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

[Remiak 108]

*snip*

 

I hope this helps

YES, finally, someone supplies me with something that looks like actual data to further reduce my ignorance. I was unaware (duh, should have imagined it) that there were different values for the different turrets that were actually made, you mind telling me the source of these scans (photos?) for future reference?

 

 

the 128mm would naturally hav ehad 306 or so mm of penetration if modeled correctly. With it, we could easily frontally pen a t10m, however they will not give us this correct pen because bias.

 

I know there's a bias because reasons that just made me uninstall the game.

 

However I won't get into those here. To answer your statement with another statement, we should have had this long ago because almost ALL tier V's have APDS, including some mid-tier brits. 

 

So, frankly I am overall disappointed by the dev's negligence. The germans can use A LOT of buffs, and this is just one of them, so the next one or two updates better be about them exclusively because we have it the worse. Our last update was with the leopard, which was what, the middle of last year? and still isn't good enough to reliably defeat soviet armor?

 

This suggestion is full of many things that would help, from APDS, Keiler, sturmtiger, to some earlier vehicles to help pad out the tree more. At least something, the soviets get a new vehicle EVERY. SINGLE. UPDATE.

 

So yes, overall I am dissatisfied with their behavior. 

 

Back to the subject at hand, we're still unsure about a few specifics, if it's really pzgr 40, or pzgr 39 in the image, since it stated that the round would be pzgr 40 IF POSSIBLE. 

 

That means different values are possible.

 

 

 

I agree, and they've only further proved my point.

 

Yes, i am aware of the penetration and spalsh damage issues of the 128mm Pak44/KwK44. I know that gaijin used the penetration values of the 128mm Pak40 (flak gun mounted on the Sturer Emil) as reference for the Pak44, which is incorrect taking into account that the propellant charges on the Pak 40 were smaller, hence producing less acceleration. Yet the Pak44 has its propper acceleration (in paper) with the lower acceleration penetration values applied to it.

 

Also comical how the 122mm APHE rounds can do up to twice as much damage as the 128mm APHE rounds, despite the later being not only larger but also having almost 4 times the amount of explosive filler. And with the recent APDS nerf they applied i fear that if they ever give the KwK44 this round is all going to be with entirely imaginary values. If they can ignore obvious and plentiful data imagine what will they do with a shell as obscure as this one.

 

The one thing that keeps me hopefull is that they were messing around with this gun recently, i've noticed its performance has improved in the last few months for the best (just a little, mind you).

 

[igeticsu 3,400]

11 pages of comments and not passed to the devs? I just saw a suggestion that was passed to devs after a total of 6 comments (only two people posting 3 comments each)

[Nudelblitz 22,006]

YES, finally, someone supplies me with something that looks like actual data to further reduce my ignorance. I was unaware (duh, should have imagined it) that there were different values for the different turrets that were actually made, you mind telling me the source of these scans (photos?) for future reference?

Kampfpanzer Maus: Der überschwere Panzer Porsche Typ 205

made by Michael Fröhlich

[Ruslan_DR 686]

YES, finally, someone supplies me with something that looks like actual data to further reduce my ignorance. I was unaware (duh, should have imagined it) that there were different values for the different turrets that were actually made, you mind telling me the source of these scans (photos?) for future reference?

 

Yes, i am aware of the penetration and spalsh damage issues of the 128mm Pak44/KwK44. I know that gaijin used the penetration values of the 128mm Pak40 (flak gun mounted on the Sturer Emil) as reference for the Pak44, which is incorrect taking into account that the propellant charges on the Pak 40 were smaller, hence producing less acceleration. Yet the Pak44 has its propper acceleration (in paper) with the lower acceleration penetration values applied to it.

 

Also comical how the 122mm APHE rounds can do up to twice as much damage as the 128mm APHE rounds, despite the later being not only larger but also having almost 4 times the amount of explosive filler. And with the recent APDS nerf they applied i fear that if they ever give the KwK44 this round is all going to be with entirely imaginary values. If they can ignore obvious and plentiful data imagine what will they do with a shell as obscure as this one.

 

The one thing that keeps me hopefull is that they were messing around with this gun recently, i've noticed its performance has improved in the last few months for the best (just a little, mind you).

 

improved how? I mean, I shot through the front of an IS-3 on straight angle, from a distance this time so i suppose there's that.

Edited February 3, 2016 by Ruslan_DR

[Ruslan_DR 686]

so, after trying AP in customs some more more i've realised that it has changed since I played it. Normally i snipe HE into the lower gun mantlets of the M60, M103, T-10, T-54 series, and some others, all onehit kills to the ammo. I did this because way back when AP sucked a lot worse i basically elected to go only HE, with AP used sparingly. If given correct pen AP would be a good default, with this APDS being used for harder targets like the T95, T32, and SU-122-54 as well as others.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Ruslan_DR

[GeckesPilotHUN 2,391]

Am I wrong? but I saw this topic among the passed to develoment threads with 4 others and now this topic is opened again, or I just dreamed?  :Os

[SmartSkull007 2,990]

Am I wrong? but I saw this topic among the passed to develoment threads with 4 others and now this topic is opened again, or I just dreamed? :Os

I thought it was as well...
Mods?

[arczer25 5,202]

i also saw that, strange.

