Amx-10p (milan)

Suggestions - Devs Passed
1
Would you like this armament change for the AMX-10P to be implemented?
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters
If yes, how would you want this change to be implemented?
  • Change to Light Tank, add missile to one side, move smokes to turret, and raise BR
  • Keep SPAA, add missile to one side, move smokes to turret, and raise BR
  • Add a separate Light Tank version with turret smokes and missiles
  • I don’t want to see this change
0 voters
If this change is implemented, should you be able to choose which side the missile goes on?
  • Yes, a choice between left, right, or both launchers
  • No, it should be constant and unchangeable
  • I don’t want to see this change
0 voters
If this change is implemented, and the vehicle is moved, should the name be changed?
  • Yes, it should be changed to AMX-10P (MILAN)
  • No, it should stay as AMX-10P
  • I want to see a separate vehicle
  • I don’t want this change
0 voters

AMX-10P (MILAN)
An AMX-10P with mounted MILAN launcher(s).

With the recent addition of the AMX-10P, although France needed/needs an AA it makes no sense to me as to why the AMX-10P of all things was chosen to be that AA. In my mind, it should be closer to it’s intended role, as an IFV. Of course, with only the 20mm, it would be rather difficult to play as an IFV at Cold War BRs, but there is a solution.

image
AMX-10P (MILAN)

The AMX-10P carried two MILAN launchers and 10 missiles in the troop compartment. These were intended to be used by infantry anti-tank teams, but if required could be mounted on the hull. The downside, of course, is that whichever side the MILAN would be mounted on (or both, potentially) would be a dead-spot for the turret, unless the intention was to shoot your own MILAN launcher. And of course this is assuming that the launcher is mounted to the left/right of the turret and not on the back, as in the picture. In any case, the MILAN launcher not being turret-mounted means that besides the swivel of the launcher itself, the MILAN will be semi-hull aimed.

To get a better understanding of how it would be modeled, I got some screenshots from a game where it was implemented in this fashion.
image
image
The MILAN launcher in these games are mounted behind and to the right of the turret. Assuming 45 degrees for the launcher, this gives the turret a 315 degree arc of fire on all sides except for to the back-right. Unfortunately, these are just game assets, and the only real picture I could find of something like it is the one at the top of the post.

In game, this would allow the AMX-10P to be more of its intended role as a Cold War support vehicle, instead of a mid-tier SPAA. For putting it on the left/right, a separate drop-down armament menu in modifications for left, right, or both could be added, similar to how torpedoes are on some ships.
Mounting the MILAN launcher would also cover one or both smoke launchers, as they are in game right now, so I would also suggest changing the smoke launchers to be turret mounted, as seen here.
image
image

Specifications
Armament

  • 20mm GIAT M693/F2 autocannon
  • 7.62mm MAS machine gun
  • 1-2 MILAN missile launchers, 10 missiles stored
    MILAN 1, 2, 2T

Engine - Hispano-Suzia Model 115-2, 275hp

Mass - 14.0t

Power/Weight - 19.65hp/t

Max speed

  • 65kph

Sights

  • M371, commander, 1x-6x magnification
  • M406, gunner, 2x-6x magnification
  • MIRA or MILIS thermal sight (mounted on MILAN launcher)

Unfortunately, due to the way modifications and battle ratings work, this couldn’t be added as a modification to the current vehicle without increasing its BR flat out, as modifications do not change BR. So either the current AMX-10P needs to be changed to light tank and moved to ~7.7, or a separate AMX-10P (MILAN) needs to be added. This would also be an excuse to add NVDs to the AMX-10P. That way, it would be equal to its contemporaries such as the Marder 1A1-, resulting in a pretty solid choice for mid-Cold War France.
Personally, I would prefer a move and corresponding armament change to allow some new, unique SPAA to take its place, and I will link some alternative SPAA suggestions below my sources. Additionally, as this was mostly a field-mod, there are very few sources discussing it.

Sources

Spoiler

Chars-Francais
Army Guide - AMX-10P
Tank Encyclopedia Archives

Alternative SPAA

Spoiler

CCKW 353 (Flak 38)

CCKW 353 P512

AMX-13 S533

Thank you for reading. If there is more sources/information on this field-mod please let me know, so that I can add them to the post.

11 Likes
2

+1 but only as a separate vehicle.

3

+1 as a separate vehicle

4

They can probably fudge the Milan launcher to just pivot around on its tripod, since it will no doubt be “ghost operated”.
The AMX-10P/HOT would be a better bet for a light tank/destroyer. It was proposed to the devs a few years ago.
But the “SPAA” one can represent the early first version, while “light tank” can be the modernized with the MILAN, applique armor, and maybe even the meat armor in the back. And then a TD with HOT. 3 whole vehicles added to the tree with only a little copypasta!

4 Likes
5

I’m 70% sure that the launcher can’t change it’s orientation, meaning that the ATGM would need to do a 45° arc each time you fire it, so well…
Considering it would be a gimmick at best, and would give it a higher BR, I don’t think it’s really worth it ; the HOT version would be better

2 Likes
6

the hot variant it pretty cool, however its pretty much a side grade to the mephisto in concept, trading mobility for better protection.

7

While yes I agree the HOT version would be better as a standalone TD, for this one I went with the idea that it would be similar in role and performance to the Marder 1, as a contemporary IFV, and not as a dedicated TD.

8

What do you mean by “not change its orientation”? Like traverse?

9

Yes

10

The tripod allows for 360-degree traverse, and +20-degree elevation. So it should be fine :)

3 Likes
11

In my opinion, this is the build that should have been added since the beginning. That way it would have been placed at a higher br, and left the place free for the ACMAT that was added after.

3 Likes
12

I agree, it was useful when it was released but became obsolete one patch after since the amcat have 1 more gun and better firerate. So +1 for me, it will give the amx 10 p a new purpose and it will be useful again.

13

When I wrote this the ACMAT hadn’t even been added. So even more of a reason to change it IMO.

14

I agree, the ACMAT is better (and cooler) in every way, so i hope AMX 10P can go to light tank line :P.

1 Like
15

Maybe something you should include in your suggestion, the MILAN was intergrated as part of the 2005 life extension program, along with passive armor to help withstand 14.5 rounds

2 Likes
16

Extra armor sounds nice, too.

17

Yup, it’s mentionned in the first suggestion on the old forum : AMX-10P mod. 2005: A New Legacy - France - War Thunder - Official Forum

2 Likes
18

After reading it, personally I think it should be implemented in a way similar to the Marder 1A1(-) and 1A3, where they’re separate IFVs at different BRs. But because of that I probably won’t include it in this one because this one is specifically about the old 80s/90s AMX-10Ps

3 Likes
19

In terms of choosing launchers, having two “ammo belts” (1 per side) would probably be the simplest way to implement that feature using existing game functions. You’d load up to 12 total ATGMs split between the two and each launcher would reload separately. If you want only one launcher, only “load” shells in one “belt” before battle. It’d be janky but relatively simple.

Alternatively, there could be modifications like on most tanks currently (gun or gun+smokes) where you can select your equipment from the hangar. This would be a more elegant solution but also would mean you have to pick before going into battle.

20


2 Likes