Nothing, im just mentioning it.
Thank you on this part already, bringing few options to either add/replace the shell with on post war modernised heavy tanks.
1 Like
Yes, like I said this shell technically existed. No need to post that photo, I have seen it. In fact this is 1 of 2 photos of this shell that seem to exists at all.
Wow, an internet blog! Clearly a much more reputable source than the historical documents I’ve posted.
It’s also doesn’t prove squat.
There is only ONE mention of the BR-471D shell in the link you’ve posted.
It gives the source for this info the footnote no. 6
And guess what? There is grand total of 0 mentions of this shell there.
So, now I expect you to apologize for wasting my time and to find a better source to back your claim.
Edit: the source for this information is listed as: “Техника и вооружение. Вчера, сегодня, завтра…» №9, 2008”. An article in a russian journal about AFVs.
But this still doesn’t change what I said: these penetration values look plausible, but they still do not prove that this shell was adopted in service.
4 Likes
I am not gonna search for anything for a man who failed that hard to search to begin with.
And it pretty much answers for the question of if its a serial shell or not.
Good luck to you trying to search something post war out of Stalin’s USSR tho.
Especially funny that BR471 and BR471B/D are literally same shells, just with different cap and fuse, meaning even finding the fuse would prove the shell to exist.
Also I would read through the thing (skim read at least) because when I’ve looked at USN/USAF documents before they don’t register the text as text and essentially treat each page as an image, so ctrl + F doesn’t do anything
But anyway service adoption doesn’t really mean things in war thunder, what matters imo is time of introduction/development/existence. For example, despite using the same gun, a Leopard 2K should not get DM73, even though it is in theory capable of using it, because of the time difference. That’s why in my post I specified the late war heavies specifically and not all of them, as BR-471D was (to my understanding) a post-war development.
My guess is that the 122mm APCBC was supposed to be introduced for the T-10 but with the later more powerfull 122mm cannon, they changed the designation to BR-472, since that was the only AP round the more powerfull 122mm fired. So the shell was probably only called BR-471D for a short time and the stocks of old BR-471 and BR-471Bs were instead issued to the IS-2s, IS-3s and IS-4s that were kept in reserve.
The higher the velocity, the more you get out of APC shells. Being able to pierce thick armor plates like on turrets, while flat shells have very poor performance under such conditions.
So it makes sense that 100mm and 85mm high velocity guns would change to APC rounds, and that the 122mm APC was mainly developed for the high velocity 122mm M-62 cannon.
1 Like
Thx, I did skim the text first, I then deliberately screenshotted an opened search form to emphasize my thoroughness.
The photo of the shell posted is NOT the BR-472, look it has a single driving band while the BR-472 has double driving bands, like the Pzgr.39/42 and Pzgr. 39/43 and other shells designed to be fired from a high pressure/high velocity guns.
Like I said, probably it was intended for the T-10 with the D-25TS but after the T-10 received the more powerful cannon they changed the round to be fired from the new cannon, creating BR-472.
They probably didn’t bother producing the APC shell for the D-25T and thus the BR-471D only existed for a short period.
1 Like
I don’t think BR-471D matters much in the first place. It’s not better than BR-471B, more like a side grade.
Shouldn’t have said that. Now you summoned AverageWehraboo_ who will tell you otherwise 😂
I’ll have you know, its really good!!! it uhhh kills me!!! /s
Didn’t they take this shell away before for some tanks then give it back?
Makes you wonder why they even bothered with making the “D” shells for their 57, 85, 100mm guns after the war, right? ;)
Well, WarThunder isn’t real life.
1 Like
yes
added it to is-2 (1944) then took it away when it went down in br then added it when it went up again
(iirc)
At first, I was baffled when I saw you talking about the “D-25TS” gun in this context, but then I realized there existed two soviet guns with this designation (in Cyrillic “Д-25ТС”)
Edit: actually I’m wrong and @KillaKiwi is right. There was always only one “Д-25ТС” gun.
2 Likes
Iirc this one was used on the T-10B, which was stabilized. Maybe some other stuff, but that’s the only one I remember
Gaijin removed the BR 471D from the IS-2 about 4 years ago and the forum community revolted so they added it back not long after.
Yes, my bad. Too little time to dedicate to refreshing my knowledge of tanks nowadays. :)