM60 from the game but these values should be impelemnted, and the shells changed on the tanks for balance. But absurdly fake stats when sources are available is absurd.
Penetration values for rounds at 2km at 0 degrees of angle
3bm28 : 350mm
3bm9 : 290mm
3bm12 : 400mm
3bm15 : 400mm
3bm22 : 470mm
3bm26 : 490mm
3bm29 : 500mm
3bm32 : 560mm
3bm42 : 520mm
3bm42m : 600mm
3bm46 : 650mm
Uhhh- I call BS on that… if you punch in the numbers of the dimensions of soviet APFSDS into a long rod penetration calculator the current stats in game hold up.
It is quite literally physically impossible for those penetration stats shown to exist….
8 Likes
The only way I can see these numbers holding up is if they used a very mild steel for testing.
all Apfsds rounds are wrong in pen but i am skeptical on some of these values
In-game 60 degree 2km.
125:
3BM9- 282mm, 141.*
3BM15- 308mm, 154.
3BM22- 346mm, 173.
3BM42- 470mm, 235.*
3BM46- 586mm, 293.*
Asterisk = matches your chart.
So yeah, your chart is inconsistent, and the numbers are even, which means it defeated a plate that thick, but defeating can mean barely perforating, which 3 of the 5 rounds definitely match.
@Macekeeks
They seem rather accurate from my research.
If so im surprised how wrong gaijin gets these pen values and what crystal meth they are doing in calculation especially with 3bm46
What’s wrong about 700mm DM53 for example?
Do you think all rounds perform drastically better than this IRL? I mean, perforation simulation in WT ain’t the best, but spall liners prevent spalling from partial pen in modern tanks, as well as reduce spalling post-pen.
1 Like
drastically, depends on the round like ofl g1 while it is underperforming its not underperforming to the point to where it would make a massive difference if it was fixed but dm53 like you said thats just sad how off it is
The game uses the Lanz Odermatt equation to calculate APFSDS penetration. If you think they are wrong, then please provide proper penetrator data(diameter, length, material, density and velocity) with appropriate source.
1 Like
Russian 125mm APFSDS
3BM9
240mm @ 2000m (0)
140mm @ 2000m (60)
3BM15
400mm @ 2000m (0)
150mm @ 2000m (60)
3BM22
420mm @ 2000m (0)
170mm @ 2000m (60)
3BM26
410mm @ 2000m (0)
200mm @ 2000m (60)
3BM29
360mm @ 2000m (0)
210mm @ 2000m (60)
3BM32
395mm @ 2000m (0)
230mm @ 2000m (60)
3BM42
395mm @ 2000m (0)
230mm @ 2000m (60)
3BM42-2
480mm @ 2000m (0)
280mm @ 2000m (60)
3BM46
495mm @ 2000m (0)
290mm @ 2000m (60)
3BM60
515mm @ 2000m (0)
300mm @ 2000m (60)
3BM59
540mm @ 2000m (0)
315mm @ 2000m (60)
Foreign 125mm APFSDS
125-I
420mm @ 2000m (0)
245mm @ 2000m (60)
M711/8 Mk 2
435mm @ 2000m (0)
255mm @ 2000m (60)
P99 TAPNA
462mm @ 2000m (60)
270mm @ 2000m (60)
DTW-125
515mm @ 2000m (0)
300mm @ 2000m (60)
DTC10-125
???mm @ 2000m (0)
330mm @ 2000m (60)
do you have a sheet of other apfsds shells pen or just Russian ones
3BM9 is just a 410mm x 36mm Steel Rod penetrator with
1800m/s at 0m
1527m/s at 2000m
L-O calculator gives it
308mm @ 0m at 0 degrees
240mm @ 2000m at 0 degrees
The fact that source says the 3BM9 has 290mm @ 2000m is laughable when official Soviet sources state 245mm @ 2000m.
What’s also laughable is 3BM22 in that source having 220mm @ 2000m at 60 degrees penetration which is complete nonsense.
Even the 3BM42 only has 230mm @ 2000m at 60 degrees and it’s a tungsten penetrator. 3BM22 is just a trash steel rod from 1970’s
1 Like
Which other 125mm apfsds are you interested in
3BM15 features only slightly longer steel rod than 3BM9, being 435mm long instead of 410mm.
3BM15 also gets carbide core which inflated vertical penetration but doesn’t help the sloped high obliquity penetration.
That’s why 3BM15 only has 150mm at 60 degrees, which is slightly better than 140mm at 60 degrees at 2km.
The fact the source in the opening post says 180mm @ 2000m at 60 degrees for 3BM15 is unrealistic and laughable. It doesn’t match even official Soviet data.
Correct 3BM15 penetration
400mm @ 2000m at 0 degrees
370mm @ 2000m at 30 degrees
200mm @ 2000m at 45 degrees
150mm @ 2000m at 60 degrees
120mm @ 2000m at 68 degrees
This is penetration for Yugoslav M88 APFSDS, it’s their designation for 3BM15
2 Likes
I’m curious to know what kind of armor its suppose to be shooting because these seem very inflated because a 100mm difference with 3bm42 according to this and compared to in game i don’t think gaijin is that incompetent and 520 sounds crazy for only being a steel shell
3BM32 is literally just 380mm long Depleted Uranium penetrator with 1550m/s at 2000m.
It’s literally impossible for just a 380mm long penetrator to defeat 560mm of steel at 0 degrees, especially with only 1550m/s at 2000m
For comparison… M829A2 has 690mm long depleted uranium penetrator with 1560m/s at 2000m
1 Like
if its going at the speed of light i can believe it but nah this gotta be a joke
It’s just a random table might by someone. I’d imagine it was made before Lanz Odermatt equation even existed. Nowadays we can easily say the figures are absurd.
1 Like
this list would put 3bm60 at above 700mm of pen at 0 degrees at 2km the 2km is the worst part of this list
1 Like
that doc isnt right, unless we want to give L27A1 350mm at 60 degrees at 2km?
1 Like
