Ground vehicles 128mm APDS (treibspiegelgeschoss mit H-kern)

[bellezza03 6,009]

using the APDS modifier of the 17pdr on the Black prince

this 128 APDS round should do 162 mm at 60° at 100 meters.

APCR instead much less at 60°

 

Gib :Ds

Edited December 2, 2015 by bellezza03

[Redneck1 1,882]

Difference is:

 

17 pdr APDS composition and and firing characeristics are well known and documented.

 

This ones? No.

[Ruslan_DR 686]

using the APDS modifier of the 17pdr on the Black prince

this 128 APDS round should do 162 mm at 60° at 100 meters.

APCR instead much less at 60°

 

Gib :Ds

 

Well Illuminas, you know what to do :U

[Super_Renard 749]

Well that's going to be needed unless the devs extend the ground BR at 9.0 for the T-10M and the British top tank with its absurdly thick armour. I don't believe it's their plan, so keeping the Maus, Jagdtiger and E-100 relevant in a cold war environment, is extremely important. Oh and the KT 105 also needs the same kind of ammo, since it's going to fight that absolute monster British tank.

Edited December 3, 2015 by superbob44

[juraleona 3,944]

Why are you using APDS modifiers for it? Isn't that like modified APCR just with sabot?

[bellezza03 6,009]

Well if you read the topic, there are 2 types of ammo. The APCR that will do 350 mm and the APDS that will do 400 mm. ( don t be scared, M58 that worked at higher pressures had APDS of 440 mm at 1000 yards... and this ammo was fired by the conqueror, the T-10M APDS should do 400 mm too... in this game APDS are seriously underperforming)

Difference is:
 
17 pdr APDS composition and and firing characeristics are well known and documented.
 
This ones? No.

and fun fact... gaijin despite the different performances of the APDS ( russian should do better against vertical plate and NATO better against 60° plate) they use the same modifier for all of them. So actually in game it would get that values

[Redneck1 1,882]

Well if you read the topic, there are 2 types of ammo. The APCR that will do 350 mm and the APDS that will do 400 mm. ( don t be scared, M58 that worked at higher pressures had APDS of 440 mm at 1000 yards... and this ammo was fired by the conqueror, the T-10M APDS should do 400 mm too... in this game APDS are seriously underperforming)
and fun fact... gaijin despite the different performances of the APDS ( russian should do better against vertical plate and NATO better against 60° plate) they use the same modifier for all of them. So actually in game it would get that values

 

One wrong should never be used to make up another one!

[arczer25 5,202]

using the APDS modifier of the 17pdr on the Black prince

this 128 APDS round should do 162 mm at 60° at 100 meters.

APCR instead much less at 60°

 

Gib :Ds

gaijin is lazy and using 1 slope modifiers for all APDS with is heavily incorrect, they balanced 17 pounder using 60 degree penetration removing 50mm from 0 degree penetration... (in reality 17pounder APDS have slope modifiers very close to APCR) i used correct APCR (with closer to reality, as gaijin again use 1 slope modifers for all APCR...) as it APCR round in sabot

Why are you using APDS modifiers for it? Isn't that like modified APCR just with sabot?

i used APDS are as its fired as APDS so it have firing behavior of APDS with is required for that small mod (still forgot 7% or 1.7%), still it have slope modifiers of APCR and penetration drop of APCR.

Well if you read the topic, there are 2 types of ammo. The APCR that will do 350 mm and the APDS that will do 400 mm. ( don t be scared, M58 that worked at higher pressures had APDS of 440 mm at 1000 yards... and this ammo was fired by the conqueror, the T-10M APDS should do 400 mm too... in this game APDS are seriously underperforming)

its one and only one round 88mm APCR round mounted in sabot and fired from 128mm gun. examinations are from 350mm to 400mm.

any way 120mm T53 (M58 proto) hat APCR with had about ~500mm

[Taskforce404 210]

No.Experimental ammo should be left to the other game.

then delete d25t and d5t's postwar ammo and delete t10m m60 m103 t54 from game

[Ruslan_DR 686]

then delete d25t and d5t's postwar ammo and delete t10m m60 m103 t54 from game

 

Really? 

