Ah, fair enough for that then
yeah wanted to mention with the full auto as well, doesnt look like it, the slow mo makes it realy hard.
well never mind if its a complete different cannon you showed off.
So still a big yikes on the CT 40 front
1 Like
chain cannon being the 7.62mm i assume?
yup
1 Like
yeah and thats the main problem, nobody just shoots 1 round with an autocannon.
Even more so when they specialy wanna use 40mm for more penetration capability etc
Not even that, the first two or so shots are on target, then it walks off to the right before correcting back left while remaining relatively in the same plane. Which indicates operator or software/mounting error rather than anything with the gun itself, given we have nothing else to go on I’d hazard a guess at operator error.
this is Shini being Shini and trying to whine about the CT40/British industry again and making a big deal out of a nothing burger, note they posted it here and not in the Jaguar thread cause they know they’d get called out on it lmao
6 Likes
well no, the french part
i didnt even think about that honestly, i just talk more british members, as it affects them as well
I dont know if its operator problem etc, i only see a bad firing gun, i recently found those posts about the Ajax and its possible poor barrel wear and needing quick replacements.
This is just a continuation of it, since for a long time the Ajax was in fact a problematic development project
I did not have any notorious actions behind this. I just wanted to share information about the gun i found. Me not posting it in the french jaguar stuff is cause i do not care about the french.
But i care about the british possibly having a bad system in real life that could miss the mark on its performance and could lead to real life problems.
I did no go as far as to actualy analyse the pattern how the gun missed, i just saw a freaking gun completly missing its target
Honestly i feel like your slight bias on my canada / australian stand, plays a huge role into your analysation and my intention of me posting it here
1 Like
Rant on
Not really british, but rather french
He’s always spreading borderline fake / out of context info all the time
Off the top of my head I have :
- CT40 not accurate and short lifespan (but it’s basically the same as bofors 40mm)
- Leclerc can’t get SHARD APFSDS cause it’s not bought by the french army yet (KF-51 in the german tree is fine though)
- Rafale bad because shot down (no context, no nothing)
- SAMP/T doesn’t work you-know-where (actually a bug caused by the battery being made with a mix of french and italian elements, fixed after two weeks)
- ASCALON 140 bad, Rhm 130 good, because low chamber pressure (that one is the funniest). Larger HE shells ? Potential ability to carry missiles ? Growth potential ? Who cares i suppose, not important on an IRL battlefield
It’s not really surprising he does not post on french threads anymore, he usually gets debunked in a matter of minutes, so he resorts to attack shared programs with anything french inside instead, at least that’s the pattern i’m seeing…
Rant off
7 Likes
Eh, both then I guess, I’ve only really seen the junk they’ve posted about Ajax and Challenger 3. Poorly sourced and usually taken out of context. I’m just tired of it really :/
5 Likes
heh fair enough, maybe he does it with everything non german
Never bothered to check to be honest X)
3 Likes
Aye fair, it’d be more effort than it’s worth.
Now I should probably have something to eat, hope you all have a good evening/day/morning!
2 Likes
How am i doing that again lol.
I nearly never write about other nations lol.
U literaly brought later sources that said as well that it holds 900 apfsds rounds. But when i wrote that its false. Sure fine.
Never said it cant get it. I only said its not the active service ammunition and france doesnt plan to use it. Strv122s dont get Dm 53 either in the game. Ammunition is mostly based on the actual service ammunition.
Thats just how the game works with weird exceptions like premium 2a4M KE-W.
Tech tree standardly dont get it.
Vehicles going to developer is quite normal on the other hand.
I only posted to it getting shot down, u are thinking to much into it. Like literaly the eurofighter, ragale beaf is quite common thats not a me issue. Hell half the people in thisbthread got warned for that already.
Dont think i ever wrote sth about the french sam system specialy u might remember that one wrong?
Age old debate as well. Thats not borderline fake or out of context wither.
No i just dont care enough.
The hell kind of junk did post about the chally 3.
I only shared information that was released from the rheinmetall side abiut the upgrade.
Everything else i hold back since i dont know.
The only issue that might have been was cause i called it the rheinmetall upgraded chally cause of the gun.
Which to some might come over as disregarding the british part of the project. Which was not the intention and for that i apologise if that was the case.
Chally 130 on the otherhand, i only spoke the truth.
Only things i ever posted about the ajax was mentioning how at one point of development it deafened the crew i think?
The barrel wear and now the spread info.
U make it sound like its a regular thing, which it is not.
No i generaly keep away of stuff i dont know enough about normaly.
In case of the british i just cared about them and feeled like i was close enough to discuss it.
I guess not.
Still believe your general dislike cause of my canadian/ australia opinion plays a bigger role into this bias.
But british equipment and the handling of canada / australia are complete different issues in my opinion
Read my post again then, CTA 40 is rated for 900 - 10 000 depending on the round fired (900 for APFSDS only, 10 000 for HE and derivatives)
Naval bofors is rated for 5000 HE round
Both are basically similar in that regard
Neither I or you have any official sources, just eurosatory for me and some random tweet for you
The rest is not related to this topic so i will hide it :
Spoiler
Repeating it again and again doesn’t make it true though
15% increased penetration compared to F1 (Source nexter) “ain’t much better” I suppose
Apparently still enough to oppose shard addition and criticize ascalon regularly
I will stop with my off topic rant, hopefully you got the point, we can move to PM or the appropriate threads (Jaguar or Leclerc)
4 Likes
I believe the early variants of the EBRC Jaguar lacked proper stabilisation for their gun, only the very recent variants have it.
That’s likely an unstabilised variant which is causing the poor accuracy.
4 Likes
Honestly i just dont know, i just shared what we found, together with the barrel wear thing it does look bleak.
