@CorporalWojak Here I'm referring to the fourth-generation 105mm armor-piercing shell, not the third-generation one (DTC 02 105). It should be noted that the third-generation 125mm armor-piercing shell can penetrate 680mm of homogeneous steel armor at a 90% probability at a distance of 2000 meters with a propellant temperature of 15 degrees Celsius (vertical semi-infinite target). The NATO testing standard is generally a 50% probability of penetration at 21 degrees Celsius (60° inclined target), which is a more lenient standard than China's V90. Under the same penetration depth data, the value measured by the NATO standard is usually about 8% to 12% higher than that of the Chinese standard.
Under the NATO testing standard, several representative NATO armor-piercing shells have a penetration depth of around 700mm at a distance of 2000 meters for the DM63, and around 750mm for the M829A4 (depleted uranium penetrator). Directly comparing the data, converting the 680mm penetration depth of the Chinese third-generation shell (V90) to the NATO V50 standard results in a penetration depth of approximately 740-760mm; however, considering the normalization effect in the NATO 60° inclined target test, the equivalent vertical penetration depth is around 720mm. The rod length of the DTC-10 125 is 680mm, while the new 105mm shell is 1.1m, which to some extent can make up for the speed issue.
@XM803ENJOYER46 Well, it's indeed cool, but as you said, the Type 100 tank is limited by its 105mm caliber and is destined to be inferior in firepower to the NATO 130 or even 140mm caliber concepts (if they are successfully developed). At present, it seems that the Type 100 tank has given up specialized protection designs against extreme armor-piercing projectiles of large calibers. Instead, it aims to serve as an information node on the battlefield while having the ability to withstand most conventional armor-piercing projectiles and penetrate most tanks.
@XM803ENJOYER46 Haha, indeed. But you need to consider multiple information sources. First, the Zhuhai Airshow. You know, North Industries has a heavy weapons booth every year, with exhibits including the Type 15 tank, the VT4 tank, the VT2 tank... There are also many 105mm armor-piercing shells (DTW 105, BTA2 (1.1m long), DTC 02 105 (PLA's third-generation 105mm armor-piercing shell for self-use)... These are all export products, so related customers can get approximate data standards, such as the length of the armor-piercing shell rod, and thus the relevant data leaks out. Secondly, there was once a 105mm armor-piercing shell rod that leaked on Xianyu (a Chinese second-hand trading platform) (hahaha, yes, you read that right). Thirdly, many netizens can obtain the overall picture from the details through the patents published by relevant research institutes (for example, a patent registered on May 21, 2020, named "A processing technology for a large aspect ratio sabot armor-piercing projectile base", with the patent number 202010435931.X, which is believed to be the nose cone design of the 105-4). Finally, as you said, Gaijin is simply a very great intelligence agency (once the manual of the Type 15 tank was leaked).
@Hitingxt Yes, it's related to the game settings. When the physical setting is set to high, the aircraft's wing surfaces can remain completely stable. However, when the game configuration is set to low physics, the wing surfaces will experience significant shaking and may even spin out of control.
@XM803ENJOYER46 Regarding the official disclosure of this issue, I think it can start with the Type 99A tank. There is a saying on the Chinese Internet that "if it's too outdated, it can be shown." Mao Ning, the designer of the Type 99A tank, once disclosed in a media program that the penetration of the DTC 10 125 (under Chinese standards) fired by the Type 99A is no less than the main armor area of the Type 99A tank's body resistance to penetration (680mm).
@CorporalWojak Here I'm referring to the fourth-generation 105mm armor-piercing shell, not the third-generation one (DTC 02 105). It should be noted that the third-generation 125mm armor-piercing shell can penetrate 680mm of homogeneous steel armor at a 90% probability at a distance of 2000 meters with a propellant temperature of 15 degrees Celsius (vertical semi-infinite target). The NATO testing standard is generally a 50% probability of penetration at 21 degrees Celsius (60° inclined target), which is a more lenient standard than China's V90. Under the same penetration depth data, the value measured by the NATO standard is usually about 8% to 12% higher than that of the Chinese standard.
Under the NATO testing standard, several representative NATO armor-piercing shells have a penetration depth of around 700mm at a distance of 2000 meters for the DM63, and around 750mm for the M829A4 (depleted uranium penetrator). Directly comparing the data, converting the 680mm penetration depth of the Chinese third-generation shell (V90) to the NATO V50 standard results in a penetration depth of approximately 740-760mm; however, considering the normalization effect in the NATO 60° inclined target test, the equivalent vertical penetration depth is around 720mm. The rod length of the DTC-10 125 is 680mm, while the new 105mm shell is 1.1m, which to some extent can make up for the speed issue.
+6@XM803ENJOYER46 Well, it's indeed cool, but as you said, the Type 100 tank is limited by its 105mm caliber and is destined to be inferior in firepower to the NATO 130 or even 140mm caliber concepts (if they are successfully developed). At present, it seems that the Type 100 tank has given up specialized protection designs against extreme armor-piercing projectiles of large calibers. Instead, it aims to serve as an information node on the battlefield while having the ability to withstand most conventional armor-piercing projectiles and penetrate most tanks.
+3@XM803ENJOYER46 Haha, indeed. But you need to consider multiple information sources. First, the Zhuhai Airshow. You know, North Industries has a heavy weapons booth every year, with exhibits including the Type 15 tank, the VT4 tank, the VT2 tank... There are also many 105mm armor-piercing shells (DTW 105, BTA2 (1.1m long), DTC 02 105 (PLA's third-generation 105mm armor-piercing shell for self-use)... These are all export products, so related customers can get approximate data standards, such as the length of the armor-piercing shell rod, and thus the relevant data leaks out. Secondly, there was once a 105mm armor-piercing shell rod that leaked on Xianyu (a Chinese second-hand trading platform) (hahaha, yes, you read that right). Thirdly, many netizens can obtain the overall picture from the details through the patents published by relevant research institutes (for example, a patent registered on May 21, 2020, named "A processing technology for a large aspect ratio sabot armor-piercing projectile base", with the patent number 202010435931.X, which is believed to be the nose cone design of the 105-4). Finally, as you said, Gaijin is simply a very great intelligence agency (once the manual of the Type 15 tank was leaked).
+2@XM803ENJOYER46 Haha, these are actually all completely open-source intelligence.
+1好，把他们上市！
+1@113dttdddt https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/YivhWd/J-36-low-p
+1@Hitingxt Yes, it's related to the game settings. When the physical setting is set to high, the aircraft's wing surfaces can remain completely stable. However, when the game configuration is set to low physics, the wing surfaces will experience significant shaking and may even spin out of control.
+1令人惊艳的
Super excited!
最近的中系作品真是惊喜连连
最近的中式作品真是惊喜连连
@XM803ENJOYER46 Regarding the official disclosure of this issue, I think it can start with the Type 99A tank. There is a saying on the Chinese Internet that "if it's too outdated, it can be shown." Mao Ning, the designer of the Type 99A tank, once disclosed in a media program that the penetration of the DTC 10 125 (under Chinese standards) fired by the Type 99A is no less than the main armor area of the Type 99A tank's body resistance to penetration (680mm).
@CorporalWojak The new 105-millimeter shell should have a penetration depth of over 680 millimeters.
It's very much like Hayao Miyazaki's style.
很精细
@antares1 Indeed, it seems he can't take off on the runway, but if the starting point is in the air, it would be possible.
非常好
很棒