 

fine, whatever. And yes, if we're not getting this, remove everything else from the game. Because I'm not going to fight this way anymore. 

Edited December 3, 2015 by Ruslan_DR
spam comment removed

[TheJoker1432 1,974]

Included here:http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/278743-future-of-german-tier-5-only-real-built-vehicles/

[Ruslan_DR 686]

Now, i would normally never do this, but if this gets into the game I would GLADLY spend all of my sheckles to have it immediately. 

[i_ivanof 7,084]

 

This is probably the one thing that would need to be added, and German players would stop caring about whatever tanks are thrown their way, even the IS-7 would be a joke with this monstrous shell.
 

hahaha, no

 

the IS-7's 65 degree compound slope on the frontal hull is enough to counter any APDS up until 70s tungsten carbide APDSFS

 

this is an inefficient last resort experimental APCR-derived APDS design which would likely behave very poorly against sloped armour as most APCR shells, so forget about it having regular APDS modifiers, it will not be any better than the regular APCBC shell in almost all cases, (which is underperforming, mind you)

 

Look at the T-10M which gets its beastly 60s APDS, which while underperforming quite a lot, is still the most powerful APDS in the game, but no one ever touches it. Why? because APCBC is just better and far more versatile. Sure, add this APDS  round to the Pak44, but don't expect it to be a game changer

Edited December 8, 2015 by i_ivanof

[Ruslan_DR 686]

hahaha, no

 

the IS-7's 65 degree compound slope on the frontal hull is enough to counter any APDS up until 70s tungsten carbide APDSFS

 

this is an inefficient last resort experimental APCR-derived APDS design which would likely behave very poorly against sloped armour as most APCR shells, so forget about it having regular APDS modifiers, it will not be any better than the regular APCBC shell in almost all cases, (which is underperforming, mind you)

 

Look at the T-10M which gets its beastly 60s APDS, which while underperforming quite a lot, is still the most powerful APDS in the game, but no one ever touches it. Why? because APCBC is just better and far more versatile. Sure, add this APDS  round to the Pak44, but don't expect it to be a game changer

 

 

Bruh, not so much the ammo as it is how you use it. The leo 1's can penetrate the front of a T-10m when they angle at you (you know, despite having about 90mm less than this round due to underperformance?), because that makes it more flat. Now, at the ranges they may try and engage you, the maus is also taller, negating more of the slope because it aims downwards more, and what else? I, and I'm sure many other players, are the type to aim directly left and right of the gun on a T-54, same with the IS-2, which this round can ALSO penetrate. Yes, i admit it's not a perfect solution but it can bring back old habits such as cheek aiming, and may just end up being more effective in certain situations where the enemy is hull down, because now you can pen their turrets again. 

 

The T28, and T95, if you have watched the video that is, are no longer a threat either, as this goes STRAIGHT through their frontal armor. Again, not a perfect solution, but it gets the job done and leaves open more options. There's nothing saying you can't distribute the shells 20 APDS/ 10 APBC / 10 HE which still gives you enough to engage a wide variety of enemies. Sure, the M60 is nice and all... thick frontal mantlet armor good against regular APBC... but would buckle and break open under the force and weight of this, it's essentially HEATFS, but not as good. It basically increases the fighting capability of the vehicle overall.

 

'course my details may be a smidgeon off because I haven't managed to test the round myself, and frankly I don't claim to know everything, but what I've said seems to be possible. 

 

AS for the IS-7.... well i'm sure i can kill it. Many of my shots seem to go through guns and into the breech when i aim there, anyways~ so... this shell's going to break through the back of the breech and destroy it's internals. Plus, apparently the 130mm guns used by the soviets (including the one on the Obj 279) performed more like the 105 L7 than anything... so it's not that scary.

