Well you mention Kontakt -5 exploding to 3bm version rounds only. I have read according to online sources that DM33 rounds and M829 A1 rounds were fired at it K-5. The US and German governments had access to T-80U tanks and , those rounds did not pen the 80U at its most armored section that is of course at 2km 90 degree angel, that means that Kontakt 5 did indeed work, angel dependent. Otherwise the US would not then create A3 rounds since it would not be necessary for them to do so if they were able to pen them with older rounds.
Yes of course online sources and drawings suggest 550mm base turret armor (cheek section) of T-72b tank. However the newer 90a turret cheeks section not the entire section of the turret of course increases to 700mm.
What is then the armor values for Oplot tank and what is the ERA that it uses, so lets say I am in an M1a2 version tank fire A2 round distcance around 1km similar height no height advantage on my part, flat shot will it pen?
Nizh-1M offers about a 10-20% increase over K-5. Duplet-2M takes Nizh-1M and stacks them on one another, angled. Duplet-2M is the ERA used on the BM Oplot. The T-84U/BM Oplot zr. 2000 uses Nizh-1M only.
Even if it penned or not, the US still continued to develop the M829 round to maximize its effectiveness. Any country does this, regardless if the original worked, they’re still going to keep developing the munition to maximize its performance and remove any chance or risk of failure.
No dude no problem this not about accusations , its about me getting a compete understanding of armor values, cause I have been reading quite a bit online ever since playing this game. I find it interesting when there are discussions about armor and constitutes a penn vs non pen.
This means that if Duplet ERA is added to the game then even DM63 should not be able to pen it frontally. What is then the theoretical overall protection added to the upper glacias of Oplot and Turret cheecks, hardest areas of the tank.
The armor of the T-80U was estimated at 670 mm in rolled homogeneous steel equivalent. As can be seen from the scheme
value around 700 mm of protection in the T-80U turret is less than 40% of the frontal projection of the turret, the main value is within 460 mm, taking into account that most of the frontal projection (at 0 deg) in zone near the gun is not covered by the armor composition.
They are very impressive. This is comparison of BM Oplot-T with VT-4.
I believe that basic turret protection against KE rounds is 780-800mm of RHA equivalent.
If you hit the area covered in ERA - no, if you hit area that is not covered (it is small but chances still exist) it is likely to penetrate the armour
If these measurements are correct then definitely no if you hit the ERA covered place
|120mm M256: [M829A1 APFSDS-T]700
|120mm M256: [M829A2 APFSDS-T]750
|120mm M256: [M829A3 APFSDS-T]840
Fun thing about Relict and Kontakt-5 ERA
In fact, the Relict is the K-5, in which the breezability and sensitivity were slightly increased, which increased the chance of triggering on APFSDS. However, it has not been tested against thin western APFSDS as well as the K-5.
It is not clear why Relict became “so much more effective” than the K-5, except for dry text from the Research Institute of Steel I have not seen any proofs of this claims, not even photos from firings.
IRL Relict doesn’t show very good results. It works against non-tandem HEAT rounds as any other ERA does, but it has bad things like exploding all sockets for ERA if one socket is hit, same goes for Kontakt-5
Now it appeared yesterday in official War Thunder twitter video about sight customization system. So let’s wait for proper introduction dev blog I think.
