tanks/vehicles GER Leopard 1A5 for 9.0/3 (with apfsds)

[Necrons31467 14,236]

47 minutes ago, tavo89 said:

 

 

 

Wait, you don't actually think that those are penetration figures right?

[tavo89 381]

54 minutes ago, dotEXCEL said:

those are all 120mm shells.

but way better pen against angled armout than these russian shells.

DM23 has 385mm pen at 10m

 

Range: 1000m

DM23: 360/400mm

3BM3: 300mm (T-62)Game info

3BM25: 290mm (T-55)Game info

T320: 260mm (T95E1)Game info

http://echo501.tripod.com/Military/105ammo.htm

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php/Ammunition_Data

 

 

 

Edited June 17, 2017 by tavo89

[tavo89 381]

50 minutes ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

 

Wait, you don't actually think that those are penetration figures right?

 We are talking about ammunition dm23

[Rohrkrepiererer 1,393]

Just now, tavo89 said:

 We are talking about ammunition dm23

 

And it clearly says: Diameter 32mm and length of 360mm

[dotEXCEL 5,969]

55 minutes ago, tavo89 said:

 

Range: 1000m

DM23: 360/400mm

3BM3: 300mm (T-62)Game info

3BM25: 290mm (T-55)Game info

T320: 260mm (T95E1)Game info

http://echo501.tripod.com/Military/105ammo.htm

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php/Ammunition_Data

 

 

 

both not hisorical sources. only estimations

[tavo89 381]

13 minutes ago, dotEXCEL said:

dude just admit that you were wrong. it doesnt hurt i promise

 

thing is that we double designated our shells. some of the 105 and 120 have the same name

12 minutes ago, dotEXCEL said:

both not hisorical sources. only estimations

What are the real values?

 

[Necrons31467 14,236]

46 minutes ago, tavo89 said:

 We are talking about ammunition dm23

 

That comment has nothing to do with what I asked whatsoever.

Edited June 17, 2017 by Necrons31467

[_Catweazle_63 9,834]

If you guys want to continue to discus then please refrain from the childish insults, inflammatory comments and demeaning remarks towards those not agreeing.

 

If this proves too difficult then there is no other option then to deal with those that can't keep it civil and constructive and close this thread

 

[Rohrkrepiererer 1,393]

32 minutes ago, _Catweazle_63 said:

If you guys want to continue to discus then please refrain from the childish insults, inflammatory comments and demeaning remarks towards those not agreeing.

 

If this proves too difficult then there is no other option then to deal with those that can't keep it civil and constructive and close this thread

 

You can agree and disagree on opinions, not facts though ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[RefrigerRaider 563]

Thought about wanting to bring this suggestion back alive since T-64 and M60A1 RISE Passive is actually gonna be added to game

https://warthunder.com/en/news/4906-gamescom-t-64a-the-pioneer-of-a-new-era-en

[Rohrkrepiererer 1,393]

Yup, seems appropriate.

[Admiral_Aruon 2,264]

3 hours ago, Rohrkrepiererer said:

Yup, seems appropriate.

 

agreed. the Leo 1A6 makes so much sense now. and the Leo 1A3A3 and 1A5 with the DM23 APFSDS now look borderline manditory.

 

plus lets face it, even with little to no applique armor, #justleopardthings works well as as Explosive Rageinducing Armor.

[Rohrkrepiererer 1,393]

1 hour ago, Admiral_Aruon said:

 

agreed. the Leo 1A6 makes so much sense now. and the Leo 1A3A3 and 1A5 with the DM23 APFSDS now look borderline manditory.

 

plus lets face it, even with little to no applique armor, #justleopardthings works well as as Explosive Rageinducing Armor.

 

None of the Leopards ever mounted ERA as far as I can remember. At least there were no packages in serial production. 

However I could imagine the 1A3, then A4, and then 1A5 as a last Tier IV tank for now. Main upgrades would be better ammo on the A3, then better ammo plus composites on the A4, and then even better ammo plus FCS on the A5. To me that sounds very well rounded for a Tier 6 MBT line, with the new Tier VII beginning with the Leopard 2AV or some Kpz Keiler variant.

You get the gist.

Also, if I were Gaijin, I would very seriously think about dropping the reload speed of the L7A3 cannons down to 4-5 seconds (as they would be historically accurate that way) since you have basically no advantage over the T64A if that were not to happen. Yes, you get no gun depression in that thing, however it can afford to crest hills with it's composite armor, and it goes just as fast as a Leopard does now.

 

Edited August 22, 2017 by Rohrkrepiererer

[RefrigerRaider 563]

On 8/22/2017 at 2:33 PM, Rohrkrepiererer said:

Yup, seems appropriate.

The only ingame features of this tank would be availability of more advanced ammunition and better FCS.

[Josh_Yong 328]

I wonder if MEXAS would be a possibility for the 1A5

[Rohrkrepiererer 1,393]

14 hours ago, Josh_Yong said:

I wonder if MEXAS would be a possibility for the 1A5

 

That would just be ridiculous at this point. Or that's what I think it would be at least. It adds Leopard 2 protection levels to a Leopard 1...