Anyones gladly invited to prove me wrong.
I specialy wrote if those first hand knowledge are true ,since i cant verify it.
Same with the dispersion.
The thaught that people assume i checked / was aware of the pattern of the dispersion and it likely being an error of some kind ir whatever is kinda ridiculous.
I only saw a missing gun, nothing more
Suppose it counts as a weapons system but the first model of the SSN-AUKUS has just been released, I did a bit of a write-up on discord for some others but I thought perhaps someone here might find it interesting.
Contrary to popular belief, Boats are indeed cool as hell, and from a British perspective, Hunter-Killer submarines are probably the only military weapons system we have that are genuinely unchallenged in their place as No.1.
Some observations with SSN-AUKUS
Sonar
The flat plates I believe are the flank sonar arrays. Astute (below), as you can see has a similar panel for sonar 2076 which composes a bow sonar, 2 flank sonars, another 2 aft-flank sonars, and a towed array sonar deployed from somewhere (this is more or less secret).
Weapons systems
It features 6 torpedo tubes which is good, this is the same as the Astute class the standard number for RN submarines (well 5 is also standard but we no longer place a tube in the middle of the bow sonar array instead we arrange 3 around the circular shielding for the sonar on each side for a total of 6). American’s generally use 4 tubes plus VLS cells which the RN has never had before outside of nuclear missile subs. The seawolfs (American again) have 8 tubes but 4 are loaded with tomahawks at any one time as they lack VLS, so the american standard is 4 torpedo tubes. Astute’s generally have all 6 tubes loaded with torpedos as they don’t often fire tomahawks without advanced notice and not in salvos. The French only have 4 tubes and no VLS because their submarines are smaller and less capable (but still very good technologically).
Its worth noting as you can see these boats will also have VLS equipped in a common VLS compartment with the US next gen sub, similarly the British dreadnoughts and the new US Columbia’s are also sharing VLS compartments but on those for ICBM’s , so 6 tubes plus VLS would put them ahead of the current US standard for hunter-killer subs on torpedo tubes, and also on par for VLS. So they’re better hunter-killers than existing US subs and better land-attack platforms than existing British subs, best of both worlds.
Size
They’re going to be much bigger than the Astute’s though and likely on par with the Virginia’s. The best way of proving this aside from what the media is saying (often wrong) is the location of the dive-planes. All serious nations have moved away from the concept of sail mounted dive-planes they’re worse for a number of reasons but acoustically they’re a big penalty.
What’s interesting here is that as you can see the astutes feature their hull mounted dive planes up high, this is because they’re ~7200 tonnes submerged and don’t have the space, this also gives them their stubby look as the PWR2 reactor they use is actually the reactor for the Vanguard class which is ~15000 tonnes so a much larger reactor. as a result they had to place the dive-planes up high to find space for them. on all the new renders of the AUKUS subs they’re mounted optimally in the middle of the hull, this is because the new AUKUS subs are slated to be 10,000+ tonnes which is a lot for a Hunter-killer submarine, the US ones are that big regularly as they use the same base designs for arsenal submarines as they do for ballistic missile submarines to save development costs. Seawolfs are smaller and a similar size as a clean(er) sheet design.
Present features
As you can expect it features a nuclear-linked steam turbo-electric drive (Britain will be the first to field these on a submarine), a pumpjet propulsor (again british submarine innovation), X plane steering gear (British again) , Integrated optronics mast (british again…).
I also expect a lot of changes
That sail will not stay that way its a terrible design and won’t remain as in the full scale model, thats more american than anything and doesn’t suite the hull at all, i’ve included diagrams of dreadnought and an artists rendition of the AUKUS, as you can see it will have the same strengthened, streamlined, optronically integrated sail i believe. it probably won’t even have an Astute sail and those are better than the american ones.
Second thing is the round hull form, that’s last century for the Brits, we have never featured such a poor hull form in our entire SS(B)N history. That won’t stay as you can see on the AUKUS render and again Dreadnoughts the UK has pioneered a new hull form based partially on the physiology of Whales but also based on hydrodynamic advancements. so i expect the dive-planes to be refined to blend in with that new 2-piece hull form, you can see some of that on astute but its most prevalent on the dreadnoughts.
Why we’re really quite good at this
Look at any British nuclear submarine, then look at the equivalent nuclear submarine from a NATO ally, notice how they get the important features the generation after we pioneer it.
6 Likes
No kidding.
People like to gush about Germany’s type XXI’s but the amphion class was out at the exact same time and lasted alot longer. Then came the porpoise and Oberon which Wikipedia calls one of it not the quietist sub during its service. (I spent a whole five seconds looking for figures and didn’t find any). Said it before but I’d really like to see British subs on game soon.
There’s a reason you won’t find much on the Oberons - they found much use (allegedly) being very kind to the folks in Hereford.
They also preceded the Upholders, which are still in service with the Canadians (as the Victorias iirc?), so there’s that also.
I am really fearing that they’ll start with US, Japan and Germany for “reasons” and it will be like a year later that other nations would start seeing Subs added
I mean, while I won’t go out on a limb and suggest that our submarines previous to the 80s were distinctly the best (partly because I have no evidence to support that, and partly because Imm in that crowd of accepting that US SSNs were probably best in the world at that point), TRAF class were god’s own (along with Spearfish which i’d wholly rate as superior to some variants of the Mk 48 on the basis of “you aren’t escaping an 80kt torpedo”), and then you get Astute that would’ve been a decent submarine had it not been torpedoed by the massive flaws in British Defence procurement post 1995 so I wouldn’t be surprised if it was one of the best/the best SSN out there. There’s probably a reason the Americans are keen for buy-in.