What are the differences between the Oplot-P and the Oplot-M?
Mainly the lack of Varta APS on some versions and different side skirts.
We have more than enough information to make pretty safe educated guess, mainly this photo alone is enough
Gaijin are just blatant in their bias.
HHRA alone in ingame model is responsible for 417 mm of protection at 68 angle, while Gaijin in response to my report stated that reference total protection(including other layers and ERA) is 620, that leaves us with 203 mm of proptection from ERA + textolite + separation layer between ERA. And they somehow don’t see problem there claiming “wrong calculations”.
3 Likes
Yea, idk why I’m even trying to think of this rationally.
It’s a vehicle that Russia made that has dozens of variants that they tried to improve on it yet it always had marginal performance compared to most western tanks that Ukraine, a small now recently sovereign nation took and objectively made better in almost every way giving it better mobility with an improved engine and much better transmission, better situational awareness with parts like a commanders panoramic sight with the ability for thermal imaging and much better protection with the layered Duplet ERA which should be able to stop the majority of projectiles from doing damage to it frontally and within a ±30° frontal arc of the vehicle along with other things like a better FCS and the newer welded turret instead of the old cast turret.
But were never gonna see it as it should be because Russian vehicles other nations made better then the original are either not allowed to be in any other nation or as effective as they realistically are.
1 Like
For some reason, high caliber HESH rounds (150mm+) can kill the BM Oplot anywhere, idk if this is due to armour holes or what but at least on BVM and T-90M the UFP cannot be penetrated by such rounds. HESH should not be able to penetrate through composite armour like it does here.
Same rounds on BVM:
2 Likes
It was reported already
1 Like
Gonna try to fix the grouped ERA thing, not sure if someone made such a report already.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/QDr7Q0iKSdbM
You have come across a CBR(Ralin) that is blatantly falsifying test results.
The shelling took place at an angle of 50 degrees👇
4 Likes
even with 65 degrees the ERA is underperforming
1 Like
I have also had a discussion with him about the angle. According to Ralin the projectile was fired at a 50-60 degree angle and then changed to 70 degrees after encountering the ERA.
Firstly, there is no evidence of this, in my opinion, the supposedly higher angle seen in the residual penetration mark left on the armour is due to how deformed APFSDS (after encountering ERA) travels when encountering base armour.
See below:
See how in the end, you cannot tell the exact angle of the initial shot? It seems like the shot was fired at a higher angle than reality.
Secondly, even if the ERA did indeed change the angle of the projectile, why shouldn’t the resulting reduction in penetration from this change also be included in the ERA’s kinetic protection? Unfortunately it is impossible to get any report passed because the CM will not look at these issues in his logic.
I have also redone my calculations taking into account the 50 degree angle of firing (originally I had assumed the angle to be 60 degrees):
Spoiler
The ammunition used was 3BM42 at a distance of around 100m. Which gives us 500mm+ of penetration. (In game 3BM42 penetration at 100m is 524mm for a 60 degree angled plate, in real life the penetration at 100m is stated to be 550mm+)
After encountering Duplet ERA, the residual penetration was only 60mm on the normal, for a 50 degree LOS firing angle, this means 93.34mm of residual penetration.
500 - 93.34 = 406.66
~407mm of reduction in penetration of tungsten core APFSDS.
Percentage wise, ~81% reduction in penetration. Duplet is ridiculously effective against 3BM42.
NOTE: I have calculated this using 500mm as penetration figure for BM42, if we take the given real life penetration figure of 550mm, the penetration reduction is increased to 456.66mm.
However somehow the snail gods have decided that it only provides ~292mm of kinetic protection.
2 Likes
If ERA would change angle it would be upwards not sideways, it is absolutely wild claim
1 Like
That guy used to just post all kinds of nonsense on the russian-language forum. Then he somehow became a volunteer, and they gave him mod so he could remove inconvenient posts from his opponents.
In my opinion, youre fighting windmills. The developers of this game have a deep-seated dislike both for that tank and for the people who made it. This dislike has been cultivated literally for decades and has already become a holywar. And youre trying to prove something to them with reports. But in the end, its’ still them who make the final decision, right?
1 Like
What are we even doing anymore?
“You have not provided evidence that the protection in these areas is lower than it should be.”
What? Their own model says two tiles should give 280mm combined. The groupings have 2+ tiles. What do I need to provide evidence for? Do we need to provide explanations like 140+140=280 and that 140mm is not equal to 280mm because that’s how numbers work?
6 Likes
You need to provide them this, tho better take your own screenshots since my decals may trigger them, considering their aligence lmao
1 Like
Explain how an upward force pushed core sideways.
what a joke, why does every single japanese tech tree mbt lack protection that they would have irl. They should give you all your ammo stock as compensation if they are not going to rework them
1 Like