chieftain tank vs t-62

[Svenne]

Does anybody know how to fight t-62s with chieftains? Seems like no matter what i do chieftain always looses and that t-62s just kills everything in it's path. Like it's super easy to play Iraq, but with Iran i'm struggling hard. Am i supposed to use other weapons to take out the t-62? It's really hard.

[archibaldthe1]

Is this statement incorrect then?

However, APFSDS would be preferred under all circumstances due to its superior first-shot hit probability, sufficient armour penetration performance and superior post-perforation effect. Both HEAT rounds can be used interchangeably in a T-62 as they share the same ballistic characteristics, and they are both capable of defeating the armour of any enemy tank.

Although this round is capable of knocking out an M60A1 or a similar type of tank from the front on the first hit, the chances of scoring a hit with the first shot at normal combat ranges are rather low. At 1,500 meters, the probability of hitting an M60A1-sized target is only 20%. The maximum effective range of the 3BK4 round is around 1,000 meters as the probability of hit is 48% at this distance. This is seen in the diagram below, taken from the TRADOC bulletin.

Particularly:
- “ [APFSDS] have superior first-shot hit probability, and superior post-perforation effect”
- “ penetration [by HEAT] led to much less damage than APDSFS and seldom led to fires"
- “ during the Iran-Iraq war, 70% of the hits recorded on Iranian Chieftain main battle tanks were 115mm APFSDS rounds, proving that it was the preferred ammunition type”
(The last sentence is from another part of article, one talking about APFSDS)

[Battleshipfree99]

Accuracy:
in game test, entrenched Chieftain vs attacking T-62, 2000m
14 HEAT fired, 7 hits, 1870~2000m, strictly 50% hit probablity.

stationary T-62 vs attacking Chieftain, 2000m
29 HEAT fired, 8 hits+ 1 near miss kill (???), ~30% hit probability.
4 APFSDS fired, 3 hits

Near miss kill: a HEAT round blasts aflame this poor Chieftain through its 15mm bottom.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2939038036

[andrey12345 v2.0]

Origineel geplaatst door archibaldthe1:

I
- “ [APFSDS] have superior first-shot hit probability, and superior post-perforation effect”
- “ penetration [by HEAT] led to much less damage than APDSFS and seldom led to fires"

But there is also a table right there where the % of the defeat (kill) of the tank when hit by different types of shells for the t-62. And there for some reason both types give 70+% Moreover, for HEAT it is 4% more!

It seems to me or in this article there are 2 contradictory statements at the distance of the 1st paragraph from each other? :)

Further more - if we look closely at the British report on the Chieftains (not as superficially as in the article), we will suddenly see that the probability of penetrating (the ratio of penetrations to hits) of the Chieftain with a HEAT projectile is 39/44 ~ 0.9, but with an APDS projectile only 71/88 ~ 0.8. And it turns out, whatever one may say, the HEAT projectile is more effective.

What hints to us that AI in the game can be smarter than a person in terms of which shell should be chosen.

Origineel geplaatst door archibaldthe1:

- “ during the Iran-Iraq war, 70% of the hits recorded on Iranian Chieftain main battle tanks were 115mm APFSDS rounds, proving that it was the preferred ammunition type”

This may also indicate that, for example, HEAT shells were simply not brought (there were few).
Or the tankers might not have had enough shooting training experience, so they fired a projectile with a flatter trajectory because it was easier for them to hit and, in fact, they did not need to enter and determine the distance.

We do not know, therefore there is no point in making such a one-sided conclusion - that preferred means better

Origineel geplaatst door archibaldthe1:

(The last sentence is from another part of article, one talking about APFSDS)

And I would not interfere in the general pile of everything. The findings of the British commission on Iranian tanks are quite unusual. And they are somewhat at odds with the practice of using HEAT projectiles during WW2, and in some other conflicts (why in Angola HEAT projectiles from Ratel-90 led to the fires of T-55 tanks, but in Iran HEAT projectiles from T-62 did not lead to fires in Chieftains). There can be a lot of different explanations for this. But the probability that in Iran in a particular battle the laws of physics have changed and the HEAT projectiles began to work differently than before, I estimate as equal to 0. But unfortunately, there is very little information on events in Iran, and it is not clear how to solve this riddle.

