Jump to content

Vickers VFM Mk.5


Something is uhhh something is very wrong here..... This has to be a placeholder no NVD no  Thermals and all the shells are all over the place 

Screenshot_96.thumb.png.690fb643c93e73e9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope its placeholder or its a dead on arrival tank lol. UK didnt use HEAT-FS, so really it should not be there imo for starters lol. Otherwise complaints and "bug reports" with the leaflets saying it was offered with thermal systems ^^

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mitchverr said:

I hope its placeholder or its a dead on arrival tank lol. UK didnt use HEAT-FS, so really it should not be there imo for starters lol. Otherwise complaints and "bug reports" with the leaflets saying it was offered with thermal systems ^^

Not super enthusiastic about the correct implementation of the VFM mk 5 ... It is gaijin we are talking about and a british vehicle.

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, omnipotank said:

Not super enthusiastic about the correct implementation of the VFM mk 5 ... It is gaijin we are talking about and a british vehicle.

So we'll get it, it'll just take 3 years to get right :P

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TerikG2014 said:

Something is uhhh something is very wrong here..... This has to be a placeholder no NVD no  Thermals and all the shells are all over the place 

Screenshot_96.thumb.png.690fb643c93e73e9

Meanwhile both Germany and Italy both get Leopard 1A5 at 9.0, same round, thermal.

The TAM 2C at 9.3 is better all-around and also with excellent thermal.

 

100% dead on arrival like 90% British vehicles:016:

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Loongsheep said:

100% dead on arrival like 90% British vehicles

 

How on earth did they assume a giant tin can without thermals barely scratching 400mm base pen would be a addition to the british lineup - at 9.3? Could they be more blatant with their treatment of UK vehicles?

 

I wouldn't be surprised if it goes into the game as it is right now. 

 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/10/2020 at 02:36, TheFuzzieOne said:

If it's 9.3, then it having thermals and an excellent APFSDS round in game is all but assured.

You fool!

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, TwitchyCarlos said:

You fool!

Let's keep hoping there a place holder however me and some mates have begun the process of bug reporting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get too optimistic telik, it's likely a lot of these things won't be fixed for a while. :(

Looking at it as positive as possible maybe it was barely ready for the test and they just gunked some placeholder stuff on it, but they've not said anything to suggest that so it seems unlikely is all. 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Baron_Tiberius said:

Bunch of reports submitted.

 

Vertical targeting speed

Commander's NVD

Ammo selection

Might want to prepare one for the missing thermals and the H6/62 which you didn't include in the report 

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, [email protected] said:

Might want to prepare one for the missing thermals and the H6/62 which you didn't include in the report 

I think H6/62 was more of a speculative shell as it was still in development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

H6/62 was not a round available when the tank was presented, so its not a bug reportable thing. I chose an ammo selection representative of the time.

 

Thermals were optional and also not mentioned in any secondary source I have, the standard configuration was just NVD. I've seen the brochure that mentions they were optional but I don't have a copy to use, so here we are.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair though, I consider it the same way as how cars are sold. You dont have to pick the extras up, but the option being there means in a game, the option should also be there ^^.

 

Theres also the side thing that other vehicles get things "offered" but not officially used all the time, especially when it comes to ammunition and optic systems IIRC or if a tiny batch had an upgrade gaijin puts it in with said upgrade. On top of that of course if they are giving it HEAT-FS which isnt even in the leaflet for the tank because "could use it" I dont see why it shouldnt get thermals which were offered (or you know, why it would not get other NATO rounds... like M900 if gaijin "really" want it to fight at the ranking its on).

 

Of course, all I want is realistic rounds and the thermals it was possible to upgrade to, but I just dislike the weird way gaijin "makes exceptions" on things.

Edited by Mitchverr
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mitchverr said:

To be fair though, I consider it the same way as how cars are sold. You dont have to pick the extras up, but the option being there means in a game, the option should also be there ^^.

 

Theres also the side thing that other vehicles get things "offered" but not officially used all the time, especially when it comes to ammunition and optic systems IIRC or if a tiny batch had an upgrade gaijin puts it in with said upgrade. On top of that of course if they are giving it HEAT-FS which isnt even in the leaflet for the tank because "could use it" I dont see why it shouldnt get thermals which were offered (or you know, why it would not get other NATO rounds... like M900 if gaijin "really" want it to fight at the ranking its on).

 

Of course, all I want is realistic rounds and the thermals it was possible to upgrade to, but I just dislike the weird way gaijin "makes exceptions" on things.

 

Problem is whether there is even an image to know how the thermals looked on it, if they were fitted. We aren't sure yet if they were. You can't put a tank in game that features something that isn't modelled on it.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the issues with thermals is that the only potentially usable source that mentions them is the brochure which I don't have access to post. Websites are not usable sources and all the secondary book sources don't mention the thermals. Even the brochure doesn't specify what the thermals would be, I can make an educated guess for that but its far from sourced.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a much later Raven iirc. The original Raven that the VFM5 would use is just image intensified. The thermals were also for the commander only, with a display for the gunner. If I were to guess it would be the Pilkington Osprey which was used on the Warrior MAOV. Warrior usually has 2 Ravens but the moav swapped one for the Osprey.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Mitchverr said:

To be fair though, I consider it the same way as how cars are sold. You dont have to pick the extras up, but the option being there means in a game, the option should also be there ^^.

Yes, that is pretty much how our T-80U and T-80B got their thermal.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More late night long rods, prepare for the stupid:

 

Supposedly L64A4 pens NATO single heavy (260-300 @ 60) at 4.2km.

 

Manual gives mass of projectile as 3.59kg and diameter 28mm. That probably means penetrator is ~3.46kg.

 

Rough length I can get from this is 340mm.

 

To get length of continuous rod I used: (estimated mass of penetrator)/ (density x cross sectional area), so length of continuous rod = 3.46/(17500*pi*0.0142) = 321mm, as rod is not continuous and has a frustum as well as a probable reduction in diameter where the fin and tracer are joined to the penetrator, this means that the penetrator will be slightly longer. I estimated this would be roughly 340mm length.

 

unknown.png

 

So muzzle velocity of ~1550 m/s if it loses ~250m/s over 4.2km.

 

At a muzzle velocity of 1550 m/s, this would give a warthunder flat pen of 334mm at 0 which is very similar to M111 from the Sho't Kal.

 

Please someone, tell me I am wrong, because that seems pretty pathetic.

 

 

Edited by Shirazz
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...