Yes I know that, I chose the Stinger since it’s the first one that came to my mind…my point was that 27mm rounds to the back of the engine and wings of a Su-25 or an Aim-9 would never leave the receiving plane without any damage !
The A-10 is not resilient. LOL
3 Likes
Su-25s survivability appears to come from its ability resist damage through essentially armour. This is something they model.
A-10s surviability comes from an insane amount of redundancy but this is something they dont model due to the overly simplistic aircraft models.
Overall I find A-10s go down very easily usually taken out with my first Starstreak. Su-25s on average take more like 2 and sometimes 3
4 Likes
They are quite literally as resilient.
Different experience is bias and thus easily thrown out.
There’s a reason I’m not claiming A-10 is more resilient, because my experience doesn’t matter.
1 Like
Different experience is evidence to the contrary. When everyone is saying that the A-10 is not very resilient, that’s a you problem.
2 Likes
No, different experience is different pilots with different skillsets.
Just because you witnessed more skilled players hit the weakspots of A-10 doesn’t mean the weakspots of Su-25 aren’t present when they obviously are.
By your own post’s argument, your posts are now claiming Su-25 isn’t resilient based on the same standard.
Unless you are intending to have double standards or hypocrisy…
I never contested that. What you are implying is that the A-10 and Su-25k are fundamentally equal in resiliency and any experience to the contrary is bias, which is not true. When the preponderance of the evidence suggests that the Su-25k is more resilient than the A-10, we don’t pretend that they are equal.
Go derail another topic…
1 Like
@ZE4L0T
I’m going to ignore your post’s attempted derailment and address the post.
I’ve one-shot more Su-25s with the F-5’s guns than A-10s.
And I’ve fragged more A-10s with AIM-9Bs than Su-25s [I miss no contrails].
That doesn’t mean one is weaker than the other.
What matters is launch parameters, weapon, and same-shot aspect.
So unless you’re claiming that A-10 is weaker than getting one-shot by F-5s, they’re equally resilient cause I guarantee there is no evidence of any aircraft being weaker than pilot snipes as that’s the weakest any aircraft can get.
Lol. If you want to argue that they are equally resilient because both are equally susceptible to getting pilot sniped, be my guest.
In my opinion, the survivability of the A-10 and SU-25 attack aircraft is not quite correctly perceived in reality. If I am not mistaken, then the introduction of redundancy of control and some armor is to give some chance to the attack aircraft to leave the battlefield for the airfield without continuing combat operations, because in reality it is protected only in some projections from 12.7-23 mm in a certain number of hits. A hit from a MANPADS (~ 390-600 grams of TNT) will practically lead to the failure of the control surfaces, which will greatly worsen the aircraft’s ability to maneuver and especially will not give it the opportunity to fight in reality. The aircraft, at best, will try to leave for the airfield with a failed engine (or maybe both), with a fire and a smoke trail, having greatly lost controllability. This is the maximum level of survivability achieved in reality with great danger to the pilot, and not what we see in the game quite often.
IRL if a MANPADS explodes in the front hemisphere, even bulletproof glass may not save the pilot in the cockpit from shrapnel.
An even funnier and stupider situation is in the game with high-level helicopters (Ka-50, 52, 29, AH-64, EC655, etc.) I have encountered many times how these helicopters survived 2-3 MANPADS hits and killed me, when in reality for them, in the best case, protection is declared only from 12.7 and 23 mm (the latter only a couple of hits, no more). The stupidest thing is that they survive hits from such large anti-aircraft missiles as VT1, 95Ya6, 9M311M, etc. as well as up to a complete hit in the cockpit, tail section, and could destroy me, there were cases when they survived 2 hits from large anti-aircraft missiles. In reality, this is impossible, one MANPADS hit with a very high probability destroys even an armored helicopter or takes it out of the battle with mortal danger for the crew. And a hit from a full-fledged anti-aircraft missile will completely destroy the helicopter.
bro you missed 99% of your shots
guns arent powerful enough to take a plane out just like that, especially su25 designed to take a hit
F5 shreds su25 with AP belt
1 Like
Yes, especially when you know where to aim.
The cockpit area of aircraft is weaker than the wings or main hull in general.
That goes for Su-25 and A-10; wing tips are also weaker on both than main wings and main hull.
Has anyone questioned the armour modeling of soviet tanks.
I looked into that more and it basically shows the devs have a bias towards modelling soviet stuff more accurately and with real volumetric plates.
Yes, I think the general conclusion is 3 fold
-
Soviet tanks are generally unclassified and so can be modeled properly. Most NATO tanks are classified and its guesstimation on their armour structure, usually underballing it by quite a bit
-
All tanks use a standardised armour figures, which iirc, buff Soviet tanks up quite a bit but leave everyone else underpowered. This is especially notable with ERA
-
The balance should be a lot better, because most western shells are designed to deal with soviet ERA. It is not modeled in game, so a western tank, like the Challenger 2 that should be able to easily pen a T-80BVM anywhere. Has to aim for the cracks in the ERA
2 Likes
This is true but Gaijin has not even modeled the plates on a lot of tanks. ones that are not classified. I think your points are right on the money though. As well as the devs not wanting to spend time and effort on different tanks.
Here are 2 non classified tanks
I find it’s the specialized filler inside the Su-25 fuselage that prevents things from destroying it as easily as other aircraft. They gave it a specific damage model parameter that basically acts like spall liners would for tanks. Fragments just don’t penetrate as far into the Su-25 than they do other aircraft.
While apparently this is realistic, it’s overperforming in the game to a decent extent.
what specialized filler? In reality, except for armor and a reinforced structure, the Su-25 does not have any specialized fillers, just like the A-10. The only filler that can be present in attack aircraft is filling the fuel tank with a special foam material designed to reduce or completely eliminate the likelihood of its explosion when penetrated (a fire is possible).
I believe the foam filler is modeled as something the entire aircraft fuselage is filled with. I can’t remember the specifics, but it is related to that foam.