[andrey12345 v2.0]

Origineel geplaatst door Battleshipfree99:

Accuracy:
in game test, entrenched Chieftain vs attacking T-62, 2000m
14 HEAT fired, 7 hits, 1870~2000m, strictly 50% hit probablity.

stationary T-62 vs attacking Chieftain, 2000m
29 HEAT fired, 8 hits+ 1 near miss kill (???), ~30% hit probability.
4 APFSDS fired, 3 hits

So what's the conclusion? I've already lost the point of the debate.

[archibaldthe1]

Origineel geplaatst door andrey12345 v2.0:

But there is also a table right there where the % of the defeat (kill) of the tank when hit by different types of shells for the t-62. And there for some reason both types give 70+% Moreover, for HEAT it is 4% more!

It seems to me or in this article there are 2 contradictory statements at the distance of the 1st paragraph from each other? :)
…
We do not know, therefore there is no point in making such a one-sided conclusion - that preferred means better
…
The findings of the British commission on Iranian tanks are quite unusual.

Thanks for the reply, and yes, the table makes little sense given the statement.

Does the low accuracy of HEAT shell makes sense though? They site 20% at 1.5km (low speed + imprecise rangefinder)?

[andrey12345 v2.0]

Origineel geplaatst door archibaldthe1:

Does the low accuracy of HEAT shell makes sense though? They site 20% at 1.5km (low speed + imprecise rangefinder)?

low accuracy of _FIRST ROUND HIT_, not low accuracy itself

In post #17 there is a certain (albeit incorrect from the science point of view) test. And there, we see that in order to hit from 2 km into a stationary target T62 requires from 1 to 7 HEAT shells, i.e. somewhere a little more than 3 on average.

[Battleshipfree99]

Origineel geplaatst door andrey12345 v2.0:

Origineel geplaatst door Battleshipfree99:

Accuracy:
in game test, entrenched Chieftain vs attacking T-62, 2000m
14 HEAT fired, 7 hits, 1870~2000m, strictly 50% hit probablity.

stationary T-62 vs attacking Chieftain, 2000m
29 HEAT fired, 8 hits+ 1 near miss kill (???), ~30% hit probability.
4 APFSDS fired, 3 hits

So what's the conclusion? I've already lost the point of the debate.

Accuracy is reasonable. Just that near miss kill by HEAT... how?

Origineel geplaatst door andrey12345 v2.0:

Origineel geplaatst door archibaldthe1:

Does the low accuracy of HEAT shell makes sense though? They site 20% at 1.5km (low speed + imprecise rangefinder)?

low accuracy of _FIRST ROUND HIT_, not low accuracy itself

In post #17 there is a certain (albeit incorrect from the science point of view) test. And there, we see that in order to hit from 2 km into a stationary target T62 requires from 1 to 7 HEAT shells, i.e. somewhere a little more than 3 on average.

lol. The first test on entrenched Chieftain looks like this: 1 hit, 1 miss... 14 shots in a row. (I really mean "strictly 50%".) Yes, a first round HEAT hit on a 2000m entrenched Chieftain. Never imagined this in SABOW. Lucky man.
The first round hit probability on moving target is more or less close to 20%.

[andrey12345 v2.0]

So, everything is ok with accuracy as it should, with the shells action, too, and US and British sources tell us it is definitely HEAT better

"But there is also a table right there where the % of the defeat (kill) of the tank when hit by different types of shells for the t-62. And there for some reason both types give 70+% Moreover, for HEAT it is 4% more!

Further more - if we look closely at the British report on the Chieftains (not as superficially as in the article), we will suddenly see that the probability of penetrating (the ratio of penetrations to hits) of the Chieftain with a HEAT projectile is 39/44 ~ 0.9, but with an APDS projectile only 71/88 ~ 0.8. And it turns out, whatever one may say, the HEAT projectile is more effective."

if we do not take a "muddy" criteria like "tankers love to shoot APDC more than HEAT". I think, according to such reasoning, tankers love beer even more, and we can assume that beer is a much more effective shell than both HEAT and APDS.

The question is closed?

[andrey12345 v2.0]

Origineel geplaatst door Battleshipfree99:

lol. The first test on entrenched Chieftain looks like this: 1 hit, 1 miss... 14 shots in a row. (I really mean "strictly 50%".) Yes, a first round HEAT hit on a 2000m entrenched Chieftain. Never imagined this in SABOW. Lucky man.
The first round hit probability on moving target is more or less close to 20%.

