the M829 is overperforming

[gbem]

hi... the DM33 irl is equivalent to the M829 in penetration rating around 550mm at 2km under nato penetration standards in contrast to the 560-540mm at 2km of the M829

however ingame the penetration of the DM-33 drops down much faster than the M829 with an apdamagerange of 51000 and a base damage of 540 with 498 at 2km in contrast to the M829 which gets 70000 and a base damage of 550 with 519 at 2km... this means that the DM-33 not only has less penetration than the M829... it loses its penetration faster than the M829... this is inconsistent with NATO penetration data which indicates the M829 and the DM33 should have similar performance at 2km...

ive brought up the 3bm42 for additional comparison aswell 40000 apdamagerange and 540 base damage... these values makes sense as the penetration drops relatively quickly for both the mango 3bm42 and the vant 3bm32 in contrast to the DM33...i might add another inconsistency where the vant should have higher penetration at a range than the mango but that is a topic for a later date....however when compared to the m829 it becomes apparent that the M829 seems a bit out of place...

sources i still cannot quote since the forums wont let me post links for 7 days... i will give sources for all 3 of my proposed changes in 7 days... however my source for this data is janes IHS...

[exsonic01]

Nope, actually opposite. All DU shells in this game slightly underestimated from previously known estimations.

[gbem]

janes quotes the penetration of the DM33 at 560mm 2km while the M829 has 540mm at 2km... US army manuals also have estimates for the M829 ranging from 560 to 550mm at 2km... (nato penetration standards)

meanwhile ingame the M829 has 519mm at 2km and 498mm at 2km... their 2km performance should be similar however the M829 itself is considerably stronger...

[exsonic01]

meanwhile ingame the M829 has 519mm at 2km and 498mm at 2km... their 2km performance should be similar however the M829 itself is considerably stronger...

I'm confused with about your comment.

But anyway, 120mm DM33 is no better than M829. 560mm at 2km is for DM43A1, not DM33. IIRC 2km DM33 have 460~470mm from Swedish tank test.

[gbem]

Those numbers are ingame penetration at 2km... apdamage*(1-(range/apdamagerange))^2

Ill doublecheck janes... just went off

[Remmes]

You are obviously an authority on munition types and SOP,’s etc, but please stop spamming these forums with all the things that are not right within the game. After all it is just a game, you either like it or you don’t, that is your good right. If you don’t like it, you could decide to not play it or mod it to your taste. The big question for me for me ( i haven’t bought the game yet) if it is FUN to play. That ammo type x does not meet expectations mentioned by source y is of
little to no conisideration, but the fun and good time factor is.

[nikolas93TS]

As I said, there are no reliable formulas for estimating the penetration characteristics of depleted uranium rounds, as we don't yet have accurate data points for them. All calculations for the penetration values of DU rounds I have seen until now are derived from Odermatt formula originally made for tungsten and steel perpetrators and simply modified by using a value multiplier (sometimes called "material modifier") which is no more than estimated constant. Therefore estimates tend to vary a lot.

But without even going onto theoretical discussions, Jane's is simply not a reliable source. For example, they copied Fofanov estimates for Soviet rounds, and we have seen those are quite obsolete today. Or I have seen their reports mixing vertical and horizontal angles for penetration etc.
Jane's is open-source intelligence provider (excellent to that matter), but should be treated as such. They fill up the holes when nothing else is available, but otherwise take their data with grain of salt.

[Rosseau]

IMO, it is quite fun to play, Remmes.

It's different from Flashpoint: Red Storm, which is a great game in its own right. Many, many more options; not that FPRS lacks them.

It's a little like a totally revamped, modern version of a game like Steel Panthers MBT. People worked really hard on SPMBT, but old guy that I am, I could no longer deal with the UI, graphics and some other issues. AB fixed everything and adds a lot. I played the free version, but had no idea the release version would be so good!