 

maybe some mod was :my_precious:

[_Iluminas_ 3,769]

yep even liked him it was him

http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/user/196089-sauber-kh7/

[GeckesPilotHUN 2,391]

We have to execute him then  :zlo:

[Ruslan_DR 686]

Aw, you mean i missed briefly when it was passed? ;3;

 

Damn now i'm all sad. It got passed and then it got un-passed, so cruel.

 

 

Also, if this round is sub-caliber, can we shove it into smaller-caliber guns like 122's and 105's? It's essentially an 88mm flying at insane velocity.

Edited February 3, 2016 by Ruslan_DR

[juraleona 3,944]

 

Also, if this round is sub-caliber, can we shove it into smaller-caliber guns like 122's and 105's? It's essentially an 88mm flying at insane velocity.

It could be done... Though, it would require diffrent sabot, but that is it.

[HerrSektor 3,840]

at least, no muzzle breake Tier IV cannons should have this round... im including Panther F and II, 128mms Tigers

[juraleona 3,944]

Panther F 

88mm penetrator, 75mm gun.

How the hell.

[SmartSkull007 2,990]

88mm penetrator, 75mm gun.
How the hell.

Magick ))))

[juraleona 3,944]

But senpai, it will not fit.  :dntknw:

[CokeSpray 7,274]

The thread was moved before time (along with a couple others) by mistake.  This (and other threads in question) will be moved back to "Passed to Development" in due time with the full batch of suggestions intended for passing. I hope this clarified some things up and I apologize for the confusion.  8)s 

[GeckesPilotHUN 2,391]

The thread was moved before time (along with a couple others) by mistake.  This (and other threads in question) will be moved back to "Passed to Development" in due time with the full batch of suggestions intended for passing. I hope this clarified some things up and I apologize for the confusion.  8)s 

meh I don't know I should believe to you... it sounds so strange :S 

[Ruslan_DR 686]

88mm penetrator, 75mm gun.

How the hell.

 

To be fair, the "book of sabots" that I posted before (which the images F'd off.) showed several sizes of sabot rounds including ones for 75, IDK about those, but i know the 10.5 tiger also had a sabot based on an 8.8cm

 

You can check the link for yourself! It'd be fairer now what with the brits having them. Then again, they have them because they can't pen anyone WITHOUT them XD

Edited February 3, 2016 by Ruslan_DR

[Ruslan_DR 686]

It could be done... Though, it would require diffrent sabot, but that is it.

 

Oh, what I meant was can we shoot down the barrel of a T-10m with our 88mm shells, and destroy their gun breech :v

 

Because sabots have different models, modeled with the rings still attached.

Edited February 3, 2016 by Ruslan_DR

[Draken_lord 9,320]

Because sabots have different models, modeled with the rings still attached.

 

I just... what...

[BuBBa9R 749]

I think they should be implemented into the game for a balance point of view. The 1 and most glaring reason the Germans did not use APDS was the short supply of tungsten material for the core. This is not a realistic sim game anymore and far from it, it would be great for balance. On the same hand though, Gaijin would have to give back all the pen values for the nerfed rounds for APDS and HESH rounds and fix the 120 mm guns of the M 103 and Conqueror.  Also video does not work anymore?

Edited February 4, 2016 by BuBBa9R

[Ruslan_DR 686]

I just... what...

 

Ever seen a sabot round in the killcam? There's usually ridges along it, where the discarding sabot goes which means it seems to be modeled with it still on.

 

 

I think they should be implemented into the game for a balance point of view. The 1 and most glaring reason the Germans did not use APDS was the short supply of tungsten material for the core. This is not a realistic sim game anymore and far from it, it would be great for balance.

 

Yeah, they realised they needed it. Like the maus, it was a thing that was never really completed. 

 

I mean yes, maus was built and all, but just the one, same for the handfull of sabots. If you scaled production of each it would be feasible!

Edited February 4, 2016 by Ruslan_DR

[Choogleblitz 10,205]

Coming back to the performance of the round, I've seen plenty of above 400 mm figures pop up about it, hell even 450+ figures. How exactly is this being achieved? I mean, wasn't it originally 350-ish at the muzzle? How has it creeped up so much? In comparison, the 3BM11 was quoted at 455 @ muzzle, the 3BM7 at 370 @ muzzle, and the very similar to the 128 APDS in this case - 3BM8 at 350 @ muzzle. All on the USN standard. Anyone want to explain what changed, if anything actually did? I really can't understand how something so similar to the 3BM8 can walk away with so much more performance. I mean, it walks past the 3BM7 which has a truck load more energy.

Edited February 4, 2016 by Choogleblitz

[Ruslan_DR 686]

Coming back to the performance of the round, I've seen plenty of above 400 mm figures pop up about it, hell even 450+ figures. How exactly is this being achieved? I mean, wasn't it originally 350-ish at the muzzle? How has it creeped up so much? In comparison, the 3BM11 was quoted at 455 @ muzzle, the 3BM7 at 370 @ muzzle, and the very similar to the 128 APDS in this case - 3BM8 at 350 @ muzzle. All on the USN standard. Anyone want to explain what changed, if anything actually did? I really can't understand how something so similar to the 3BM8 can walk away with so much more performance. I mean, it walks past the 3BM7 which has a truck load more energy.

 

No idea, considering the correct data is down at the bottom of the post with a physical test. It'd make the maus more useable for sure. Penning the front of many-a-turret!