Jump to content
Assassin 7

Question about BK-31 Heat-FS-T [FIXED]

Recommended Posts

I have been hit by this round several times and have received severe damage. But when reviewed from the AAR the shots are not making sense. maybe you guys can answer some of this. 

SS_19_58_59.jpg

SS_19_27_04.jpg

SS_20_08_26.jpg

SS_20_08_32.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what the issue is.  Is it the distribution of fragments in the 2nd image?  Or is it the fragments that are contained in the final image?

 

If the former, not sure there, Ssnake would have to explain.  In the case of the latter (the fragments contained internally), this is correct -- you are seeing the space between the outer armor and the inner compartment where the armor inserts and spaced air is located. The round impacts, exploded in the armor, and the fragments were contained by the inner wall.

 

If there is something I missed in the images the please explain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Volcano said:

Not sure what the issue is.  Is it the distribution of fragments in the 2nd image?  Or is it the fragments that are contained in the final image?

 

If the former, not sure there, Ssnake would have to explain.  In the case of the latter (the fragments contained internally), this is correct -- you are seeing the space between the outer armor and the inner compartment where the armor inserts and spaced air is located. The round impacts, exploded in the armor, and the fragments were contained by the inner wall.

 

If there is something I missed in the images the please explain.

The first image looks like it was contained but saids destroyed. The 3rd image hit my right sponson box and my tank had severe damage. The last image i receive severe damage. Damage to the extent the tank cannot fight anymore  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I was explaining the last two images - looking only at fragments.  You can can certainly receive severe damage or even get destroyed now, based on over pressure effects, and the fragments impacting the internal armor too - even if those fragments appear to be contained..  Its complicated, but very powerful fragments can hit internal armor which can trigger all sorts of damages (from spall and such) depending on their power. Then there is overpressure effects,  which are new. This can cause damage or destruction based on the explosive power of the ammunition, and the proximity of the explosion.

 

Given how powerful the BK-31 round is, the results are not unreasonable (almost like getting hit by an AT-14).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what to say.

 

  • You may have discovered an edge case.
  • The results may be adequate, but I can't really say much from a handful of screenshots that don't show the angles that would allow a complete assessment.
  • There may be a discrepancy between the in-game impact location and the recorded location in the AAR ("shouldn't happen", but can I rule it out with absolute certainty? No.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

Not sure what to say.

 

  • You may have discovered an edge case.
  • The results may be adequate, but I can't really say much from a handful of screenshots that don't show the angles that would allow a complete assessment.
  • There may be a discrepancy between the in-game impact location and the recorded location in the AAR ("shouldn't happen", but can I rule it out with absolute certainty? No.)

Here is the AAR from the screenshots.

SEP's -Leopard2A5 vs 12 t-62's heat demo_9840_081019DESKTOP-UHDQ1412.aar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 8/10/2019 at 7:33 PM, Ssnake said:

Not sure what to say.

 

  • You may have discovered an edge case.
  • The results may be adequate, but I can't really say much from a handful of screenshots that don't show the angles that would allow a complete assessment.
  • There may be a discrepancy between the in-game impact location and the recorded location in the AAR ("shouldn't happen", but can I rule it out with absolute certainty? No.)

Is this being investigated or going to be investigated?

Edited by Assassin 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 8/10/2019 at 6:41 PM, Colebrook said:

...not sure what it is, if the overpressure or the round itself but something is wrong here.

So let's make some things clear here, since overpressure is new in SB, and needs to be understood:

 

As I said to Assassin, it IS the over pressure effect.

 

Overpressure was NOT represented before, but the fact is - HE/HESH/HEAT ammunition has overpressure that does "additional damage" to the target (ammo effectiveness is not all about penetration like we modeled before).  Overpressure in itself can destroy vehicles, structures, and personnel (in the open, or unbuttoned).  All of these things are connected too, its the primary mechanism that allows artillery, bombs, and IEDs to destroy things (in SB and in real life).

