Ammunition Types for MP scenerios

[Ludwigmeister]

What are the ammunition types I should be setting for the M1A1s and the LEOs for balanced MP??? I forget as I haven't made a scenerio for a while, but the one I'm working on will undoubtedly make its way into the TGIF roster.

DM33 for the Leos, or keep to the American rounds? The 89bblablalba....... yes no maybe so? I remember on the last scenerio I made for TGIF everything was up to snuff, except Nikatori had to do some ammo adjusting for the Leos....

Ludwig.

[PS-SCUD]

M1 LEO

A3 and A3 = Advantage Leo
A2 and A2 = Somewhat even
A1 and A1 = Advantage M1
A1 and A2 = Slight Advantage LEO
KE-WA2 and KE-WA2 = Roughly even
A2 and DM53 = Slight Advantage M1
A1 and DM53 = Slight Advantage LEO
A squirt gun and DM33 = Major advantage for the M1

[Homer]

Just curious, but how are you rating the ammo? By the numbers or just from experience?

[Wahrborg]

Different players, have different opinions. I for one do not agree whit the list scud made. But im the ammo ranting guy, and would belive that Scud's list is mainstream around here ;)

[Ludwigmeister]

Would anyone care to explain the properties of the rounds as they are given in the mission editor? Or does anyone have any good sites on the different round types? I would like to understand the rounds, not just memorize what is better, but understand why they are better or at least how it is they differ from each other.

Ludwig.

[PS-SCUD]

Just curious, but how are you rating the ammo? By the numbers or just from experience?

Experience.

[Bluewings]

Ludwig , you can check here :
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/bob_mackenzie/ArmourPenetration.htm

SCUD 's list is more or less what the SB community is using for MP games . Nevertheless it is flawed as the Abrams and Leopards differ a lot in armor design . Furthemore , the German DM-53 ammo used in SB is too weak compare to the real round .

Anyway , you can "force" one side to adopt a more drastic approach by giving them DM-33 or M829 . It will ask them to manoeuver to archive a kill . A Leo firing DM-33 to the side hull of the Abrams @2000m will kill it . But of course we sometimes do not want to play this way and favor on the par ammo ...

Cheers . :3starSK:

[Ludwigmeister]

First of all, thanks for the reply scud with the easy to follow chart.

Can someone explain to me what P0 and P2500 are? I am guessing the capability/ability of the round at 0 metres and 2500 metres into its flight? Penetrative power on standard steel? (it says" mm RHA" in brackets if I recall correctly.)

Ludwig.

[PS-SCUD]

First of all, thanks for the reply scud with the easy to follow chart.

No problem.

Can someone explain to me what P0 and P2500 are? I am guessing the capability/ability of the round at 0 metres and 2500 metres into its flight?

Yes

Penetrative power on standard steel? (it says" mm RHA" in brackets if I recall correctly.)

RHA stands for Rolled Homogeneous Armor. I guess you would call that "standard" steel, though from what I have seen, it is somewhat of a vague definition.

[Ssnake]

Actually it should rather be called "RHAe" - Rolled Homogenous Armor Equivalent. Because it's a fictuous number. It means that if you wanted to achieve the same degree of protection against in incoming round and had no other material than RHA, you'd need to make it that thick. Or, if the target was protected by nothing but steel, this round could penetrate so much of it.
In reality, armor plates are much thinner because they're laminated, multi-material composite elements. The combination of rubber, ceramics, steel, and eventually some high-density alloys creates a lot more resistance than a homogenous material like RHA. Therefore you need less material, which reduces the overall vehicle mass (or improves the actual protection level) beyond the limits of WW2 technology.

[Hell_Hound]

RHA stands for Rolled Homogeneous Armor. I guess you would call that "standard" steel, though from what I have seen, it is somewhat of a vague definition.

If I remember correctly:

For NATO, RHA refers to the US Army's MILSPEC 64000-A-1 high-hardness steel, which is used to make the NATO Standard Ordnance Target and the NATO Triple-Heavy Ordnance Target.

There are book-length procedures laid out for how to conduct penetration tests with these targets and assess the results. I dug this stuff up once while preparing for an AFV lecture (the audience was infantry, so any weakness was unacceptable) and it took forever; I can try to find it again if you care.

[ShotMagnet]

Conjuring the spirit of Paul L; RHA is a little bit like Christmas in that it's what you make of it. The values are apparently open to some degree of interpretation, NATO values tend toward the conservative and Russian values tend toward the liberal.


Shot

[Bluewings]

Chineses are even more liberal than the Russians regarding the value of RHA . They say that their 3rd generation DU APFSDS has about the same penetration that the US M829A3 , which is rubbish ! :casstet:

The Chineses rate their APFSDS @ 960mm@2000m ( :shock:) when the A3 is given 930mm@2000m , but it 's not all ! They also say that the A3 is highly overrated and is in fact only capable of 810mm@2000m !
How the Hell do they know ?! :casstet:

I love the Chineses but they are sometimes coming from Mars ... :lol:

Cheers . :3starSK:

[RIPper]

on the other hand, if i remember correctly, in US the penetration must occur at least in 50% (e.g. 800mm at 2000m, means it will pepentrate the 800mm in 50% cases). from what i read, russian are more strict in this, like 75%. but i'm not totally sure.

[Ludwigmeister]

I love the Chineses ...:

Um... why? :P

Ludwig.

[Bluewings]

Because of (in disorder) :

- Martial Arts
- Poetry
- Politness
- Wisdom
- Cooking
- etc ...

Cheers . :3starSK:

[Ssnake]

From a Monty Python song:
"I love Chinese...
There's 900 Million of them in the world to day
You better learn to like them, that's what I say"

;)

From the figures you can see, it's a pretty old song.