AK-12 and AKM Penetration Discrepancy with Other Weapons

[DeltaUMi 4]

Intro

To put this simply, the AK-12 and the AKM both have substantially more penetration than it should, much so that it has penetration value rivaling that of DMR's. I first found this discrepancy when I tested the AK 7.62 mm series in the Virtual Arsenal, discovering that they dealt similar damage to the designated marksman rifles. I found that the AK's could down a target with a Carrier Chest Rig with two clean shots to the torso will it took an assault rifle three to four clean shots to the same target on its torso. I expanded my investigation by downloading the Quick and fun projectile path tracing! scenario to test the penetration of the weapons, hypothesizing that the AK's penetration corresponded with its absurdly high damage for a rifle carrying merely a 7.62x39 mm ammunition.

 

 

Testing Results

These are the results from testing the AK series with various assault rifles and DMR's on the wood wall range in the Quick and fun projectile path tracing! scenario. The results are listed with the name, amount of wood walls penetrated, and then the lethality of the bullet after penetrating its last wall, where lethal means the bullet can still cause damage and where nonlethal means that the bullet no longer can cause damage.

 

AK series

AK-12 7.62x39 mm

• 10 walls / lethal

 

AKM 7.62x39 mm

• 8 walls / lethal

 

 

Assault Rifles

TRG-21 5.56x45 mm

• 4 walls / lethal

 

Mk20 5.56x45 mm

• 4 walls / lethal

 

SPAR-16 5.56x45 mm

• 4 walls / nonlethal

 

CAR-95 5.8x42 mm

• 6 walls / nonlethal

 

MX 6.5x39 mm

• 5 walls / lethal

 

Katiba 6.5x39 mm

• 5 walls / lethal

 

 

Designated Marksman Rifles

Mk-1 EMR 7.62x51 mm

• 11 walls / nonlethal

 

Mk14 7.62x51 mm

• 10 walls / nonlethal

 

Mk18 7.62x51 mm

• 9 walls / lethal

 

SPAR-17 7.62x51 mm

• 10 walls / nonlethal

 

Rahim 7.62x54 mm

• 10 walls / lethal

 

Note: I also did some rough testing with the two AK's and the Rahim on the porta potty range to see if the material effected the relative penetration of the weapons, and the result was that it did not. I encourage anyone reading this to repeat this test to corroborate this data.

 

As clearly shown by the data, the AK-12 and AKM, though assault rifles, has a penetration better than most DMR's.

 

 

Conclusion

The AK-12 and the AKM having DMR penetration is probably an unknown mistake on the devs part. It is quite obvious that the AK-12 and AKM should have lower penetration than the DMR's for two reasons. The AK-12 and AKM have shorter barrels than the DMR's and its 7.62 ammunition has a smaller cartridge with its 39 mm cartridge versus the DMR round's 51 mm and 54 mm cartridges. These two reasons result in less energy in the bullet when fired from these AK's; as a result, lower penetration. In fact, the AK-12 and AKM should be corrected to have lower penetration than the 5.56mm assault rifles, as it is known through multiple real life tests that the AK rounds have worse ballistics than NATO 5.56 rounds. It should also be remembered that the size of the NATO catridge to the bullet is much larger than the AK rounds, which also results in less energy in the AK round relative to other rounds when fired which of course means lower penetration. With all these facts, the AK-12 and AKM in Arma III have absurdly more penetration than it actually does in real life, most likely resulting the discrepancy I originally found in the damage from the AK series.

[angel24marin 34]

I hear many people saying that the 7,62x39 should have similar damage/stopping power as the 6,5x39 Grendel in game but worse ballistic (due a less aerodynamic bullet). In game the AK 12 looks like if is shooting a 7,62x51 but with a recoil of a 5,56. May the conf has a wrong caliber (7,62x51 instead of 7,62x39) or is shooting a 7,62 bullet with the 5,45 muzzle speed.

PD: I miss a 5,45 version...

[roberthammer 582]

The 7.62x39 in A3 should be weaker like in ArmA 2 and it was more closer to the real performance

A3 :
class B_762x39_Ball_F: BulletBase
{
hit = 11;
indirectHit = 0;
indirectHitRange = 0;
typicalSpeed = 730;
airFriction = -0.001;
caliber = 1.6;
model = "\A3\Weapons_f\Data\bullettracer\tracer_yellow";
tracerScale = 1;
tracerStartTime = 0.05;
tracerEndTime = 1;
nvgOnly = 0;
};
----------------------------------------------
A2 :
class B_762x39_Ball : BulletBase {
hit = 9;
indirectHit = 0;
indirectHitRange = 0;
cartridge = "FxCartridge_762";
visibleFire = 18;
audibleFire = 18;
cost = 1;
typicalSpeed = 710;
tracerColor[] = {0.200000,0.800000,0.100000,0.040000 };
tracerColorR[] = {0,0,0,0 };
airFriction = -0.001950;
caliber = 0.830000;
};

[ivan keska 45]

Ya the ballistics and damage are completely wrong, on all the weapons. something you can clearly see by looking at the MX series. Anyways the 7.62x39 should actually be a less effective round then 5.56, but not by much. Granted it does have very good penetration, but that is also why it's not a very damaging round. Plus add in the poor ballistics it has overall, and you quickly understand why the soviets went with and greatly preferred the 5.54. I think the penetration of the round is fine in game, but the damage it does should be equal to or just barely below 5.56. Well the 5.54 should be buffed a bit since that round is a bit more lethal then 5.56.

[x3kj 1247]

lethal / nonlethal is a bad comparison because ingame damage is inconsitent. Bullets that just manage to penetrate through a soldier are significantly less damaging, than a bullet that stops just within the soldiers body

[ivan keska 45]

lethal / nonlethal is a bad comparison because ingame damage is inconsitent. Bullets that just manage to penetrate through a soldier are significantly less damaging, than a bullet that stops just within the soldiers body

 Fair point, also would be to much coding for any team to put in a detailed system. I guess the simplest way would be make it detect if it was stopped by armor, passed through and stopped in person, or passed through the person entirely. Thus stopped would do little to no damage but effect aim, stamina, or something else. Stopped in person would do full damage, and pass through would do some damage but not full.

And i think the current system just measure armor value and uses that to act an a damage reduction to the bullets damage value.

[DeltaUMi 4]

lethal / nonlethal is a bad comparison because ingame damage is inconsitent. Bullets that just manage to penetrate through a soldier are significantly less damaging, than a bullet that stops just within the soldiers body

 

Yeah, I should had specify a bit more on what lethal and nonlethal meant. What I meant by nonlethal was that the path tracing line turned white, which I believe was when the bullet is traveling slow enough not to cause any damage. By lethal, I meant that the bullet was still traveling fast enough to cause damage. I'll fix the OP to specify this.