 

Specifically tough, the BK-31 and AT-14 are quite powerful, one of the AT-14's is an FAE designed to kill purely from its over pressure effect alone (although that is not what is being discussed here though), but everyone needs to be aware that destruction and damage via overpressure is possible in real life, otherwise these FAE munitions would not exist, along with IEDs (especially). Then of course we have to understand also that if the over pressure doesn't kill the vehicle, then odds are its tracks will be knocked off, wheels damaged - separated from suspension arms, or it may have a fuel leak, engine damage, stabilization damage, commander's HMG damage, especially radio damage, and so on. The severity of this damage depends on the power of the explosion and the class of the vehicle (heavy armor (tanks), light armor (PCs/IFVs), non-armored (trucks), and various classes of MRAP protection levels, actually, all of these are modeled to have different levels of vulnerability to overpressure effects). Get used to this -- a tank might get hit by an ATGM that doesn't penetrate but the overpressure of the explosion damages the radio, and knocks off a track, perhaps. Its another reason why the Russian T tanks have a such a high percentage of HE.  In the past these rounds were essentially useless, but now they are not - not only are they good at killing troops, but the can be effective and damaging/disabling vehicles and killing light and non-armored vehicles (but not tanks).

 

The question though, as with everything, is whether or not the explosive effect is too much for the BK-31 and AT-14 specifically. In SB does it kill the tank in the front armor each time it is hit? No, it does not.  In SB it can kill the tank in the front armor, yes, but this isn't likely to occur, as our internal test have proved (example test, BK-31 impact on front armor of M1A2 did not yield a kill in 4+ hits, but did produce reasonable damages from overpressure).

[If you can prove that it does happen with each hit, then post more info here, but right now the "additional" damage (and possibility of a kill) from overpressure seems reasonable, given the power of these rounds, at this point at least.]

 

Visually the overpressure magnitude isn't shown in the particle effects - one explosion appears just like another (and we are aware of this and want to improve this over time, to give a better visual impression of the power of these explosions).

 

So, maybe the HEAT version of the AT-14 and BK-31 might get toned down in overpressure slightly (I don't know - this is not my domain), but the FAE version of the AT-14 would still kill the tank, even frontally, and in some cases in proximity - depending on the power of the explosion. Regarding the AT-14, there are some results in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen I believe where the missile has proved to be quite effective, and the BK-31 seems to more or less be a HEAT round version of it - both of which are known to be a serious threat.

 

And the fact is, these weapon systems are much more lethal than anything available before, hence the need (and development) of APS.  Do you think that APS is something they decided is a nice thing to have?  AVEPS and Trophy are being developed to address these threats, and until they are fielded in numbers (and until the next revolution in armor happens), tanks are going to be quite vulnerable to the cutting edge ATGM/HEAT ammunition. Give the Leo 2E and M1A2 SEP the AVEPS APS when going up against these modern threats or else you will be at a disadvantage (but also, having western equipment at a disadvantage is also not bad, for some scenarios).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If those newer HEAT rounds and weapons are so effective in damaging even heavily armored vehicles, do tank units start to prioritize those rounds when engaging newer AFVs?  In game and in real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, thewood said:

If those newer HEAT rounds and weapons are so effective in damaging even heavily armored vehicles, do tank units start to prioritize those rounds when engaging newer AFVs?  In game and in real life.

No, (rhetorically) how does anyone know what round is being carried by a specific target? One T-72 might have a BK-31, while another doesn't. This is something that would not be known. Then of course ATGM launchers are hard to determine what the launcher actually is as well, and so forth.

 

Of course in real life if you saw a T-62 and a T-14 in your sight picture (not sure why they would be together), then you would prioritize the T-14 first -  but the AI doesn't do this.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are seeing Tank Heat rounds that are older than the BK-31 killing modern tanks on the Turret frontal Armor here. Colebrook has posted the AAR of this incident. We are also seeing Abrams being killed by a frontal direct hit to the side sponson boxes which IMAO yes it would go straight through it. I understand shit can happen and some can have really bad luck, but its consistent in SB. Here is what happens when an IED that has the force to lift a 68 ton tank off the ground does. It did not penetrate the hull or Turret just severely damage everything around it such as skirts, sponson boxes, loader 240 MG, Cracked periscopes and other shit as seen in the pictures but the Turret could still traverse. It knock my TC and my loader out for close to 5 minutes. The tank rolled still while the engine was in protective mode back to the FOB. We also understand the threat of newer modern AT-14 and The Russian BK-31and know that in SB it will damage us. 

