I just checked this thread for the first time in a week and I came across hundreds of posts of someone who is absolutely hellbent on fighting tooth and nail to prevent Challenger 2 to get the advantages of hydrogas suspension; every time demanding for sources, and when the sources were provided, denying and rejecting them or using technicalities to question them.
Of course I got a little nervous here, hahah. Because this is irrational. I can’t see a user with genuine intent here. It either has to be trolling or someone very desperate to prevent Challenger 2s to shine even a little bit.
Not like it has been good enough to you on the multiple other messages on this thread the last couple of days. Every time a source has been provided, you have m oved goalposts by asking “improved performance, cOmPaReD tO wHaT”, or “it says it’s more stable and softer, not that it drives better”, etc.
And now you are flagging me lmao
I don’t know what Challenger 2 has done to you guys, but this is kinda sad.
Prolly because whoever had made the original claim, stated that HydroGas is superior in every single aspect? That’s what Godvana has been disputing here to my knowledge (i.e the blanket “X is better than Y because I said so”.)
Driving an AFV equipped with torsion bar suspension is a lot like driving a 4x4 cross-country, you observe the terrain in front of you and navigate obstacles, adjusting acceleration and inputting steering demands to compensate for difficult terrain.
Driving an AFV equipped with hydrogas is like driving a boat; you slap the pedal all the way down and it just flows over all but the most horrendous terrain as if it isn’t there, at a consistent speed.
My personal experience as a driver is Challenger 2, FV432/Bulldog, Spartan, Sultan, Scimitar, and some American equipment.
Edit; please note, this is anecdotal evidence and not a source.
It’s better compared to what? You’re just giving me another example of the “it’s better because I say so!”. Better compared to what other tank’s suspension?
M1A2s?
Leopard 2A7Vs?
How did you come to judge it to be better when the performance of torsion + dampener suspensions can vary so much, that 2A7Vs suspension for example, is a completely different beast compared to M1s.
Casually ignoring the previous multiple days of people providing descriptions, statements and sources of every kind and all of it being denied and rejected
GPT here was not used as “ultimate proof”, just as an additional layer to sum up all of the previous statements in a simple and fast way to make a sort of TLDR. Anyone with good faith would have got the point.
Of course, claiming that “GPT was used as suppossed ultimate proof” is better to “destroy” the point made, so whatever.
Compared to the common contemporaries, obviously. What else could the statements be referring to? Christie suspension? Of course not. It’s a matter of simple context!
I just can’t understand why some players would put so much time and energy into trying to deny a minor nation’s subpar MBTs getting some sort of gameplay improvement. Like, just why?
Of course, and Merkava’s helical spring suspension also has some advantages in the off-road department which I believe should also be modelled or simulated ingame. If I recall correctly, Merkava’s suspension was specifically designed for smoother rides on rocky terrains typical from the Golan Heights.