[dotEXCEL 5,969]

2 hours ago, Rohrkrepiererer said:

 

That would just be ridiculous at this point. Or that's what I think it would be at least. It adds Leopard 2 protection levels to a Leopard 1...

never say never xD

[Nope 10,634]

9 hours ago, Rohrkrepiererer said:

It adds Leopard 2 protection levels to a Leopard 1...

 

It can't. The composite array is far thinner than that of the Leopard 2 even when factoring in the steel UFP behind the module. Probably won't stop 2A46 shells other than HEAT.

[RefrigerRaider 563]

but Mexas is late 90s tech, which makes the canadian leopard a 90s tank using 90s munitions and stuff

Edited August 25, 2017 by RefrigerRaider

[Nope 10,634]

6 hours ago, RefrigerRaider said:

but Mexas is late 90s tech, which makes the canadian leopard a 90s tank using 90s munitions and stuff

 

Regardless of era, composite cannot exceed its own LoS in terms of KE protection. The MEXAS modules are rather thin.

[Koty1996 457]

On 25. 8. 2017 at 11:18 AM, Nope said:

 

Regardless of era, composite cannot exceed its own LoS in terms of KE protection. The MEXAS modules are rather thin.

Unless you mix in materials with better RHAe than RHA  which is like late 1980's stuff

...then there is NERA and that perforated armour on Leo2, those do all kinds of classified magic.

[Fonz_408@psn 941]

Think ive said yes to this before so +2 

[Nope 10,634]

3 hours ago, Koty1996 said:

Unless you mix in materials with better RHAe than RHA  which is like late 1980's stuff

...then there is NERA and that perforated armour on Leo2, those do all kinds of classified magic.

 

If that were the case, then all development of APFSDS has been useless as well as all future development of armor. See, the Leopard 2A4's UFP is 640mm LoS. The Abrams's LoS thickness varies from 650mm to 700mm. The Soviet design MBTs (anything based off the T-64 and T-72) have LoS thickness in the 630mm region. Now, the original M1 Abrams has around 400mm KE resistance frontally. This is worse by a massive amount compared to the LoS thickness, and the 400mm figure actually comes straight from the CIA out of all people. One may argue that HAP changed things up with DU inserts, but to catch up from a 300mm deficiency is enormous. This would mean the development of HAP, which has continued for 2 entire decades since the introduction of the M1A1HA, has been a complete waste of time. This also goes for the Russians, with their famous Kontakt-5 ERA. Kontakt-5 has been advertised by NII Stali as being capable of helping their current tanks acquire immunity to M829A1: a round that can penetrate around 600mm of 230 BHN RHA according to the Lanz-Odermatt equation. But wait, 600mm is definitely under the LoS thickness. Why even bother mentioning this? After all, M829A1 should already do nothing to existing tanks of the time, right? There's simply no way any composite made even to this day can exceed the LoS of the entire module in terms of KE protection without creating massive contradictions.

[Retry 7,363]

31 minutes ago, Nope said:

If that were the case, then all development of APFSDS has been useless as well as all future development of armor.

Take the following as true: There exist materials for which have greater RHAe than RHA.

If the above is true, there exists at least one composition for which an armor type's effective RHAe thickness exceeds its LoS thickness: a homogeneous slab of that tougher material.

Since the above is true, there must consist more combinations of materials that yield a RHAe thickness> LoS thickness.  sandwiching material A with a RHAe of 2 against KE with regular RHA in a thickness of 500-100-400 would, after all, be composite armor, and have a greater KE protection than its LoS thickness.

 

Therefore, the claim

On 8/25/2017 at 4:18 AM, Nope said:

Regardless of era, composite cannot exceed its own LoS in terms of KE protection. The MEXAS modules are rather thin.

must necessarily be false.

[Nope 10,634]

2 hours ago, Retry said:

Take the following as true: There exist materials for which have greater RHAe than RHA.

If the above is true, there exists at least one composition for which an armor type's effective RHAe thickness exceeds its LoS thickness: a homogeneous slab of that tougher material.

Since the above is true, there must consist more combinations of materials that yield a RHAe thickness> LoS thickness.  sandwiching material A with a RHAe of 2 against KE with regular RHA in a thickness of 500-100-400 would, after all, be composite armor, and have a greater KE protection than its LoS thickness.

 

Therefore, the claim

must necessarily be false.

 

Sure, there may be materials whose KE RHSe exceeds that of RHA itself for a given volume. However, it would be impossible to have the necessary HEAT protection that composite armor was designed to stop in the first place. Nowadays the HEAT warheads definitely exceeded the 800mm penetration mark, and thus armor must be upgraded to stop such projectiles. To stop HEAT rounds, one would need to give the worst possible environment for the liner, and this will require spacing the armor modules, which themselves contain air too. This cannot stop KE that well, hence why armor like that hasn't ever reached KE resistance superior to the LoS of the module. There's also weight to take into account, as composite armor holds the best protection for a given weight restriction. As composite designed to stop KE would have a worse HEAT resistance by default (if this were true such composite would have been used in the first place), the tank would either suffer heavily from HEAT ammunition that's more commonplace than APFSDS that is only fired out of vehicles or end up horrendously overweight. Because of this, composite armor actually fielded cannot have KE resistance higher than the LoS of the module.

Edited August 27, 2017 by Nope