735012-R1-021-9.jpg

735012-R1-023-10.jpg

735012-R1-025-11.jpg

735012-R1-027-12.jpg

735012-R1-029-13.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Volcano said:

No, (rhetorically) how does anyone know what round is being carried by a specific target? One T-72 might have a BK-31, while another doesn't. This is something that would not be known. Then of course ATGM launchers are hard to determine what the launcher actually is as well, and so forth.

 

Of course in real life if you saw a T-62 and a T-14 in your sight picture (not sure why they would be together), then you would prioritize the T-14 first -  but the AI doesn't do this.

 

 

I think you didn't read my question right.  I am asking if a T-14 would choose the BK-31 over an APFSDS against a modern M1 or Leo 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, thewood said:

I think you didn't read my question right.  I am asking if a T-14 would choose the BK-31 over an APFSDS against a modern M1 or Leo 1.

IRL your really asking an hard question to answer here. Its really up to the crew commander of what type of round that leaves the Tube first. Normally the round loaded is the fire fired follow by an round adjustment depending on the targets identification. But they may choose to battle carry Heat. If it was me I would rather battle carry a Sabot. Reason is you never know exactly where you would end up fighting the enemy, may know a expected area of the enemy but not the one that would be shooting at you. Also its important to see the enemy before the enemy see's you. Though APS systems are changing the battlefield still the first Target seen normally is the first to be either KIA or damaged severely bad. Crew training is very important, platoon maneuvering and communication are the key factors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was using the "IED" as an example of something that relies on overpressure to do the most damage.  The pictures aren't necessary and aren't really relevant, given that the unknowns of type of explosive and quantity.

 

But the counter to that is the big/infamous IED attack on M1 (that every tanker knows about, that lifted the tank high into the air the height of a telephone pole) can be found in other photos. The turret was completely detached, and entire crew was likely killed and I don't care to ever see those images again, so please don't post those. But it proves the point - as with everything the overpressure effect depends on the magnitude of the explosion and in the case of IEDs strikes in real life and the effect can be quite devistating to the vehicle can crew. Also, direct impact via HE/HESH/HEAT is not exactly comparable to IEDs.

 

To be clear though, because the "discussion" is going down the rabbit hole...

 

My previous post is simply explaining that overpressure is new, and that it will cause damages, sometimes killing a vehicle. The post wasn't refuting that something might need to be adjustment here (I thought I implied that an adjustment might be natural, and necessary). Making adjustments is very easy to do actually, but we just have to be sure after thorough investigation because everything is directly connected, so we have to be careful.  But yes, the AAR file above will be evaluated when there is time and we will look into it.

 

Not sure what else needs to be said?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Volcano said:

I was using the "IED" as an example of something that relies on overpressure to do the most damage.   It was simply an example of an ammunition type that relies on overpressure to do most of its damage. The pictures aren't necessary and aren't really relevant, given that the unknowns of type of explosive and quantity.

 

But the counter to that is the big/infamous IED attack on M1 (that every tanker knows about, that lifted the tank high into the air the height of a telephone pole) can be found in other photos. The turret was completely detached, and entire crew was likely killed and I don't care to ever see those images again, so please don't post those. But it proves the point - as with everything the overpressure effect depends on the magnitude of the explosion and in the case of IEDs strikes in real life and the effect can be quite devistating to the vehicle can crew. Also, direct impact via HE/HESH/HEAT is not exactly comparable to IEDs.

 

To be clear though, because the "discussion" is going down the rabbit hole...

 

My previous post is simply explaining that overpressure is new, and that it will cause damages, sometimes killing a vehicle. The post wasn't refuting that something might need to be adjustment here (I thought I implied that an adjustment might be natural, and necessary). Making adjustments is very easy to do actually, but we just have to be sure after thorough investigation because everything is directly connected, so we have to be careful.  But yes, the AAR file above will be evaluated when there is time and we will look into it.

 

Not sure what else needs to be said?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks and understood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, thewood said:

I think you didn't read my question right.  I am asking if a T-14 would choose the BK-31 over an APFSDS against a modern M1 or Leo 1.

