Really?
yes, made the report myself
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/scFlBnUnYw7i
I had 3 books, the numbers i had was 10-25mm armour thickness for the bins… well gajin took the 10mm and ran with it but its still better than nothing
1 Like
Genuinely surprised it isnt a primary source.
Thank you for amount of effort man, the old cold wat brit tanks and challanger 1s are some of my fav and glad they got a fix.
anyone considered putting a report in for the incorrect size of the CR2 reticle in-game?
1 Like
I just read this is there any truths in it ??
Who knows
I mean if its the tank crews themselves saying it must be some merit to it.
The way I look at it. It kinda makes sense. UK only has 150 or so CR2s, would make sense to make them as good as they could possibly be and we know that it has an exceptionally good FCS and often wins NATO gunnery competitions.
The US on the other hand has 1000+? It’s probably better to make them very good, but not absolutely maxed out performance as a cost efficiency thing
2 Likes
Not really, CR2 has been found to be heavy and its inability to lob an HE shell at a trench line is a massive draw back. This will be the first positive article I have seen on the CR2 and it’s likely excelling more in an offensive role
It is more reliable though not requiring the massive amount of maintenance that the M1s require.
The M1 is designed to operate with the whole strength of the US logistics chain with supply and service areas.
In Ukraine these necessary service windows are not being met. The vehicle then breaks down and the crews call them unreliable.
You crew that M1 with a US tanker and the performance metrics would be similar.
Somewhat, one thing to realise is they’re pretty extensively used as indirect fire pieces supporting infantry etc, so haven’t seen that much tank on tank action. And therefore have had complaints about the HESH not being a great frag round.
The maintenance cycles have been appreciated, although I’ve heard complaints about the HP being not great.
Overall it’s inline with previous interviews :shrug:
>Eurasian times
Ignored
3 Likes
It’s an interview from an active tank crew…
There are more than enough trusty sources talking about this. I already know. Eurasian should always be taken with a grain of salt at bare minimum.
Yes, it is unable to do so. It does not have HE in its arsenal.
You could say the same with the likes of Forbes and even the Telegraph
None are without biased
1 Like
Of course, and i’m sure HESH would be great for Urban fighting but not for indirect fire support on grouped troops or trench lines
213 in active service, so yeah not many at all.
To be fair, compiling and comparing news sourced. Such as the one linked, forbes, telegraph etc, they tend to say the same thinfs. The challanger 2 fails in the mobility department due to the grounds of ukraine and the sheer weight of the tank.
Most sources from the tank crews since tbe challangers have arrived say its armour and space and FCS are phenomenal.
Lacking in the HE department but has a phenomenally accurate gun.
But they do also report issues such as the fact the gun cant fire as many rounds as the abrams for example without maintainance.
No news source is reliable but cross examining them shows what they say in common.
Yeah it’s all stuff we already know. The only thing that would be interesting is a Challenger vs T90M 1v1 in which challenger shrugs off a round and the T90 explodes but like that’s ever gonna happen.
1 Like
That’s to be expected considering they used mostly even more cramped soviet vehicles.
1 Like