30mm damage to Tanks

[uhoh7]

1. Are you sure DCS simulates real armor penetration by AP rounds? Otherwiese all your in-game tests do not make any sense.

 

2. In reality some rounds penetration level is classified others not. Unfortunately we have both examples in the game. So even direct real comparison between them is impossible. We can only guess...

 

As noted by EB, there is some modeling of varied armor thicknesses in some vehicles, but DMs are still primitive.

 

There's RL and there's BSL. We all hope they get closer and closer, but it's worthwhile to know what works in BSL.

[Brute]

I've had resonable success with firing Vikhrs in pairs (singles have little effect) which seems odd - in GW1 TOWs had little trouble with T-72s and a Vikhr is twice the weight, so I would guess has at least comparible armour penetration.

 

Don't waste your missiles. A single Vikhr will take out a T-72 just fine. After it hits you'll see smoke coming out of the turret. It will catch fire and explode shortly thereafter - you just have to wait. Works nearly every time here.

[uhoh7]

Don't waste your missiles. A single Vikhr will take out a T-72 just fine. After it hits you'll see smoke coming out of the turret. It will catch fire and explode shortly thereafter - you just have to wait. Works nearly every time here.

 

yes, only the abrams and the leo take two. Don't know about the french tank i think is in there.

 

So without detailed armor modeling our discussion about various rounds efficiency is pointless.

 

Besides I'd like to know what exactly type of 30 mm 2A42 AP rounds is utilized in DCS Ka-50? In reality there is two such rounds:

 

- 3UBR6 AP-T - armor penetration 20 mm at 60 degrees at 700 m

- 3UBR8 APDS - armor penetration 25 mm at 60 degrees at 1500 m

 

according to official Rosoboronexport data.

 

As we can there is huge difference between their lethality!

 

Interesting regarding the two types. Again, RK the diference betweetn RL and BSL is not pointless to my mind. I think ED prides itself on fidelity, as we we see in the FM. I think we may see some improvements, and discussions like these won't hurt in prioritising what might be improved.

Edited January 19, 2009 by uhoh7

[Yo-Yo]

So without detailed armor modeling our discussion about various rounds efficiency is pointless.

 

Besides I'd like to know what exactly type of 30 mm 2A42 AP rounds is utilized in DCS Ka-50? In reality there is two such rounds:

 

- 3UBR6 AP-T - armor penetration 20 mm at 60 degrees at 700 m

- 3UBR8 APDS - armor penetration 25 mm at 60 degrees at 1500 m

 

according to official Rosoboronexport data.

 

As we can there is huge difference between their lethality!

 

The second one is not modelled in ED because it was never shot from Ka-50 because they are much more expensive.

Only HE-T and AP-T are modelled.

[uhoh7]

- 22 mm at 500 m equals 35 mm at 90 degrees

- 18 mm at 1000 m equals 28 mm at 90 degrees

- 14 mm at 1500 m equals 22 mm at 90 degrees

 

Well that at least explains why AP rounds do not work well at 3k, hehe.

[2win_TOWR]

 

- 22 mm at 500 m equals 35 mm at 90 degrees

- 18 mm at 1000 m equals 28 mm at 90 degrees

- 14 mm at 1500 m equals 22 mm at 90 degrees

 

 

different sources, different data:

 

at range 500 m: 30 mm

at range 1000 m: 28 mm

at range 1500 m: 25 mm

 

http://www.mlmintl.com/30x165mmAP-AP-T.pdf

 

so a Bradley & Co. should be aware of a gun run.

 

 

 

Btw.

the settings for HE-round´s seems to be not accurate.

 

Explosive fill: (ingame 72 g) (supplier: 48.5 g)

V° : (ingame 980m/s) (supplier: 960m/s)

 

http://www.mlmintl.com/30x165mmHE.pdf

 

Makes a pretty difference as i just found out. With 48.5 g explosive filled HE-rounds its hard to kill a bradley frontal.

Edited January 19, 2009 by 2win_TOWR

[Esac_mirmidon]

And all this discussion about penetration capabilities of the Ka-50 gun when the MAIN weapon against tanks and armored vehicles is the Vikhr?

 

I can´t imagine an scenario where a Ka-50 pilot could choose his gun instead of his missiles against an armored vehicle or a tank. 2000 meters maximum against 7500-8000. I would not waste a second thinking. I am using the best weapon from the longest distance available to engage the enemy.

 

Someone is really bored out there.

Edited January 20, 2009 by Esac_mirmidon

[uhoh7]

And all this discussion about penetration capabilities of the Ka-50 gun when the MAIN weapon against tanks and armored vehicles is the Vikhr?

 

I can´t imagine an scenario where a Ka-50 pilot could choose his gun instead of his missiles against an armored vehicle or a tank. 2000 meters maximum against 7500-8000. I would not waste a second thinking. I am using the best weapon from the longest distance available to engage the enemy.

 

Someone is really bored out there.

 

Vikhrs are precious in the GOC, my friend. Waste them and goals are unachievable.

[Frederf]

There are too many ED-made missions with 50 tanks and 12 Vikhrs.

[Focha]

There are too many ED-made missions with 50 tanks and 12 Vikhrs.

 

Work in team. :) 12x4=48 now kill the other 2 with some rockets. Lol.

 

Regards.

[uhoh7]

There are too many ED-made missions with 50 tanks and 12 Vikhrs.

 

LOL, seems that way at first for sure. As I slowly get better, and prirotise threats, only using vikhrs against relevant MBTs and especially fearsome SAM placements, and trying to keep my wingie alive long enought help out, it's less an issue.

 

UPDATE: somebody needs to send a memo to the mi-24 pilots on this subject. Tonite in the GOC about halfway through the missions in a hasty attack, I followed one as he made repeated strafing runs, guns only, on an Abrams.

