Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
SavageTactical

Adjusted US CL shell ballistics?

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

372
[RKN]
Beta Testers
1,100 posts
9,864 battles

Has there been any official word if they will adjust the ballistics of the Cleveland and the new US 6” guns cruisers to shoot flatter?

Edit: I’m specifically asking if they will adjust the shell drag to something similar to the Cleveland’s beta test values.

Edited by SavageTactical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,201
[SALT]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
3,660 posts
2,989 battles
8 minutes ago, AVR_Project said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6"/47_caliber_gun

Read it and weep.

Has 18KM range, 812m/S on the Mark 35 AP Super-Heavy round

Except that Wikipedia article is wrong.

812m/s was for the HC Mark 39 shell at 105lbs

762m/s was for the AP Mark 35 shell at 130lbs

Both of these are while using a 33lbs SPD charge.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_6-47_mk16.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,276 posts
830 battles
9 minutes ago, AVR_Project said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6"/47_caliber_gun

Read it and weep.

Has 18KM range, 812m/S on the Mark 35 AP Super-Heavy round

That's at 22 degree elevation. Max range is actually around 23 km. Furthermore, 812 m/s MV is for the HC shell.

EDIT: Azumazi beat me to it.

Edited by DeliciousFart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
372
[RKN]
Beta Testers
1,100 posts
9,864 battles
18 minutes ago, Roadrider7021 said:

By changing shell drag, they can arguably assign whatever arc they want to any USN Cl shells.

To clarify, this is what I’m asking about and not muzzle velocity. In beta the Cleveland’s shells had much less drag and shot flatter. They increase their drag to better balance her against T6 ships. I was wondering if they planned to adjust the shell drag.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
519
[CVA16]
Members
3,148 posts
11,000 battles

Wonder if this would be a good or bad thing. Everyone has gotten used to being the best at shooting over islands (second to Atlanta I guess). Flatter arcs would mean if you can shoot, red ships can probably shoot back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
91 posts
4,869 battles

I would be comfortable with the arcs if they were halfway between Des Moines and current Cleveland. You would still be invulnerable when firing from behind islands, but aiming would be manageable.

Edited by neworleanssaintsfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
333
[CZS]
Members
842 posts
7,892 battles

If they're keeping the ridiculous ROF + turret rotation that's been proposed, then absolutely not. Moonshot shells, all the way then.

Moreover, the Cleveland should NOT be flatter arcs than the 155mm Mogami. 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,446
[SYN]
Members
15,265 posts
11,938 battles

seriously, this "usn shell arc nerf" conspiracy theory needs to die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×