No, it’s been reported for TES, OES, 2F
3 Likes
Can’t wait to get spall liners 6 months after everyone else
4 Likes
okay am i shizo? it looks like there are muiltiple side plates
here you can clearly see that the plate is thicker in the middle compared to the rear (i dont know if i see the same with the frontal triangular plate)
meanwhile here everything looks like it is flush and the same thickness
while here the engine side plate is again thinner
Congrats, you just discovered that Dorchester have different versions. Something that gaijin failed to understand. From 2E to 2I, while F has 2 and I has 3 subversions. Plate start from G and end in I3
1 Like
Also it is not engine plate that is thinner, the crew plate is thiccer or thinner
wait i thought we had just two mounting variants, the first one
and the solid plate
which was first used with the NERA blocks of the earlier Dorchester versions since ASPRO-HMT was not ready yet
The no backplate was up to 2f package (well there was a backplate but a steel one, not composite and it were a individual nera sized backplates, i think on the 2f). 2g up the backplate is present. 2g has a thinner plate, 2h has a thiccer plate and 2i can sellect them depending on the need (the i1 to i3, but i sadly do not know what configuration has what.
2 Likes
i feel like we are just slipping deeper and deeper down the Chally 2 Lore Iceberg
Yea, and the pixel measure that trick used was made on the OES with 40mm backplate configuration. We need to prove that TES used the thiccer one (the one that stand out on the photos, one of the OES config also use it). Sadly it is very hard as the argument is that the thiccer plate is dust cover… And we need to prove that it is not a one (yes dev said that around 70mm of a thicness difference is a dust cover for a 40mm plate. A dust cover for a plate
so idealy we need a picture of the backing plate of a 2008-2009 Challenger 2 in Iraq
Yes. Good luck with that tho. Remember that you have to prove that the pić was taken in 2008 and it was a TES configuration (2H)
cant we just pixel count the lower triangle plate (without the add on plate bolted onto it, you can see the seem quite good here) and the backing plate?
Sorry to break it of you, but at the front there are 2 plates, the 40 one and the 65 i think, i forgot, on top of it, between the 40 and the ECM box. So you cant prove anything with that
This change is in the datamine for every version btw
Challenger 2 (2F) :
Part of Gun Mask : 60 → 30 mm
I compared it to live and i cant find the 60mm plate anywhere, idk where it is. Will log on live again in a while and i will check again
yes i meant the 40mm plate without the 65mm on top
That will give you the 40mm, what you want to do with it?