Here are all the tanks that have higher ammo detonation chance than the soviets:
This is completely working as intended. No matter the Everests of information you will ever provide Gaijin and their power crazed russian moderators in the bug reporting website, they will not change CASELESS ammunition burn rates to high 90s which is where it should be. And im sure the “wet stowage parameter” was applied to the carousel rounds as well as the ones stuffed in the internal diesel tanks, which is probably the case considering gaijins hilarious mismanagement with Russian/Soviet vehicles protection statistics.
So then what about all those ammo blacking out examples i have provided just 1 comment above yours?
Either way it’s stupid that any tank can eat a direct hit to the ammo. Ammo should have 100% chance to explode when hit, it’s not realistic but at least it’d be consistent.
They should all burn too if its case-less ammunition. Thats the point. Cased ammuniton w brass should probably not burn unless penetrated by large spall.
The only time caseless ammuniton shouldnt burn is probably with the new nato ammo thats designed to not burn when hit for example like Dm63 or 73 or what ever.
I have no bias.
And the british charges in glycol should have reduced burn chance, like wet stowage should provide. Except in cases where its stowed dry.
All of the japanese tanks had their ammo directly hit by a 75mm shell, and the entire rack disappeared instead of blowing up.
It is a game bug, and ammo disappearing happens with 100s of vehicles.
It happens, when the tank has either:
a, 2 piece ammo
b, ammo modelled in bulks, instead of individually modelled shells
It never happens with tanks that use single piece ammo that is modelled individually (except blowout panels on MBTs, but it is how it should work).
If you have a counterexample, please provide it.
It is reducing the chance of shrapnel igniting it. A direct hit into the charge will blow the tank up.
You dont understand what am trying to say.
I am not arguing with you.
I agree stuff disappearing is a completely fake thing to happen to things that are explosive encountering white hot fragments.
Okay, but then could you tell me in a more detailed way, because i don’t get it. Sorry, but i am not native to english.
Im saying ammo should not disappear when hit. It should explode with a very high success rate ~90%. Only in select cases should this burn chance be reduced.
This is not how the game works unfortunately
Yes. It is not bias. People just like to cope with it as russian bias.
I wounder then, is this german bias? xd
The ammo shouldnt explode, as its electricaly fired and is extremely stable (similar to all modern ammo), like C4, although a hard enough hit through all the armor could cause it to “shock” and detonate. Most of the videos of exploding T-80’s isn’t an ammo cookoff, it’s actually the hydraulic fluid of the autoloader catching fire and burning every flammable thing in the tank, with a possibility of an ammo cookoff.
This is 100% false. Casings themselves are flammable and rh120 is coated in a wax. Rh120 is made of nitro cellulose for example.
And what about turret toss? Thats pretty explosive for just being “hydraulic fluid” thats a pretty wild cope post you wrote
I think it’s a common knowledge of everyone to know modern ammo is electrically fired dude. Yes, the autoloader for T-72/T-90 is electric, and T-64/T-80 is hydraulic. I feel, not even being that interested in Russian equipment, and me knowing this, but not you, doesn’t make sense.
We know they have electronic primers. But that doesnt mean they dont burn when hit…
Thats literally why late rh120 ammo like dm73 (which is new) has a special formulated propellant thats extremely resistant to unintentional ignition.
Russian tech that is in service from the 80s def does not have this tech
The more “modern” Russian ammo from the 60’s uses Ж40, considered a “low-explosive”, so yeah, it really makes sense for it to not explode, but lead to a slower burn, which is why the 125 is so long, when it does explode, it does cause the turret to fly, but it rarely “explodes” it just burns out. Here’s the stats if you don’t believe me.
The propellant case is of a semi-combustible type, consisting of a fully combustible pyroxylin-cellulose, TNT-impregnated tube set in a rear stub made of BV-11 steel, that also incorporates the GUV-7 electric primer. The gunpowder is of a high-nitrogen pyroxylin straw type. The ZH40 consists of 15/1tr V/A (1.5mm burning arch high-nitrogen pyroxylin stick gunpowder) + 12/7 V/A (1.2mm burning arch 7-channel high-nitrogen pyroxylin stick gunpowder) + VTKh-20 (flame-suppressing gunpowder) + DRP-3 initiating gunpowder.
So yes, it does blow up, but it’s much more stable than the “grains” or “pellets” of other ammo. Also, the fact is, if it’s a side shot, then it probably won’t go off, unless it ignites the hydraulic fluid, leading to an ammo cookoff, by spewing hydraulic fluid everywhere on fire, it will likely light whatever propellant charge is there, and open to the elements. But like I said, it’s not going to light on a direct shot unless it’s sparks at such a rediculous amount. As for now, I’m not going to argue or reply.
Edit: A cross section to further elaborate
I will be very honest with you, yes, the AMMO explodes, specifically the HE/HEAT-FS, because they are filled with A-IX-1/2. It’s very unlikely for the CHARGES to explode
The probability of ammo explosion is the same number in game files(i forget the number)，for every top mbts, and it’s not very high, which means if you don’t hit enough ammo, there is a high probability that it will not explode. The reason is that there is a armor bucket around the ammo, which can block most shatters, and this armor bucket is marked as ‘no secondary shatter’, so you can only hit 1 ammo in most cases, that’s the problem, and same for the other t-64s and t-80s.
Hey, if it’s realistic, makes sense, although I think spelling should get a projectile velocity plot to help with that so if it’s still fast enough or big enough shrapnel, it should be able to go through, but that’s a hard process for the computer to compute math wise.
They can, the armor is about 6mm as I remember, but most of the shatters is around 10mm penetration, only a few can go through, as the bucket is round. The problem is, the armor bucket can’t provide shrapnels, what go through is what left, no new shrapnels.
I can only find a t-64b‘s, but bvm is the same, you can check this by nvidia ansel.