[arczer25 5,202]

IS-7 would be hard nut to crack hull front untouchable for anything but HEAT, while mantlet have 350mm and turret is 240mm rounded, only possible place to penetrate is turret ring

[Ruslan_DR 686]

IS-7 would be hard nut to crack hull front untouchable for anything but HEAT, while mantlet have 350mm and turret is 240mm rounded, only possible place to penetrate is turret ring

 

part of the reason i said it's still possible. The T-54 late models still managed to get F'd up by me before. You know those 300mm turret cheeks near the gun? one of my APBC rounds made it through there once, but only once. if i had APDS, even the IS-7 would be.... dead. Let's just say that a lot of people learned how to aim, and part of the reason i'm good at the maus is because i know how to snipe with both guns, using the small 75mm to take out tracks and trap them became second nature :P

 

Then again, this isn't about me, just, long story short, this round would open up a LOT of new places to aim at.

(besides if they got the IS-7 we'd get the Kpz-70. Kek.)

[i_ivanof 7,084]

'course my details may be a smidgeon off because I haven't managed to test the round myself, and frankly I don't claim to know everything, but what I've said seems to be possible. 

 

AS for the IS-7.... well i'm sure i can kill it. Many of my shots seem to go through guns and into the breech when i aim there, anyways~ so... this shell's going to break through the back of the breech and destroy it's internals. Plus, apparently the 130mm guns used by the soviets (including the one on the Obj 279) performed more like the 105 L7 than anything... so it's not that scary.

It will be similar to the Tiger II's APCR, at least before the nerf. It used to allow you to penetrate a lot more armor than the regular APCBC but I never switched to it even when meeting an enemy with stronger armor like a T-32 or T-54 because it's far easier to just aim for the weakspots and try to flank than to change ammo, wait for it to reload, readjust the aim and aim for flatter armour spots. Also, if they give it its 400mm penetration, then it would be reasonable to give all APDS their historical penetration, which would change the way T5 tanks work entirely... not that it will be bad though, it might end the HEATFS spam nightmare. I'm not against adding this shell, but I feel like it's seriously overhyped in here. 

 

As for the IS-7, yes of course you can shoot through the gun, but the frontal armour is virtually impenetrable save the lower glacis, the armour layout is very similar to the T-10M's except it's thicker by 30-50mm everywhere and even more angled, only the lower glacis remains a weakspot. 

 

It's very wrong to say that it's similar to the L7, which if one of the most overrated pieces of machinery in the game. The L7 itself is even weaker than the D-10T, the only good thing about it is that it uses british APDS which was very advanced for its time. The 130mm S-70 had more than twice the muzzle energy, in fact, it will be the most powerful gun in the game if it is added, surpassing even the M103's 120mm. The 130mm APHE shell alone will wreck everything it faces of tanks with ease, it's like the T-10M's APHE but with a bit more penetration and even more explosive filler, basically a 1 shot kill every time. APDS and HEAT shells for the 130mm have similar penetration to the L7's more advanced APDS, but the sheer difference in muzzle energy means it will cause far greater damage once it does penetrate.

[Ruslan_DR 686]

It will be similar to the Tiger II's APCR, at least before the nerf. It used to allow you to penetrate a lot more armor than the regular APCBC but I never switched to it even when meeting an enemy with stronger armor like a T-32 or T-54 because it's far easier to just aim for the weakspots and try to flank than to change ammo, wait for it to reload, readjust the aim and aim for flatter armour spots. Also, if they give it its 400mm penetration, then it would be reasonable to give all APDS their historical penetration, which would change the way T5 tanks work entirely... not that it will be bad though, it might end the HEATFS spam nightmare. I'm not against adding this shell, but I feel like it's seriously overhyped in here. 

 

As for the IS-7, yes of course you can shoot through the gun, but the frontal armour is virtually impenetrable save the lower glacis, the armour layout is very similar to the T-10M's except it's thicker by 30-50mm everywhere and even more angled, only the lower glacis remains a weakspot. 

