I said that SRL document will be a curse
1 Like
what, 4026?
Aren’t those the initial requirements, not actually representative of capability irl?
Yes try getting gaijin to understand that
Oh no, SRL again…
There is more data suggesting a 600/1000 arc capability was demonstrated as an option.
1 Like
Only a curse if used poorly.
This is gaijin they go with poorly first. Even so even if not done poorly your whole turret becomes a weak spot instead
SR(L) 4026 will become what the Swedish Trials are for Germany & US, a thing holding them back cus Gaijin will have “”““no reason””“” to ““believe”” the tank’s armour was improved beyond the initial requirements.
2 Likes
Lets be real with how the other blogs have been its bound to happen. Get ready for a mega nerf coming to Mr Challenger 2 cos of some documents that give the minium requirements for a tank le sigh
What they’ll do is nerf the cheeks while buffing the mantlet to make it so the entirety of the turret can be penned by rounds like dm53. Either this or they do nothing. Maybe making the side composites even worse while they’re at it, as they see no reason why we wouldn’t have just filled it with cardboard as Russia did and we obviously can’t be any smarter than them.
Thats why we dont give them anything bad :)
Gaijin: According to the public information owned by the development team, the protection of the Challenger 2 tank is obviously too good, and we will modify it in the next update to
Hull: 300-350KE (same as Challenger 1 main battle tank)
Turret: 500-600KE (according to SRL4026)
I won’t be surprised if they really did this.
When you ask such a question, Gaijin often replies, "According to the public information owned by the development team, it is obvious that the United Kingdom has not continued to improve the data shown in this (SRL4026) document.If you are not satisfied with this, you can submit what you know to support Challenger 2’s additional protection indicators.
Xddd
Comparing the mobility of Challenger 2/2E/3TD, I came to the conclusion that their mobility depends on the neutral gear.
The Challenger 2E has 1700 rpm at N, so it immediately starts driving without revving. At the same time, the challenger 2/3TD has only 600 rpm per N, so the tank seems to make a leap of 5 meters. And while it is moving by inertia, it spins up the engine speed to 1300 rpm, and only then does the tank begin to drive.
My question is, would it be a serious violation of historicity to give the Challengers 1000 rpm on N gear instead of 600 rpm?
This will help chelli feel better about small maneuvers.
If you need a comparison example
Ch2 accelerates to 30 km/h in 5 seconds
Ch3TD accelerates to 30 km/h in 4 seconds
Ch2E accelerates to 30 km/h in 3.6 seconds
3 Likes
I mean i swear to god if they pull that document out of their ass and try nerf Turret Cheek armour I want them to work out what is actually in the armour to give them that weight and yet so little protection. If it’s gonna have no armour, may as well give it decent mobility so there’s at lesst some redeeming qualities.
And also, SR(L) 4026 was… produced before the armour inserts were produced and added… unless SR(L) was produced before 1994?
That’ll be a no then
Merkava 4: First time?
Good news everyone: I have been banned from Reddit for the second time so now I’m spending more of my time and effort doing something with my life.
3 Likes
4 Likes
It would be inaccurate, modelling a torque converter would definitely help.
1 Like