No, I said it seemed like you guys were targeting people that are trying to help, cause that’s what it felt like.
I was there providing my input and I was targeted.
Sure, I may have misworded my statements and I apologized to at least one of the people that was on the wrong end of my misworded statement.
That’s the thing, I already know how to read and understand, there’s a reason college was a breeze for me. I misunderstood no one.
The only thing I’ll forever struggle with is translating voice to text. Text to voice is easy.
the leading theory is DM53 “fooling” Kontakt-5 into thinking it’s a much smaller projectile with much less force and energy behind it (Kontakt-5 doesn’t explode when faced with projectiles smaller than 30mm KE)
second supporting theory is that the projectile is segmented at the frontal section, i.e 2 small and 1 big portions (40 - 40 - 605mm) thus if one or two segments are gone, there is still more than enough material to defeat the armour behind the ERA
the alloy can simply withstand the explosion without suffering much damage
While all of those can work by themselves, currently it’s thought Germany resorted to doing all 3 in order to guarantee penetrations at excessive ranges (hence why Rheinmetall states LKE II can overcome double-action Heavy ERAs) and why they didn’t really bother making a new APFSDS until only very recently, DM53 was simply overkill. That’s why it hurts so much to see it underperform to such a degree in War Thunder.
Thank you for the post, Shadow. I appreciate your input.
I know in War Thunder that DM53 performs rather accurately against non-ERA targets.
Many have made the point that it should be going through T-72B3 & T-80U, including myself.
We can only hope Gaijin is trying to figure out how to simulate ERA defeating measures, especially as we get closer & closer to hardcore ERA defeating rounds such as M829A3, SHARD, and so forth.
@Panther2995
Weird, I accepted all my miswording mistakes since day one, and you ignored that I accepted my mistakes.
Maybe you should accept peoples’ mistakes & apologies as well.
I’ve understood everyone, Panther; My text responses are not always indicative of my thoughts and that’s my mistake.
They don’t always portray my understanding and I apologize for that.
They had already figured it out for the most part, in fact they had anti-ERA code ready for DM53 already back in New Power, they simply didn’t activate it, and removed it in the patch that followed (likely due to balance concerns, which was fair).
Yes, those days are long gone and AE modifiers should have been in the game for a few months already. Ironically some of the weakest nations would benefit from this much more than Germany because they don’t nearly as much of a punch overall, those being;
Maybe the code caused major issues.
Tandem still is one big charge in WT, so they have a lot to figure out with these armor penetrating & ERA defeating mechanics, and on their own since they’ll be among the first to figure out all this stuff.
You better pray they actually bother to look at my Leopard 2A7V suggestion, cus considering how they modelled the Strv 122, we may get a repeat of C-technology armour + add-on instead of them actually improving the base composite lol.
Unlikely, it was like 3 lines of code at the time. All they did was lower the effectiveness of Kontakt-5 against DM53 by about 60%, which technically speaking, was a really conservative estimate on Gaijin’s part. Maybe they’re improving on that today, maybe not, maybe AE will look completely different. Too early to say knowing that Gaijin is the one doing the coding.
I’m sure gaijin even ready to make DM63 since Russians tanks ammunition in the game now act like DM63 already
also, anti-era will effect only Russian/Chinese tanks only western tank that got hit my such round might not feel any different than what already in the game.
it too OP if such around can have this in the past yes nowadays? not anymore.
Last I checked DM63 doesn’t pen as little as OFL 120 F1 [3BM60’s equivalent], nor explode with the slightest sneeze.
12.0 is near, so I do expect higher penning rounds that 11.3s won’t have to deal with as much.
@AlvisWisla DM63 is pretty much DM53 same performance only different is it use different propellent.
what those that mean? well it very hard to catch fire or explode when hit
example source of DM63 testing
and if you are wondering how German knows to defeat ERA such as K-5 remember that UK ever brought T-80U (probably UK variant) they study on it and that where DM53 and L27A1 was born
Idk how you managed to get the exact pen value, but thats not being stopped by the fuel tank, that is stopped by the 6mm thick structural steel carousel armor box. (You can tell because the box is being highlighted and there being a mark where the dart was stopped highlighted in green)
Usually tho the dart goes straight through that, generating no spalling because structural steel below 17mm in game does not spall and you are left with the dart having to do damage. And the dart is not exactly gonna do much without spall.
This passes through thicker non-structural steel. Iirc its some homogenous rolled armor (ie its hardened to some extent) which allways spalls regardless of thickness.
Yes vehicles are punished for using actuall armor plates or thicker internal strctural steel plates than 15mm. RIP centurion with its 17mm thick structural steel plate.
