Let's see what will happen if a APFSDS hit a tank in reality and in A3

[Damian90 697]

You are wrong Panther.

DM11 is a programmable HE round, there is no shaped charge inside, so nothing similiar to MPAT.

And DM12 is classified as HEAT-MP-T not MPAT, same as it's americanized version M830. The only MPAT round used today is M830A1.

However US Army will replace M830, M830A1, M908 and M1028 with new, advanced multipurpose, programmable HE round the XM1069 AMP.

http://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2013/APR_JUN/Peralta_McNaboe.html

However this round needs a data link in gun and fire control system, it is yet unknown if M1 tanks will receive upgraded M256 gun with data link, or this new gun XM360E1.

Programmable HE ammunition is more capable than HEAT or MPAT ammo. It can defeat more efficently lightly armored vehicles like BMP's, but is also more effective against structures and enemy infantry hidden for example behind a sand berm.

Israelis are also using two programmable HE rounds, the 105mm "Kalanit" and a 120mm round which designation I forgot.

Also Russians have a modification for their tanks and HE ammunition. The system is designated "Ainet", it contains fire control system upgrade, autoloader upgrade in form of programming device and replacement of conventional fuze with programmable fuze in HE ammunition.

[Hellbeard 10]

Well, from the looks of the brochure the DM11 looks like it has a hollow charge in a British configuration, fragmenting jacket and particles with point detonation, time delay and airburst modes. So it's Multi Purpose- the purposes being killing infantry, hard skins, soft skins and helicopters(not always? edit: no proximity so I guess not for the DM11).

The Israeli APAM isn't an HE round, though like many it does explode highly, it's Anti Person Anti Material.

http://www.imi-israel.com/home/doc.aspx?mCatID=67056

from the brochure:

"Effective against all targets on the modern battlefield:

Field fortifications and bunkers

Light armored vehicles

Infantry and AT squads

Helicopters and hovercrafts"

The idea isn't that there are no exploding tank rounds, that's obviously wrong. Just that the pure strain HE round has been obviated. You only have so much room for ammo in the tank so if you need one that's good against infantry either get one that's really really useful for infantry- like a flechette or a smart multi modal airburst ammo, or get one that's good for infantry AND soft/hard targets.

For clarification, when I say HE I mean a round that's only impact explosives and no other additions(though I guess a fragmenting jacket doesn't stray too far from it to be considered distinct).

The idea being that HE, HEAT, HEDP, HE-MP, HESH and other explodies are all technically distinct from one another.

To contribute, seriously, we need the APAM in the game. So cool.

Edits: accuracy, clarity. Spelling.

Edited September 16, 2013 by Hellbeard

[PantherAl 11]

You are wrong Panther.

DM11 is a programmable HE round, there is no shaped charge inside, so nothing similiar to MPAT.

And DM12 is classified as HEAT-MP-T not MPAT, same as it's americanized version M830. The only MPAT round used today is M830A1.

However US Army will replace M830, M830A1, M908 and M1028 with new, advanced multipurpose, programmable HE round the XM1069 AMP.

http://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2013/APR_JUN/Peralta_McNaboe.html

However this round needs a data link in gun and fire control system, it is yet unknown if M1 tanks will receive upgraded M256 gun with data link, or this new gun XM360E1.

Programmable HE ammunition is more capable than HEAT or MPAT ammo. It can defeat more efficently lightly armored vehicles like BMP's, but is also more effective against structures and enemy infantry hidden for example behind a sand berm.

Israelis are also using two programmable HE rounds, the 105mm "Kalanit" and a 120mm round which designation I forgot.

Also Russians have a modification for their tanks and HE ammunition. The system is designated "Ainet", it contains fire control system upgrade, autoloader upgrade in form of programming device and replacement of conventional fuze with programmable fuze in HE ammunition.

Well, as Hellbeard says, the brochure does show a hollow charge in there, so I think I will stand by that. As to the DM12: OK, Tell me the difference between High Explosive Anti-Tank Multi Purpose, and Multipurpose Anti-Tank? HEAT-MP is functionally the same as MPAT.