[nikolas93TS]

Keeping in mind that we are where Steel Panthers were back in 1995-1996. Still a plenty of features to add!

[gbem]

i am not an authority on data and penetrations but i like being nitpicky with my data and there`s no harm in that... as per the game i love the game... needs a few things like resupply options.. a dynamic campaign mode (imagine total war or wargame ALB) and air superiority fighters but as of the moment the game is awesome enough as it is... certainly has more potential and more content than the original european escalation eugen released... never even had planes in the 1st game XD

[gbem]

curious... do you have a source on the penetration of the DM33 at 2km? the swedish tests were done on the 105mm DM33... the sources i use state their penetration is similar at 2km... if so then one round is clearly over/under performing

[gbem]

same image for the m829 and new data for the DM-33... this case its a JM33






DM/JM33
Material Tungsten
Total length 511 mm
Diameter 27 mm
Frustum length 68 mm
Frustum diameter upper base 6 mm
Density 17600 kg/m^3 (assumed mango density)
Impact velocity 1.650 km/s

The perforation length is 523.3 mm.

M829
Material DU
Total length 513 mm
Diameter 27 mm
Frustum length 105 mm
Frustum diameter upper base 6 mm
Density 17500 kg/m^3
Impact velocity 1.670 /s

The perforation length is 496.7 mm.

the DM-33 is also monoblock like the m829 and should perform similarly against NERA and ERA unlike the mango... its clear the DM-33 is underperforming... OR the m829 is overperforming...

correction: the DM33 is monoblock but has a very specific penetrator designed against composite armor arrays... it only works against the first layer however unlike segmented penetrators...

[exsonic01]

Swedish tank test is 120mm DM33, showed around 460 to 470mm

[gbem]

were they? with what penetration criteria? i have another source which indicates 550mm penetration for the DM33
here

also i plugged the DM33 and the M829 into the odermatt equation and the DM33 outperforms it at point blank ranges at the very least... 2km performance cannot be solved for using the odermatt equation (since we dont know its velocity at 2km)

also although tankograd cites 480mm of penetration for the DM33 at 2km it also cites its increased efficiency vs monoblock penetrators vs composite armor in a similar (but less extensive) fashion to segmented penetrators thanks to its improved tip design

segmented penetrators

special tip design from tankograd

[gbem]

also
"The Soviet standard for calculating the penetration limit of armour piercing projectiles is V80, meaning that the expected consistency of achieving full armour perforation given a certain projectile velocity must be 80%. In formulas, V80 must replace V50 (50% chance of armour perforation). For example, if a certain projectile has to penetrate 500mm of steel, then at least 80% of all projectiles of that type must achieve that standard. Also, the Soviet criteria for a full armour perforation dictates that 80% of projectile mass must be recorded on the other side of the target plate as opposed to U.S Army criteria which only requires that a hole is produced in the armour such that light can be seen from the other side. Overall, Soviet standards were not only stricter, but the steel they used for targets was sometimes of a greater hardness than NATO targets. In reality, the given penetration data may be an underrepresentation of the actual achievable penetration of these shells."

the US army consideres a hole produced in the armor a penetration already... the swedes may be using V50 which means the data will be skewed in favour of american ammunition while soviet ammunition would be even further underrepresented against since they use V80 + high hardness steel while NATO uses medium hardness...

the odermatt equation is a more... fair comparison of such rounds than these estimates as penetration criteria may be standardized...



note a similar situation existed with ww2 sources with people stating the 85mm was drastically inferior to the american 76mm (when firing APCBCHE for both)...
meanwhile a standardized calculation (ww2 ballistics and gunnery) actually proved the contrary with 85mm APBCHE rounds being superior to american APCBCHE rounds (M62)... only the solid shot (m79) outperformed the BR-365... (the soviets never fielded solid shot for the 85mm)

judging by the numbers though contrasted against older rounds... id say the DM33 the vant and the mango need the buffs