 

It's very wrong to say that it's similar to the L7, which if one of the most overrated pieces of machinery in the game. The L7 itself is even weaker than the D-10T, the only good thing about it is that it uses british APDS which was very advanced for its time. The 130mm S-70 had more than twice the muzzle energy, in fact, it will be the most powerful gun in the game if it is added, surpassing even the M103's 120mm. The 130mm APHE shell alone will wreck everything it faces of tanks with ease, it's like the T-10M's APHE but with a bit more penetration and even more explosive filler, basically a 1 shot kill every time. APDS and HEAT shells for the 130mm have similar penetration to the L7's more advanced APDS, but the sheer difference in muzzle energy means it will cause far greater damage once it does penetrate.

 

Fair point, but again if that happens, we're getting an MBT. with a much later model gun used on the leo 2. :U DEAL WITH THAT, IVAN.

 

As for the hype. yeeeeeah maybe a little, but hey, it's exciting because it gives us a CHANCE more than anything. Of course, for using it you need to have some skill, never said it was perfect. Anyways, i'm just waiting on this suggestion to be passed on. I mean, there's no logical reason for it not to be considering both the state of GF, and the fact that generally everyone pitched in to make this a reality, it would kinda be disrespectful not to.

 

As for slope, take a close look at the document, because that photo does not show an APCR round. Document states that it was either APCR OR an 88mm AP shell from the KT to be used, one of the ones shaped more like the photo. So, it seems they went with AP. This, affects both penetration and ricochet angle.

[juraleona 3,944]

 

I broke up with HEAT hype train, and use APDS on T-10M.

 

True, sometimes I need a second shell to finish a tank, but having mostly OHK shell that travels at 1.6km/s? I don't know why more people isn't using it, it can defeat KT II UFP with decent positioning.

[i_ivanof 7,084]

Fair point, but again if that happens, we're getting an MBT. with a much later model gun used on the leo 2. :U DEAL WITH THAT, IVAN.

 

As for the hype. yeeeeeah maybe a little, but hey, it's exciting because it gives us a CHANCE more than anything. Of course, for using it you need to have some skill, never said it was perfect. Anyways, i'm just waiting on this suggestion to be passed on. I mean, there's no logical reason for it not to be considering both the state of GF, and the fact that generally everyone pitched in to make this a reality, it would kinda be disrespectful not to.

 

As for slope, take a close look at the document, because that photo does not show an APCR round. Document states that it was either APCR OR an 88mm AP shell from the KT to be used, one of the ones shaped more like the photo. So, it seems they went with AP. This, affects both penetration and ricochet angle.

The IS-7 also has a lightning quick reload for a two piece 130mm (two man semi-automatic autoloader, about 10rpm for the first 7 shells), is about as fast as a Kanonenjagdpanzer (though it accelerates slower) andhas hydraulic steering assists... For a 1947 tank it is pretty much a godmode gamebreaker, you'd need 70s stuff to effectively counter it, so I don't think we'll ever see it in-game... but you never know with gaijin, heck, in WOT they gave it a slower acceleration, made its gun inaccurate, removed the steering assist and ignored its autoloader, and it's still somewhat a powercreep. 

 

But yeah, id say go for it, add this APDS, maybe the APCR too, but i wouldn't expect that much from it, if they give 128mm PzGr43 its historical 300+mm penetration I would much rather use that

 

I broke up with HEAT hype train, and use APDS on T-10M.

 

True, sometimes I need a second shell to finish a tank, but having mostly OHK shell that travels at 1.6km/s? I don't know why more people isn't using it, it can defeat KT II UFP with decent positioning.

It should have over 400mm of pen up close, when they do give its its correct pen it will be a bitch to face... the HEAT shell should also have 460mm, so there's that too... the T-10M is just a powercreep, they should have added the T-10 and left it there...