The XM1069 is expirmental as all get out, and we was talking of rounds in service. That being said... the 1069 is a great idea. Bofors uses a version of the idea in the CV90 series when firing 3P rounds: Can be configured while loading to either blow up on contact, by proximity, delay after impact, or time delay. Freaking awesome system. They did a demo where they placed some water barrels on the backside of a hill, and fired a three round burst timed to go of 10-15 feet over them - Direct Indirect Fire. Who woulda thunk it? If we can get the 1069 to do the same, that changes everything. Obviously, a lot of people are looking into programable ammo: So far none outside the 40mm Bofors has actually entered service in any appreciable quantity that we can confirm, though as mentioned, the Israelis probably are on the newest mark of the Merk. After all, it requires a significant rework of the loading procedure either by action on the loaders part, and/or new features built into the breech.

[Damian90 697]

Well, as Hellbeard says, the brochure does show a hollow charge in there, so I think I will stand by that.

I do not seen in any brochure about DM11 a shaped charge inside, neither inside a cut out of a real thing.

DM11 have a standard explosive charge inside with pre fragmented metal nose, nothing there generates shaped charge jet.

OK, Tell me the difference between High Explosive Anti-Tank Multi Purpose, and Multipurpose Anti-Tank? HEAT-MP is functionally the same as MPAT.

Actually not. You see this is a problem generated by a mess made by a decision that tanks in 1980's wiull not take HE ammo. These were left only with literally anti tank ammunition, this is APFSDS and HEAT.

HEAT was from beggining designed as anti tank ammunition, however due to nececity, in 1980's through 1990's and in the 1st and half decade of XXI century, it also served as multipurpose ammo.

The MPAT designed in USA, was a interim solution to a problem with lack of dedicated HE/multipurpose round. However additional fragmentation effect was achieved by lowering capability penetrate armor. Which preaty much means that against modern armor, M830A1 is less effective than M830, which in it's own, is not very effective, like all modern tank gun fired HEAT rounds.

So in fact the functionality is not the same, it is more about mess in terminology caused by decisions made during cold war.

The XM1069 is expirmental as all get out, and we was talking of rounds in service. That being said... the 1069 is a great idea. Bofors uses a version of the idea in the CV90 series when firing 3P rounds: Can be configured while loading to either blow up on contact, by proximity, delay after impact, or time delay. Freaking awesome system. They did a demo where they placed some water barrels on the backside of a hill, and fired a three round burst timed to go of 10-15 feet over them - Direct Indirect Fire. Who woulda thunk it? If we can get the 1069 to do the same, that changes everything. Obviously, a lot of people are looking into programable ammo: So far none outside the 40mm Bofors has actually entered service in any appreciable quantity that we can confirm, though as mentioned, the Israelis probably are on the newest mark of the Merk. After all, it requires a significant rework of the loading procedure either by action on the loaders part, and/or new features built into the breech.

I agree that programmable ammunition is future.

BTW I seen XM1069 was capable to defeat a T-55 turret from the side, which is impressive for a 120mm HE round to penetrate ~150mm of cast armor steel and explode inside.

As for significant reworking, then no, it is not that complicated really, and loader does not need to make anything besides loading the gun.

Modification requires only some upgrades to fire control system and ammunition data link with fuze programmer inside gun.

Oh and BTW, USMC already done such modification to some of their M1A1's, they use DM11 in Afghanistan as interim solution untill XM1069 won't be ready for mass production. I also know that Danish Leopard 2A5A2DK had been modified to use DM11 with it's full potential.

[PantherAl 11]

At work so I can't dig up my referrences, so will do that when I get home: However, I agree the 1069 is the next great thing, but I am not too impressed at it punching the side of T55. I've in person, first hand, seen 25mm APFSDS punch the sides of one. Granted, they was rather close, and range counts in KE weapons. When I get home I'll post a pic of a T72 that got owned from a 25 from a sister unit in Iraq - agian, from the side, 25 anything won't do much to a 72 in the frontal aspect.

