They didn’t intend to do a lot of things. Plans change, so it was removed.
Tough luck there, you can’t flag posts made by moderators and admins
2 Likes
If it was/is 1:1 scale, then fair enough.
What does 1:1 scale have to do with anything? It’s a mockup, a representation of what it could be.
It can be touched and represents the concept in accurrate dimensions.
1 Like
In the case of the Montana class, the bluewater devs have already accepted that hulls being laid down is good enough to be put into game, and sure if you want the Mach 3 XF-108 in game thats fine, but it would be like the MiG-25 fast but supremely limited by the maps
Scale models do the same.
The Montanas were never laid down. I just used it as an example.
…The Panther is my least favorite tank, but what gaijin did with its removal was just plain biased and wrong. If they actually intended to remove so-called fakeries from this game, then they should have started with a neutral look at their side and removed the KV-122, T-34-100, T-44-100, T-44-122, Tu-1, Su 8, M6A2E1, & Kronshtadt, just to name a few fakes. What you do to one side, you do to the other(s). But of course, being russian, gaijin couldn’t get past their prejudices and inexplicably removed the Panther II, FlakPanzer 341, Maus, etc without even considering the possibility of “correcting” the Panther II by reworking its turret to match Krupp’s 1944 turret drawing (pic below) and aligning/mounting the 88 mm in accordance with the blueprint (pic above). Additionally, they didn’t even bother to consider the alternative of giving it the H-SKA 86176 / H-SK 88517 turret with a 75 mm weapon instead
10 Likes
No offense but I trust Krupp’s engineers more. Additionally, we all know that those soviet vehicles listed had very long and glorious combat histories rather than being failed, cancelled, one-off showroom vehicles riddled with crew killing technical problems that amounted to nothing
7 Likes
You might trust them more but it doesn’t change the fact that the Panther II 88 was not even a project, as the Panther II had already been cancelled by the time the 88 mm schmalturm was being worked on. At no point was the Panther II meant to use this turret, there aren’t even any proposals to do so.
Which is better than the situation the Panther II 88 is in, that being a completely fake, made up vehicle. All the other vehicles mentioned were built or were at least in the process of being built. Such cannot be said for the Panther II 88.
2 Likes
But it’s for a Panther Schmalturm, which means the Panther F.
And that turret from the drawing is exactly what we have in-game.
The gun was mounted forwards and extends outside the actuall turret in order to fit, as well as a spring to keep it balanced, since the balance point shifted to the front.
Of course it’s nothing more than a concept. RoF would suffer immensly and the range-finder probably couldn’t be used or limited the gun depression.
I am aware, my point is exactly that even though this turret was modified to mount the KwK 43 88 mm cannon, it was still at no point meant to be for the Panther II, ever.
3 Likes
I think the Coelian should return, it had a mockup made and is more real than the ostwind 2, and just plain better no clue why it specifically was removed, sure the panther 2 and 105 were fake af but the poor SPAA was fine
7 Likes
What bothers me about the Ostwind II and Flakpanzer 341 is that they don’t appear to function the way they are modeled.
They both are suppose to have the FlaK 44 37mm cannon but they are still fed by 8 round clips.
In the 341 the crew isn’t able to reload the guns because they don’t reach far enough into the turret while with the Ostwind II the clips can’t get ejcted outside the guns because the other gun is right besides it.
The 341 seems to have the same gun model as the Ostwind I while the Ostwind II has a different model for the guns.
The Ostwind II can depress the guns by -10°, the gun sight however can’t depress that much and stays at 0°. On the Ostwind I the gun sight actually depresses below the cut-out…
It’s also impossible to feed the gun on the right with ammo, since there isn’t any space for ammunition storage, nor any way to get ammo from the hull.
It just doesn’t seem logical to have side-fed 37mm AA cannons side by side.
It would be a lot more reasonable to either convert them to top-loading, use a top-loader like the M42 of the German Navy or put another gun on top like it was done with 37mm FlaK 43 Zwilling.
My guess would be that the 341 was suppose to have a belt-fed 37mm, maybe an upscaled MK 103.
Basically a ZSU-37-2. Which of course never happened since there’s basically no information on the vehicle anyway.
Its a rather heavily armored SPAA, so it was great at baiting your average P-47 pilot into your 37mm minengeschoss
1 Like
No. Gaijin tried. Now they should have the courage to acknowledge these three as they are and Hand them back over to the whole Community.
yes, with implementing the F 16 AJ and the Yak 141, you could bring them back.
But Gaijin is to selective about this and doesn’t want to treat every nation equally, regarding the implementation of prototypes etc
5 Likes
No, Gaijin did the responsible thing and removed them.
If they come back, other trees should be able to add fake vehicles designed by the community.
It wasn’t responsible, but a biased and hypocritical decision. And such cannot and will not be accepted.
4 Likes