dejawolf Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 So, the Leclerc Série 2 would have the same protection level as the Leopard 2A4 although having a turret which is 3 tonnes heavier than its German counterpart. :heu:no. leopard 2A4 has 610mm protection on the front, with maximum thickness of 700mm.leclerc has ~650mm protection on the front with maximum thickness of 900mm. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 I see here 800mm not 700mm. :heu: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkLabor Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 I see here 800mm not 700mm. :heu: RHA equivalent for KE, Damian. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSprocket Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 The RHA equivalency given by Deja was 610mm, with "maximum thickness" being by elimination 700mm. The image seems to show a value of 800mm to that weld line, but this may not reflect the actual rear edge of the armour module (a 'lid' can extend beyond the edge of a hole providing more support). I'd go with the thickness being higher than 700mm though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkLabor Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 no. leopard 2A4 has 610mm protection on the front, with maximum thickness of 700mm.leclerc has ~650mm protection on the front with maximum thickness of 900mm. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavictoireestlavie Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Might it be possible to include a way to adjust which armor estimate is used in Pro PE to end the debate about armor thickness?Model the default tank using whatever armor estimate the Pro PE team thinks is best. As an option (similar to how we can select optional weapons on some vehicles) make a way for mission builders to select the "higher estimate" of armor protection that some have posted.After all, we seem to be dealing mostly with estimates here. Yes, educated estimates made on the best information available, but perhaps sometimes it may be necessary to simply admit "We aren't sure. We think it's 500, but some say it's 700, so here are both, pick one!"At the end of the day, players will decide if they want to use it in their scenarios or not in the same way that players can decide to use T-72M1s instead of T-90s even when a T-90 would be 'more appropriate'. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Pah...with the Leclerc I'm not such much curious about the armour, but more in that "BMS coupled FCS". Heared great stories about it. Like that it completely gets rid of "double kills" by perfect target allocation within the platoon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkLabor Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Pah...with the Leclerc I'm not such much curious about the armour, but more in that "BMS coupled FCS". Heared great stories about it. Like that it completely gets rid of "double kills" by perfect target allocation within the platoon.I think you're gonna be disappointed.On S1 and S2, there is no graphical UI. The tanks send data through datalink to the upper levels of command wich uses the SIR.Targets distribution is the role of the PL within his platoon.On Tropicalised (LBMS), SXXI (SIT ICONE) and retrofitted S2 (SIT ICONE), the graphical UI is here. You can visualise the LOF on the screen, mark targets with the LRF, etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 IMHO some estimations for physical thickness might be a bit off in Steel Beasts and it might influance protection values, no fault of development team here, it is allways a problem to get proper values without meassuring armor on a real tank, and many drawings are faulty. For example M1 tank drawings are mostly based on these from Hunnicutt book, but weld lines there are improper for frontal turret armor, making it thinner than it is in reality (not counting backplate thickness). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 If everything was 100% correct in SB, it would be classified :-P 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tacbat Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Might it be possible to include a way to adjust which armor estimate is used in Pro PE to end the debate about armor thickness?Yeah, it's called ammo selection in the mission editor. Try it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.