siffo998 Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Table is simply reproducing the confusion of designations found in various sources. M61 APC was APCBC. None of the sources used for the table strikes me as particularly definitive, and show wide disagreement on numbers used. well if those APC really is APCBC, why is the table also listing the M61 APCBC ammo and why is there such a difference between those two. even if both are APCBC and the first one is the M61 ammo and the second one the upgraded M61A1 ammo than theres still the question why CM only uses the higher penetration values for the M61A1 ammo. was the M61A1 ammo that common ? even at CMFI timeframe ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 well if those APC really is APCBC why is the table also listing the M61 APCBC ammo and why is there such a difference between those two. even if both are APCBC and the first one is the M61 ammo and the second one the upgraded M61A1 ammo than theres still the question why CM only uses the higher penetration values for the M61A1 ammo. was the M61A1 ammo that common ? even at CMFI timeframe ? I think you need to look more closely at how that table was created. It is not itself a primary source. It is a collation of secondary sources. Again, I have not seen evidence that HE-filled M61 and M61A1 had different penetration values. However, I think Brits did find that inert-loaded M61 had marginally higher penetration than the same round with HE charge. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siffo998 Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Again, I have not seen evidence that HE-filled M61 and M61A1 had different penetration values. However, I think Brits did find that inert-loaded M61 had marginally higher penetration than the same round with HE charge. yep think you are right. i`ve just found these again: http://www.lonesentry.com/blog/armor-penetration-tables.html vanir posted them in another thread. looks like the m3 penetration tables here are the same as in the game. but please dont overlook the main reason why iam posting in this thread: something is strange with those firefly and the subsystem damage (test is three posts earlier). maybe somebody can confirm my experiences ? 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.