 

Who gave Georgia that tank anyway? I hate those things.

 

I just looked it up, georgia never has had that tank, just T-72s. I guess wags figured it would be more interesting to let them have it so we could try out our 1985 helicopter prototype on it. A little more testing.....

 

Well I was reading wags campaign brief again, and he covers himself on this one---western powers have granted georgia hi-tech weapons and training.

Edited January 20, 2009 by uhoh7

[Esac_mirmidon]

I can think more.

 

The Ka-50 is not developed, not suited for the classical attack helicopter role. The main role is low level conflicts against poor equipped terrorist like enemies, in very difficult terrain areas.

 

In this secenario the cannon and the rockets are well suited, no missiles needed in general. See the document about the employment in Chechnya.

 

Exposing the Ka-50 against hard targets like MBT engaging it with the cannon when i can fire a missile is not an option. If i spent all my missiles and a hard target is spotted the best way is RTB and tell other forces where they are.

 

But you know, i am only thinking a bit.

[192nd_Erdem]

I can think more.

 

The Ka-50 is not developed, not suited for the classical attack helicopter role.

 

Opposite - It was developed exactly for being a Tank Killer with it's definitive weapon Vikhr.

 

Political and economical problems forced it to become active in small numbers and take part in anti-terror operations.

[Esac_mirmidon]

And the final result was? No FLIR, no LLLTV, no night capabilities, no radar. If the original intention was a pure antitank helicopter, the result is very different.

[Boberro]

And the final result was? No FLIR, no LLLTV, no night capabilities, no radar. If the original intention was a pure antitank helicopter, the result is very different.

 

It is sad but true...

 

Ka-50 capabilities are ekhm weak at present warfare. Lacks of avionics, lack of weapons, lack of almost everything.

[Yo-Yo]

It is sad but true...

 

Ka-50 capabilities are ekhm weak at present warfare. Lacks of avionics, lack of weapons, lack of almost everything.

 

 

It reminds me one of Murphy's law: If you are short of everything except enemies, you're in combat.

[Esac_mirmidon]

But i enjoy every second i fly with it.

 

Weak in comparisson but not toothless at all..

[2win_TOWR]

Simply this machine is 20 years old. In Russia time stopped - in the West did not. Therefore Ka-50 is superior to Mi-24 but looks poorly compared to present Western gunships.

 

 

And with this knowledge, you should scrap or sell your copy and stop complaining. Im sure, some would really appreciate this. :thumbup:

Edited January 20, 2009 by 2win_TOWR

[Boberro]

Good point, Boberro! However we can still read that Ka-50 is "Havoc" or "Black Shark"...toothless of course! :lol:

 

It is not new machine, however it is absolutely not toothless. I don't think you would stay in one place when you would see flying Ka-50 into you ;)

[mckee14]

toothless?

 

sure, one can not fly with autopilot-terrainfollowing in pitch dark at 300km/h, while looking 20km with the FLIR, track heatsignatures, deploy fire-and-forget missiles over 20km and sing the song of glory halleluja.

 

but, one can deploy 40 rockets in a camp of evil persons, one can take out heavy armoured vehicles over 7km distance while they are on the move, one can support ground troops in urban areas with a kick-ass-30mm gun, one can fly really awesome maneuvers while hiding between some buildings, one can share targets over datalink and still having a good sense for the environment by staying in contact with the abris.

 

i really love new technologies, modern weapon development and stuff, but i totally fell in love with this (rusty harhar) piece of flying metal - because it not only needs to learn 100 buttons to complete all the tasks by semi-automatic systems, but it needs skill to fly this beauty...

[DiabloSP]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, they say. And I think the Ka-50 is a beautiful piece of russian-made hardware. Makes you feel warm inside when you finish a mission, it was your hand and brains which made it, not your ultra-modern carbon-fiber and kevlar composite machine with radars and thermal vision. It was not even your co-pilot who took the shots. It was all you and the machine. Like in the old times. Beautiful.

[ZaltysZ]

I have had a fortune and killed T72 with 30mm AP today. 900m, 60 degrees, turret and engine compartment as aim point. It took about 100 rounds.

[mckee14]

found some nice close-ups from 30mm GAU-8 hits:

[CE_Mikemonster]

I'm sure you could get a mobility kill on an M1 Abrams if you hit the rear with AP cannon fire. The engine block would increase the 'crew survivability' indeed, but by sacrificing itself.

 

Frontal armour is all very well - but has anyone mentioned the armour depths and strengths on the BACK of the turret?

 

M1 has the ammunition compartment there, deliberately seperated from the crew compartment. What would happen if an AP round penetrated into this cavity?

 

http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/US-Field-Manuals/abrams-oif.pdf

(I don't think that this is by any means a reliable source - it seems put together by spurious experts and armchair warriors 'Team Abrams' EH?)

 

 

EDIT; after another look it looks like the M1 has an APU externally on the rear of the turret (Latest SEP models have it internally). This can lead to ignited external storage dripping onto engine. On the upside the blast doors seperating the crew from the ammunition in the turret seem to do their job well, but any penetration and secondary explosion there would still take the tank out of combat.

Edited February 2, 2009 by CE_Mikemonster

[Jagr]

There are a few spots that the cannon would kockout a M1A2 in real life but not in the game. It proably won't work very well against Bradley armor either, atleast not the front.

 

Don't bet your life on that opinion :)

 

The 30mm in the Ka50 (and most other helos) has a fairly low velocity compared to ground or vehicle mounted weapons, its penetratin is fairly low versus MBT's especially with composite armor. Even top down shots are going to have great difficulty doing much more than damage optics and other externally mounted items..and of course piss them off at you..