20% of the probability of the first hit implies that can hit with a 1st roundl and not hit the second. You somehow very freely operate and compare completely unrelated things.

Your 50% means that in 1 test of 14 shots, 7 hits were received and nothing more. They cannot be compared with 20% of first hit probability, these are generally unrelated things.

[Battleshipfree99]

Origineel geplaatst door andrey12345 v2.0:

Origineel geplaatst door Battleshipfree99:

lol. The first test on entrenched Chieftain looks like this: 1 hit, 1 miss... 14 shots in a row. (I really mean "strictly 50%".) Yes, a first round HEAT hit on a 2000m entrenched Chieftain. Never imagined this in SABOW. Lucky man.
The first round hit probability on moving target is more or less close to 20%.

20% of the probability of the first hit implies that can hit with a 1st roundl and not hit the second. You somehow very freely operate and compare completely unrelated things.

Your 50% means that in 1 test of 14 shots, 7 hits were received and nothing more. They cannot be compared with 20% of first hit probability, these are generally unrelated things.

The 20% estimation is generated from the ~30% hitting probability result on moving Chieftains.

[andrey12345 v2.0]

Origineel geplaatst door Battleshipfree99:

The 20% estimation is generated from the ~30% hitting probability result on moving Chieftains.

No, these are measurements of different probabilities. The probability of the 1st hit in a stationary target cannot be obtained in any way know how many shells out of 29 hit into a moving target (or 14 to stationary) in 1 test. This requires a fundamentally different test, with at least 10 repetitions.

In order to get 1st hit probability from 29 (14) shots, we must be sure that they are not related, i.e. that after the 1st shot, the sight does not change and the accuracy does not increase. Obviously this is not the case.

[archibaldthe1]

Makes sense, Would need to register the result of the first shot (I.e. restart after a shot is fired). I will try that out - see how easy that is to set up.

Ran 25 tests: lone enemy T-62 advancing towards a line of my chieftains (I turned off fire at will so they don't interfere). First shot was fired between 1810 and 1559 meters, 1697 avg, 61 stddev. In 60% of these tests, the shot hit the target. What I didn't do is check that it was a HEAT round fired _every_ time, but whenever I did check, it was HEAT. This was on the snow map (Shefatov, but I don't think it would affect first shot accuracy)

[Flan]

From every T-62 vs Chieftan battle I've had it's usually:

Both tanks generally hit each other, HEAT shell is better and igniting Chieftan. Chieftan's shells damage parts of the T-62 and kill crew but require multiple hits to stop them from firing. Result the Chieftans are destroyed faster and require more hits to destroy the T-62s so often lose.

[andrey12345 v2.0]

Origineel geplaatst door Flannelette:

From every T-62 vs Chieftan battle I've had it's usually:

Both tanks generally hit each other, HEAT shell is better and igniting Chieftan. Chieftan's shells damage parts of the T-62 and kill crew but require multiple hits to stop them from firing. Result the Chieftans are destroyed faster and require more hits to destroy the T-62s so often lose.

Apart from this notorious British report, it is generally noted that the HEAT projectile is more likely to start fire. The same thing follows from the laws of physics, the cumulative jet has a much higher speed, and as a result, the greater initiation energy.

[andrey12345 v2.0]

Origineel geplaatst door archibaldthe1:

Ran 25 tests: lone enemy T-62 advancing towards a line of my chieftains (I turned off fire at will so they don't interfere). First shot was fired between 1810 and 1559 meters, 1697 avg, 61 stddev. In 60% of these tests, the shot hit the target. What I didn't do is check that it was a HEAT round fired _every_ time, but whenever I did check, it was HEAT. This was on the snow map (Shefatov, but I don't think it would affect first shot accuracy)

Now we need to get the "second point" and, better, the 3rd one, i.e. the probability of 1st round hit for some other tank / gun and in order to get a dependence in the form of a certain functional relation. In general, it would be nice to find out how 20% for the T-62 was obtained.

Unfortunately, this document does not disclose the secret of obtaining 20% for the T-62. And there are some dubious graphs, and everything looks like they were trying to pretend that the M60A1 is at least somehow better than the T-62.