Whoops, yes, I misread it from the target's perspective. 

 

Well, in real life a tank commander may prefer HEAT rounds over KE. There are a lot of variables involved.  KE round loses penetration over distance, but HEAT round does not, but then a moving target is more difficult to hit at longer range with HEAT than KE, overpressure effect of HEAT, post penetration effect of HEAT against exposed ammo, and so on,  so there are a lot of factors to think of - many of which might not be known to the tank commander. When I was on M1A1s, the extent of our training was generally: "KE vs. tanks, HEAT vs. everything else", which is essentially what the AI in SB does too.

 

But now older and wiser, its not that simple, and perhaps the tank commanders today have received more training, but its up the user to decide that in SB. HEAT rounds are also generally much more expensive than KE rounds (non-DU at least), and in many situations (let's say in killing T-72s that do not have ERA for example) are far more effective. Much better to blow the turret off the T-72 and know that it is dead than to shoot it repeatedly with KE and not be sure whether its dead or not, in the example.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Computer-controlled crews would always prefer APFSDS against heavily armored targets. Even the BK-31 isn't a reliable tank killer with its overpressure, and there's no conceivable HE round design that makes any sense for the 125mm caliber that will always be a reliable tank killer from overpressure alone.

But, we need to make sure that a 155mm or 152mm artillery shell that explodes in close proximity has a good chance of rendering a tank, even a heavily protected one, inoperable, even if the fragments by themselves are incapable of perforating the armor, simply because HE artillery killing tanks is a reality.

 

Our new HE model uses the amount of HE filler as the first objective parameter (you can find such info in horribly priced books like Jane's Ammunition Handbook/Jane's Weapons: Ammunition (at about $1,000.- a copy...)), the type of explosive as a minor modificator (TNT, HMX, RDX, ...), and finally a subjective scaling factor that we can use to tone down/tune up the effect if we have very good reason to do so; typically it is set to 50% and will rarely deviate from that.

 

 

As far as the BK-31 is concerned, the facts are that it contains approximately 1850g (happy to adjust that if a reliable source can be presented) of A-IX2 equivalent HE filler (Jane's Weapons: Ammunition, 2016/17 edition, pg 632), and lacking any other hints the scaling factor is currently at its default setting of 50%. Contrast this BK-31 round's amount of HE filler with that of a 122mm artillery shell like OF-462, which is about 3500g TNT equivalent. The 122mm artillery shell is not terribly dangerous to tanks; the BK-31, being a direct fire munition aimed at the center of the target, simply gets much, much closer (which is the only reason why it can have an appreciable overpressure effect at all). This might help to explain why a round that has maybe just 60...70% of the power of an artillery shell that's regarded as relatively weak against tanks creates some overpressure effect with regularity. But a reliable tank killer it is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I spent quite some time investigating, sinking time (going down the rabbit hole) on this, and I setup a test with the T-72, and OF-26 rounds.  After firing round after round at the Leopard 2E in the spot in the AAR "thfgh_20700_081119DESKTOP-VEAL0131.aar".   I can't seem to kill a single tank no matter what I do. Damages, yes, which are all reasonable, but I shoot the same tank again and again and don't see a kill.  I am talking 20+ rounds into the turret here, many of them in the exact place they were being hit in the AAR images.

 

For the record -- so you know I am not blowing smoke here, I have attached my AAR. It took 56x OF-26 rounds before the Leopard 2E was killed - the same tank was being hit all 56 times (not different tanks), so I am not seeing how you are killing them 3 for 3.  Is there something else I need to know?

 

There might be a bug here, but I have to be able to reproduce it with this "consistency" you both are referring to.

 

#general test_7900_081319I7-9400315.aar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And another AAR here, 94x OF-26 shots on the Leo 2E before it was killed.  I can only spend so much time on this - shooting a tank 50 to 90 times takes a lot of time, but clearly there is something else at work here but I am not seeing what you are seeing.

 

Please attach the exact scenario from the AAR "thfgh_20700_081119DESKTOP-VEAL0131.aar" if you have it.

 

 

#general test_7900_081319I7-9400325.aar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...