I’ve had enough of these developers, f**king SHOOT ON THE MOVE capability apparently doesn’t mean what it literally is according to them, just pulling excuses out of nowhere
AFAIK the AMX-32 and 40 only have stabilized optics while having stabilized guns in-game, so the ADATS should receive it as well if I am correct
well they don’t want to give it for whatever reason, and it’s pissing me off now
sources after sources, they pull excuses out of thin air just to NOT buff nato vehicles because they’d be too op apparently…
Why can’t they just make aiming sight stabilized (and force ADATS player to use gunner sight[optic])
Just like what we had with MBT where we had stabilized main cannon but still can fire HMG that are not-stabilized on the roof .
indeed, this would be a great idea, even better if they made the optics elevate 85⁰ upwards with the launchers
they finally saw it and closed it, saying it exists internally and they also said nothing specific is said in the documents, bruh
Their weapons are stabilized by linked to stabilized sights. It’s not the same case.
There is currently no direct evidence that ADATS 25mm is stabilized. I previously wrote a report using the same source and it was rejected.
Hey mind taking a look at my other thread as well? Not sure the other moderator quite understood what I was talking about.
rejected because of what?
best thing for now is dropping
adats to 11.0/11.3 same as what they did with tor-m1 it has damn 11km range with mach 2.60 all the 11km fly time like literally so dosnt lose sspeed whatsoever unlike adats and its 42g missile at 11.0
How long does it take for you to get home?
Wasn’t reported because it would be marked not a bug as it only entails the sight.
I mean, it was then reported by someone else, and just as expected it got marked as not a bug: Community Bug Reporting System
There was a project to develop a naval version called Sea Sprint, entirely based on the ADATS missile design. Among the shared features is the 60 G
https://web.archive.org/web/20040229170240/http://www.oerlikon.ca:80/en/products/arme/seasprint.htm
60 G manoeuvrability in inner-layer ranges (2-4 km)
The heritage of ADATS, produced by Oerlikon Aerospace, includes an outstanding performance record with a mission success rate of 92% in over 200 live firings. Sea Sprint will have a speed of Mach3+, manoeuvering at 60g with a 12.5kg warhead and a range out to 10km […]
Thanks, I’ll annoy a tech mod to add that
hopefully something changes in our favor
Extract from AMX 30 Valorisé suggestion (shameless plugin i know)
“(Talking about gunner’s station) On remplace la référence inertielle du viseur APX M453 par une deuxième référence inertielle liée à l’artillerie”. => “The inertial reference of the APX M453 sight is replaced by a second inertial reference point linked to the artillery (understand the main gun)”.
What does this lingo means ? It just means that when the gunner takes over the control of the gun, the FCS switches from the commander’s hunter killer (director stabilizer) mode to a classic gun stabilizer.
Over the AMX 30, this version got a normal stabilizer (for the gunner) and a hunter killer (director stabilizer) for the commander. This dual system is usually known as COSTAC and is usually portrayed as some weird technology. However through this short clip, we can see there was just a question of lost in translation. As GIAT mostly insisted on the commander’s hunter killer function (that no other 1960s MBT had back then), the normal stabilizer was only considered a back up solution, and therefore was not put forward to the foreign visitors. This led to confusion over the system. Confusion which continued to be carried over to its successor the AMX 32 (but less for AMX 40 as they had corrected their marketing error).
it seems like since the last update, the ADATS is able to track ordnance and not lose lock after acquiring it
interesting
Just asking,does ADATS have a stabilizer?
Sight yes, launchers no, gun unknown
I wanted to go around ADATS radar detecting missiles and other thing, but as of now i seem to lack the ground.
This sounds so silly. So, the operator would be watching the skies with TV/FLIR looking for missiles, even though there’s an advanced radar onboard? I’ll see if I can find anything about this.
