Then it’s rare, but I still haven’t seen it. I just ground the entire Russian helicopter tree about 9 days ago from the Mi-24V to the Mi-28NM using my BMPTs and other premiums, and not once did I ever die to that.
No, Just no. Don’t have to explain why this should not be done, we all know why.
uh huh… How bout we’ll just check what UVZ has to say about that, shall we?
No
That one is correct, max cyclic RoF is 600rds/min.
(Considering that no changes were made to the feeding system on the service-version compared to the prototype)
No
Also No
No mention of stabilized Launchers, solely FoV/Sight stabilization which gaijin doesnt model as stab ingame (See: AMX-30 DCA, ADATS, etc.)
Editing exists.
Once again, you’re hung up on something that doesn’t matter. The ATAKA is already more than enough to defeat most 12.7 vehicles. All I did was state that some recent claims have debated the truth of the Kornet’s penetration, that’s all.
I didn’t, but whatever you want to believe, man. Why would I even suggest the BMP-T should have the Kornet when it’s overperforming with ATAKA missiles? That makes no sense.
It’s called context, but you’ve now cried about this one statement across every reply you’ve made to me. Get over it.
Cool. Prove that to Gaijin, not me. I don’t care about having the BMPT made even stronger when other vehicles have been rotting in Bug Report hell for over 5 years.
This isn’t about “fixing the BMPT”, because if it were, you’d be focusing on the fact that it survives ANY ammunition explosion at all. Unlike NATO ammunition, Russian Ammunition does not deflagrate. Any hit to the ammunition, especially in the configuration of the BMPT, should be absolutely lethal.
A single screenshot doesn’t prove a bug exists. It’s well known that the hit cam is not always consistent.
What is this kill cam bro😭 #warthunder #fyp
huh!???
It’s memed constantly. Your claim hinges on you pretending this issue doesn’t exist.
The current BMP-2M in-game uses the Berezhok weapon module. It does not use the ATAKA missiles, so it cannot be swapped to use them without an entire vehicle remodel.
I should have specified. I should know that you’re going to pick at wording to make a point. The BMP-2M we have in-game should be called the BMP-2M Berezhok. When I said “It does not use atakas”, I explicitly meant the Berezhok represented in-game.
The BMP-2M does not use APFSDS in real life, unless you can somehow prove it is. 3UBR11 exists, but its use is completely up to speculation.
Furthermore, it is well known that high-fire-rate autocannons struggle to use APFSDS and APDS because the projectiles’ high muzzle velocities and temperatures wear down their barrels quickly.
I don’t need to go into this as it should be common knowledge. There’s a good reason why the Bradley shoots as slowly as it does. It isn’t a style choice to fire slowly; it’s practical.
1 Like
And it’s already accepted as 65 km/h anyway: Community Bug Reporting System
Multiple sources list it as 65 instead of 60, together with 47 ton, it’s possible it’s a different version but idk
BMPT Tank Support Combat Vehicle
ATAKA-T guided weapon system | JOINT STOCK COMPANY RESEARCH AND PRODUCTION CORPORATION KONSTRUKTORSKOYE BYURO MASHYNOSTROYENIYA
ÔÑÂÒÑ Ðîññèè | Êàòàëîã ÏÂÍ
Manufacturer of the actual launch rails lists it as -10
His claim was about the BMP-2M being unable to use 3UBR11, not about the BMPT
Not saying something != not existing
https://web.archive.org/web/20230803035608/https://www.fsvts.gov.ru/catalog/910.ru.html
3 Likes
47t and 65kp/h figures are both for the service-variant, not the BMPT prototype. (As you can see by comparing the two brochures I added)
The datasheet for the Missile-Launcher specifies the maximum elevation-range that it can achieve, however this does not mean that the depression of the missile-launcher is the same on all platforms.
In this case, the -10° figure directly contradicts the BMPTs manufacturer (UVZ).
Additional brochure for BMPT as reference for the weight and top-speed figure;
So how do you explain rosobonexport catalogue from 2005 IIRC stating 65 km/h, when it was still a prototype?
Send the page that does.
UVZ is very consistent with the 60kp/h figure for the prototype BMPT’s (including BMPT-72, though for that I am not 100% certain whether they have conflicting figures in other brochures that I havent seen yet)
Aswell as the 48t (BMPT Prototype), 44t (BMPT-72 Prototype) and 47t service-bmpt figures.
In any case, I would value UVZ’s figures as more relibale than such from rosobonexport.
1 Like
It’s this
According to the document, it’s from 2003
That one gets the 30mm 2A42’s ammo count wrong, so idk how reliable the rest would be.
The UVZ brochures I added were from 2011 or 2012.
1 Like
search function is your friend. in case you were looking for it in this thread, you guessed it, its the wrong thread.
2 Likes
The BMP-2M may be at a lower BR, but does it have the same armor? No.
1 Like
Im aware, but at the very least, the weight could be 47 tons, even UVZ website says 48±2%, that would almost be 47 tons perfectly
I think they can and do both use the 65 kmh transmission but eh
Btw, rosvooruzhenie is a primary source right?
fr lol
Is the - in the room with us?
Your 47t figure for the ingame version is essentially pure fantasy as it contradicts several OEM brochures, infosheets from exhibitions, website statements etc.
And then we can also consider that the ingame BMPT has additional addon-side era (tiles) available, which do not magically make the vehicle a ton lighter by adding stuff to it.
You’re essentially going through several brochures, sometimes for what are literally different configurations/vehicles alltogether, pick and choose which values you like and ignore the others that contradict them or others and then start throwing them together to build a vehicle with characteristics you wish it had, rather than such you can prove the ingame-vehicle did infact have.
5 Likes
👍👍
I had a feeling this was what was happening, based on him ignoring the fact that the BMPT can survive ammo racks and only wanting to speak about problems that would buff it.
I wasn’t able to make any confident statements, though, as I don’t have these manuals you do.
1 Like
Laughing so hard about your article !!!
BMPT is the worst joke tank ever !!! I dont know how many deadly and fatale shots I fired and it still lives. Besides … the rocket pod does not explode when hit ! AND the ammo rack also does not explode when hit !!!
2 Likes
BMPT should be where it is until they figure out a way to kill it while hull down
1 Like
That’s the thing, you don’t.
But currently, hitting ATGMS apparantely is killing it, which ironically present themselves as a much bigger target.