[Ruslan_DR 686]

The IS-7 also has a lightning quick reload for a two piece 130mm (two man semi-automatic autoloader, about 10rpm for the first 7 shells), is about as fast as a Kanonenjagdpanzer (though it accelerates slower) andhas hydraulic steering assists... For a 1947 tank it is pretty much a godmode gamebreaker, you'd need 70s stuff to effectively counter it, so I don't think we'll ever see it in-game... but you never know with gaijin, heck, in WOT they gave it a slower acceleration, made its gun inaccurate, removed the steering assist and ignored its autoloader, and it's still somewhat a powercreep. 

 

But yeah, id say go for it, add this APDS, maybe the APCR too, but i wouldn't expect that much from it, if they give 128mm PzGr43 its historical 300+mm penetration I would much rather use that

 

It should have over 400mm of pen up close, when they do give its its correct pen it will be a xxxxx to face... the HEAT shell should also have 460mm, so there's that too... the T-10M is just a powercreep, they should have added the T-10 and left it there...

 

wait the default had MORE?

 

Man i wanna stab a bish right now. :E I ragequit earlier, because frankly i didn't want to deal with it. I'll likely only log in from now on for custom battles and to get the E-100 whenever they decide to arbitrarily allow us to try and earn it. 

[i_ivanof 7,084]

wait the default had MORE?

 

Man i wanna stab a bish right now. :E I ragequit earlier, because frankly i didn't want to deal with it. I'll likely only log in from now on for custom battles and to get the E-100 whenever they decide to arbitrarily allow us to try and earn it. 

its not the default, but yeah, both 128mm shells should have about 300mm of pen at point blank range, it has been posted many times on the forums, the M103's gun also had about 340mm at point blank range, so thats even worse

[Ruslan_DR 686]

its not the default, but yeah, both 128mm shells should have about 300mm of pen at point blank range, it has been posted many times on the forums, the M103's gun also had about 340mm at point blank range, so thats even worse

makes sense the maus and jagdtiger guns have less, because technically in caliber to barrel length ratio, they're both shorter than the american one. However, to make up for that they did have superior weight. 

 

but yeah, come on... That's just poor show to have all the guns be dumb, and only the soviet one performing realistically (that is to say, if the 122 DOES perform accurately.) or I'll probably make a suggestion myself to nerf that.

 

No really, this is making me mad.

[Choogleblitz 10,205]

It should have over 400mm of pen up close, when they do give its its correct pen it will be a xxxxx to face... the HEAT shell should also have 460mm, so there's that too... the T-10M is just a powercreep, they should have added the T-10 and left it there...

 

I would have been happy with a T-10A or T-10B with the 3BK10. But, I mean, Leopard 1 and M60 is in the game so it's too late for that now. 

 

Also, 3BM11 should do 450 mm - 0° - 10 m, and the HEAT is correct penetration wise, it's just not the correct shell used in the T-10M. T-10M units used the 3BK9M, which had 460 mm / 200 mm. Pretty sure APDS is nerfed across the board because the T-10M would break everything in half and then some.

 

 

makes sense the maus and jagdtiger guns have less, because technically in caliber to barrel length ratio, they're both shorter than the american one. However, to make up for that they did have superior weight. 

 

but yeah, come on... That's just poor show to have all the guns be dumb, and only the soviet one performing realistically (that is to say, if the 122 DOES perform accurately.) or I'll probably make a suggestion myself to nerf that.

 

No really, this is making me mad.

 

Oh no it doesn't. But it's still performing closer to what it should be (AP wise) than the 128. 

Edited December 19, 2015 by Choogleblitz

[_Iluminas_ 3,769]

wait the default had MORE?

 

Man i wanna stab a bish right now. :E I ragequit earlier, because frankly i didn't want to deal with it. I'll likely only log in from now on for custom battles and to get the E-100 whenever they decide to arbitrarily allow us to try and earn it. 

http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/239151-id-0028815-wrong-penetraiton-values-of-the-kwkpak-44-128l55/