1 Like
Yeah, if a auto-bounce plate has a volumetric plate somewhere behind it, it seems to fuck up the projectile’s autobounce. It’s probably just hitbox geometry fuckery like we’re getting used to seeing.
It affects VT-4A1 much more because the volumetric plate housing the driver’s hatch is much larger than the one on Abrams and Leopard. Now pretty much if you fire at the centerline of the tank’s UFP, you can easily pen. This affects the survivability of the VT-4A1 massively.
2 Likes
I’m more interested in when the armor issue with the VT4 will be fixed
We are coming into 2025 and none of these issues were fixed! Ho, ho, ho, Merry Christmas!
4 Likes
Yeah…
I hate people who group Chinese MBTs with Russian MBTs in terms of their effectiveness. In many ways the Chinese MBTs have comparable amount of modeling inaccuracies as NATO MBTs.
3 Likes
I have been wanting to buy Al-Khalid to grind China for some time; even tempted…
But the sad state of Chinese MBTs, including Al-Khalid, really holds me back a lot.
If I am going to spend time and money on a tree, the very least I could expect is for its vehicles not to be butchered…
At very least give them their damn missing spall liners… more than enough bug reports with more than enough photo evidence have been made and “Accepted”.
VT-4 base armor provides 600mm of protection versus kinetic energy projectiles, this is for both the hull and turret, unfortunately I don’t have a source as to where this information comes from, except for the fact it is a Pakistani source.
Ingame the VT-4’s hull armor only provides around 520mm of protection, with FY-4 ERA it is 700mm.
It should be 780mm if this figure is used.
6 Likes
Maybe need to check the source in Urdu? (Urdu being Pakistan’s many capital languages)
our national language is Urdu but… sadly our official formal language is english. hence we dont have urdu documents especially in the military
Could still be applicable. There is a chance at least.
it says 750 if im reading it right.
also can you share where u found it?
i tried reverse image search but nothing turned up
It was posted by someone on the Pakistan defense forum, under the Haider/VT-4 thread iirc.
1 Like
Yep, this is where it is from.
1 Like
from 2024 IDEAS, still looking for more details
considering it’s on 112 page, it should be a collection of brochure?
or maybe a introduction book of Pakistan defense
Yep, that can work as a source
1 Like
Now that I think about it, maybe this can also be used for a bug report on the ZTZ96 series, Type 85 II-M should be using the same turret as ZTZ96.
Yep, what gun though? The thing with ztz96 series is, their turret according to devs have changed, although we can’t apparently see it. ZTZ96 has around 3-4 degree relative elevation + depression. Yet people can’t even prove any of that.
Type 88C most likely