---------- Post added at 18:12 ---------- Previous post was at 17:36 ----------

Annnndddd...

I was WRONG.

The DM11 data I was looking at was the orginal development design. Since then there was massive changes to the design.

Thats a rather nifty design, and I can see why I never bothered to look deeper to see if there was any changes since it still had a 'HEAT Spike' on the tip. Mea Culpa.. Mea Culpa... Mea Culpa...

[maturin 12]

PantherAI, what do you mean, that pure HE rounds are 'hit or miss?'

Do you mean inaccurate? Why should they be any less precise than HEAT rounds, which are useless if they miss even slightly, as opposed to being area attack weapons?

[Damian90 697]

At work so I can't dig up my referrences, so will do that when I get home: However, I agree the 1069 is the next great thing, but I am not too impressed at it punching the side of T55. I've in person, first hand, seen 25mm APFSDS punch the sides of one. Granted, they was rather close, and range counts in KE weapons. When I get home I'll post a pic of a T72 that got owned from a 25 from a sister unit in Iraq - agian, from the side, 25 anything won't do much to a 72 in the frontal aspect.

Ha, you see, here is a tricky thing.

T-55 have a thicker side turret armor than T-72, it is because of turret design and because T-72 uses a heavier frontal composite armor.

It is overall a problem with a very tricky geometry of soviet tanks turrets.

Also there is nothing strange that even 25mm KE round was capable to perforate such armor, but a HE round is something completely different.

As for DM11, you see, I was right. ;)

BTW a video:

Edited September 16, 2013 by Damian90

[PantherAl 11]

PantherAI, what do you mean, that pure HE rounds are 'hit or miss?'

Do you mean inaccurate? Why should they be any less precise than HEAT rounds, which are useless if they miss even slightly, as opposed to being area attack weapons?

Not hit or miss in the normal sense, more a case of effectiveness. The round is going a pretty good clip down range and when it hits a target, you wind up with an explosion pattern that is pretty minimal over the front 90 degree arc facing you, and then elongating away to a fairly large degree. Secondly, the shock of firing a high velocity round means you need a heavier shell to withstand that shock, which means less HE filling for the size. Lower velocities, more HE, and a much more even dispersal pattern for the blast effect. Why you saw back in WW2 all the primary anti infantry guns was short, stubby, low velocity weapons. Basically, a large grenade launcher on more steroids than all of pro sports combined.

[Hellbeard 10]

Huh, I guess it doesn't have a shaped charge. Does look like it, with the configuration. I guess I just assumed the front part was a liner. :/

Here's the "brochure".

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2012armaments/Tuesday14105ewert.pdf

While it explodes and also has a fragmenting jacket, it has also different modes of activation - impact, air burst and delay. It has soft and semi-hard skin capability (via aforementioned tungsten). The tungsten in this case function as a sort of kinetic penetrator against things with relatively thin armor - I don't know German but I think that's what they explain in the video. In our way of categorizing ammunition it would not be HE but MP.

The argument is useless, there is only a misunderstanding on what the term HE means.

For me HE stands for an impact explosive and nothing more.

When you start adding things like different detonation modes and soft/hard capabilities it turns it into a different thing.

Looking at the publications they do call it HE-DM11 while marines call it MP-DM11. *shrug*

Guys, it was all a cultural misunderstanding.

We can at least all agree that in ArmA 3 the KE rounds are underpowered by a factor of two million, and the HE is useless and should be promptly replaced by something that hasn't been obsolete for half a century.

[PantherAl 11]

No doubt. KE is horrid in A3.

[oksman 37]

I think Iron front did this perfectly fine, penetration systems were a bit off at start in that game, but it simulated a round penetrating the tank and killing the crew inside. Could often see a bit of smoke/fire come out the top and vents 'n all that.

