Im literally telling you that it is a developer answer, if you refuse to see it I cant do much more XD
I understood the same thing.
1 Like
Heya guys, Been doing a bit of digging on this whole baseplate part:
Here’s my conclusion: They very front and very back of the baseplate where the ASPRO-HMT bricks are not present are thinner.
The middle section where the crew compartment is, is more pronounced and effectively double the diameter of the front and back sections of TES/OES’ base plate.
See images below:
The ASPRO-HMT bricks must sit flush on their install with the base plate, as seen on these photos of Warrior’s installation
The front part is not recessed at the outside, but the inside. The back part is recessed on the outside and not the inside.
A top down would look like this:
Thanks all
2 Likes
Further top down to show my thinking:
The middle section in red, is full thickness as ASPRO-HMT needs to sit flush on the base plate. This is also where all of the weight is, so it would make sense to be reinforced.
The top blue section is flush with the outside line of the plate so on the surface LOOKS like the same thickness but this image shows it’s half.
The back light blue plate is recessed inwards and is the same thickness as the front plate.
The middle plate is simply thicker.
1 Like
the backplates also fit a lot tighter than the era baseplate from the front
which would support your idea
This video shows it from all the angles
1 Like
Afternoon @Gunjob! Here’s the issue report for the base plate if you’d like to take a look.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/WxwLXNutI80Y
Wierd request anyone has a pic of a CARRV with only it’s backplate?
As a tip, If a report is forwarded and then it gets answered and closed it is obvious that the answer is from the developers.
We sometimes literally say developer answer for avoiding confusion.
Also, Im a tech mod. If you dont trust my word on that it is a developer answer I cant do anything. You will not trust me either when I close a report saying it is a developer answer I guess.
1 Like
its not hard to put, the developers say, before a response…
3 Likes
And also not a hard step to ask the devs for sources alongside, just for a bit more transparency
1 Like
You seem to be taking this very personally, I never said anything about not trusting you, I have no idea who you are and have no opinion on your trustworthiness.
I asked for where it was specified where it was a developer response after you said someone was being personal, and then you went on about “if you can’t see it I can’t help you”, that is the genesis of my asking.
Expecting everyone to know the institutional knowledge is unrealistic and quite silly, especially when you then try to use that institutional knowledge to try and call someone out.
8 Likes
why would the report be closed if the dev asked a question? shouldnt it remain open for an answer?
1 Like
Why allow any confusion when the fix takes 2 seconds longer to type?
1 Like
Also would like to say, the current implementation is incorrect, regardless, as the front plate does not sit close to the hull but away from it, while the aft is closer to the hull.
Here you can see the front plate is thinner.
here you can see the aft plate is thinner, while there’s a significant side increse to the middle section.
The middle section is therefore thicker to accomidate the weight and installation requirements of ASPRO-HMT
Ingame, the front sections armor is shown closer to the hull while the “Dust Cover” makes up space facing the outside. That’s not possible as seen in the first image here, because it needs to sit flush with the middle outside face and we can clearly see this front section is half width solid metal.
In the current configuration, ASPRO-HMT is mounted onto a dust cover which goes against the installation requirements we’ve seen on Warrior.
3 Likes
All answers on a report provided by Technical Moderators on the CBR come from the developers generally unless otherwise specified.
looks like the plate in the back goes all the way almost to the front and the the front one goes almost to the back and theyre welded together
Again…
There is evidence, and tbh I agree with it
Right so, I think its 40mm the whole way and this is why. First lets all agree on some stuff before hand.
The plate at this point is 40mm thick;
Spoiler
And the plate is flat on the outside all the way until the rear section;
Spoiler
So the section we can see here is past the front mud guard and is atleast the height of the full sized VARMA blocks so it isn’t the drivers section, yet it is flush with the armour/mounting;
Spoiler
So how can the plate be thicker if this forward section is already flush with the armour/mount at the top hull section;
Illustrated;
So the centre section would need to be cut like this which I’m pretty sure isn’t the case;
1 Like
it can have both functions…
