As title states. Is there a specific calculator that Gaijin uses for their penetration values at barrel, 500m, 1000m etc?
Willi Odermatt, a Swiss man that’s an expert in the field.
https://www.longrods.ch/perfcalc.php
It’s how APFSDS ammo is extremely accurate in War Thunder.
https://defence.bergter.com/ also features a similar tool however with more functions aswell templates. It does feature similar interface using Lanz-Odermatt equation to calculate projectile penetration, aswell kinetic energy, armor and relative armor interaction.
1 Like
Appreciate it! I did notice they have a compilation, is there some kind of process Gaijin does after the fact because none of the numbers match the in-game values? Thank you!
This is a hot topic in my opinion, while some states that Gaijin does use real values based on calculation I personally think that there’s a intentional nerf to every penetrator in-game or the values shown in stat-card are related to another material for balance reasons.
Regarding this I’m not entirely sure, but if you manage to search around in-game data regarding ammunition penetration values you might find the exact numbers for length, width and so on. Thanks @AlvisWisla because I wouldn’t be able to help earlier, websites like these are mind blowing and are interesting tools to mess around with.
2 Likes
Appreciate it!
Well here’s what we know: DM53 and M829’s real life testing is within margin of error for War Thunder.
Same with 3BM60’s.
Lanz-Odermatt made a great math solution in the 1990s.
The only real flaw is around multiple material penetrators.
Do they mention the materials said penetrators interacted with?
That’s where tools like ANSYS joins, they can handle simulations with different materials I believe and show a more complex result of said test from what I know. Though the setup is more complex for this kind of task.
Yes, it’s a type of rolled homogeneous steel of a specific hardness.
I forget the exact hardness, but it’s a standard used for all ammo in the game.
Even maxing out the brinell hardness number doesn’t get the numbers close
going very heavily off of memory here, but it’s not that far off
Sarcasm? I mean that’s a whole 100mm off
I knew you’d trip.
It’s ~7mm off.
??? explain to me like I’m a 5 year old because 556mm doesn’t equal to 469mm in my eyes
relative armour thickness multiplier @ 60 = 2
556 ÷ 2 = 278
Thanks! The numbers certainly match up, but where’d you get the relative armor thickness multiplier?
60 = 2 is the easiest to remember but if you need to check other angles there’s always this Relative Armor Calculator
(set angle type to Cosine)
Most if not all real world APFSDS use the penetration performance at 60 degrees, often converted to relative thickness in marketing and brochures, because bigger number = more impressive.
1 Like
Appreciate the knowledgeable response!