And the MiG 23 dunked on the F-4E
The M1 was great when added and then the T-80U was basically it’s equal it was the Leopard 2A5 that started the tank arms race.
They really should give Russia the T-90M2 though. T-80BVM and T-90M feel kinda lacking.
The T-90M in game is pretty much the T-90M Obr 20 it has the full Relikt side skirts and the supplementary 4S24 ERA bags. All it is missing is a “cope cage” some rubber padding to protect the turret ring K5 on the rear and thermal camoflage cover.
T-90M2 was never realised but that hasn’t stopped Gaijin adding thinks before.
T-72B3M too. It has break the curse of -4km/h reverse speed.
1 Like
As of now, it is in development. The main advantage it would have other than APS is the reverser. It can drive forward and back at the same speed.
T-90M with a T-80 transmission and power plant?
Well, with the T-80BVM, there is still something to be done, there was a video where it moved at a speed of -25 km/h. But with the T-90M there will be problems, because apart from fuzzy videos, there is no evidence of a speed greater than -4
Not that I know of. I’m pretty sure they gave it the gearbox and stuff from the T-14 Armata.
Russian Documents state they implanted T-14 components to improve it.
They intend to put the T-14’s reverser into the T-90M2.
2 Likes
The BUK-m1, 1-2, 3 use sarh with the 2 and 3 using ARH as an optional seeker head, not IR.
I remember there being a big deal about the ARH seeker and how it should be IR. I decided to look into it a bit after some people spoke about it, but there’s clearly something wrong with it as it currently sits, or else I wouldn’t see so many people call it fictional. I’m not sure what that is, though. The uncertainty is bothering me.
It was absolutely an issue. It had the farthest range of any SPAA until the multi-vehicle mechanic/systems were added.
Some of us do. These vehicles realistically should be soft locked to 45km of range until we can add farther reaching systems for everyone. To which said limit can be removed and they get their full capability.
2 Likes
why did it @ me? I didn’t say that lol. Whisloy did.
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
2 Likes
Do you even read the graphs that you’re posting lmao ?
1 Like
That wont fix it though the BUKs missile will still be at mach 4.0 if you half the range of the system
1 Like
So really we just need to not add it at all then. If balance is a concern that is. But I suspect its not so they’ll ship it anyways.
1 Like
BUK is getting into S-300 and Patriot ranges…If they wanted systems with that Range the IRIS-TSLM should have been added
The BUK can also be notched relatively easily, unlike other SPAA systems.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/1nbo2zw/buk_m3_notch_resistance_clip_by_request_of/
Yeah it has excellent range, but that’s not as useful when it can be dodged like any other ARH missile.
1 Like
Yeah. This could have been delayed until that because, at least according to Google; we could have given the Patriot system to the US, Germany, , Sweden, France (though theyre getting the Aster-30), Japan, and Israel while Russia gets this and Italy the Aster-30. Then everyone would be sitting with a 70-100km system. But the urge to go one step forward, two step backs is irresistible for the Snail.
Many would like the S-300 with a 10kt warhead