It was great, that was made for Iron front.. a game which was created to cheat money from people quickly and instantly was instantly dropped out of progress and yet it still arrived further in tank concepts than the actual creators of the real deal! :P

Hope it gets improved though!

[Xalteva 10]

Guys, it's really useless to defend the arma damage model ... it's very primitive ! we just need some damage system that takes into account where the vehicle was hit ! electronics damage can ever be made by BIS with the current engine ... just need something at the level of what ACE did !

[pulstar 55]

Steel Beasts is pretty much the only series that attempts to simulate real-world armor warfare. Graviteam gave it a shot with SABOW but it's much limited in scope.

[mikey240 11]

This is what happens when a single rpg hits a tank in real life (near the end of the video).

I doubt that was a rp-7 that super killed that tank...some type of recoilless rifle or heavy anti tank launcher like rpg-29 most likely

[silentghoust 132]

Honestly, I rather pay for a Armor improvement DLC then a marksmen one. Right now tracked vehicles are probably the weakest link out of all the Arma 3 content. This includes AI that still can't even reverse or stay in formation. Why there has been some improvements, I still think armor warfare is still way behind what ARma 2:AO.

[gibonez 18]

Honestly, I rather pay for a Armor improvement DLC then a marksmen one. Right now tracked vehicles are probably the weakest link out of all the Arma 3 content. This includes AI that still can't even reverse or stay in formation. Why there has been some improvements, I still think armor warfare is still way behind what ARma 2:AO.

I would say Fire control systems or the lack therof is actually the biggest weakness.

This encompasses armor too but the biggest culprit of this is the T to lock on game mechanic that plagues the game.

[cholo 11]

tanks in arma 3 is shit i prefer face a tank than a single rifleman in arma 3 because tanks are not lethal they are just stupid block of iron which can be easily destroyed by 1-2 shot on turret , in fact tanks in arma3 don't use their main gun often or in the correct way but in realty you have to be so lucky to survive a single tank rush even if you are garrisoning under ground thats being said talking about armor in arma3 is something itches the heart as you know BI still catching with hitpoint system which is unreal because in realty armor is different thing you can't kill a tank this easy ( like arma 3 ) its very very hard to get a good shot and even though you need a very powerful weapon to penetrate the tank for example you can't destroy Merkava with an RPG7 you may disable it with RPG-29 if you have a good shot or damage it , i urge BI to use iron front's armor&damage system and implement it to arma 3 because its the closest system to realty ...

[instagoat 133]

Well, when I tested the armor penetration system in early release days, the game simulated armor penetration, different armor thicknesses on different parts of the tank as well as (very oddly behaving) hitpoints inside (that don't include the crew).

One game that has decent, quick acting but comprehensive armor simulation is war thunder. They have post penetration effects, accurately simulated modules and armor surfaces. They also simulate the shells decently in their behaviour (HE vs APHE or APHEBC, APCR, APCS, HEAT, etc) for a good experience.

Tanks do not always immediately blow up. There is also tons of different ways for a tank to blow up, and some ways of blowing up do not mean the tank is dead.

3:18 into the video, 90mm APCS against a Strv 103, fuel tank blown up, vehicle perfectly functional. At 6:14 they shoot a HEAT round at the lower glacis, which penetrates through a fuel tank into the engine frame without igniting the fuel. 6:16, another 90mm HEAT against the side of the vehicle, penetrating the fuel tank and into the crew compartment with the jet stopped by the gun breech. "No splinters or harmful overpressures reach the crew stations, and no fire is started in the crew compartment.".

I guess that kind of thing would be shocking, but not deadly. But if a crewmember is hit, it doesn't cause the tank to blow up either. (Right now crew cannot be harmed by rounds passing through vehicles as far as I tested).

There was a massive armor simulation thread where things like this were discussed, which then resulted in the advanced armor simulation mod. I don't know how that works in detail, but I would like for BI themselves to improve the vehicles, because right now the tanks are deathtraps.

Edited February 14, 2015 by InstaGoat