Dont people read threads they post into?
So what hull is it in these Flakpanzer photos? If its D, we should file a bug report for full engine RPM/output.
My point is rather that just because it’s a D, it doesn’t mean that the engine will be ungoverned (or rather, governed at a higher RPM). That reduction was done to lengthen service life. Re-using an older D chassis for an AA platform later in the war is a potential way to recycle previous assets but I don’t see why they would fail to uniform its engines to the lower RPM standards. You would need to actually find a source detailing what the plans were for the engine.
1 Like
Never said it was fully operational only that three guns were manufactured
The last thing that was need in the game was a SPAA with overpowered anti-tank ammo…so that’s exactly what Gaijin added. It’s completely distorted the BR. I just exit out at game start now when playing this BR and going against Germany. It’s loaded with op 341’s and not worth the time
Gaijin just doing what they are singularly great at…being jackasses.
Ah yes, its not the currently bugged armor, its the coelian whos to blame.
3 Likes
- This has already been mentioned
- Does not change the fact those ammo racks exist and were used
- Not the same thing as trying to add something (extra belts in spaa) that was never there
No, it’s the ammo that’s to blame, and those that implemented it (Gaijin).
1 Like
According to people on this forum, mixed AP-I and HE belts were swapped to full APDS-F (fragmenting APDS, like a hollow point bullet) for AA work on the later Gepard tanks.
Theoretically for earlier Gepards (and anything else with the oerlikon 35mm or derivatives) you could load them with exclusively APDS but it wasn’t done. There’s nothing prohibiting crews from doing so, except for the beating they’d get from their CO. Plus, you don’t want to see XM246s, Leo 2 Marksman tanks and Rooikat SPAAs full of APDS do you?
1 Like
Also
3 Likes
It’s almost correct;
Gepard uses two belts per gun, a large internal one and a smaller (20rds) external one.
The external belt was fitted with APDS-T ammunition (DM 23, Oerlikon TLD type) as an emergency-belt for use against armoured surface targets. (Though to be fair, I’m pretty sure that some gepards in ukraine ran around with full APDS belts, due to the first supply sent by germany consisting of 50% HE-T and 50% APDS-T shells…)
The main belt was usually fitted with SAPHEI-T + HEI (DM 13 A1, Oerlikon PLD type + DM 21, Oerlikon MSD type). HE-T was also available (DM 31, Oerlikon MLD type) and recently used in full-belts to train ukrainian crews on the gepard.
With Gepard 1A2, the gun’s recieved new coils at the muzzle-brake, which could “read” the muzzle-velocity and adjust the lead-point of the next shells accordingly. These new coils also allowed the integration of higher muzzle-velocity shells into the FCS, specifically the new FAPDS (DM 33) rounds, which could be used instead of any of the other ammunition-types.
Mixing FAPDS/APDS together with SAPHEI-T, HEI or HE-T was not possible due to the difference in muzzle velocities (1400/1385m/s vs 1175m/s).
Here’s an old training-film on the NDV (Nutzungsdauerverlängerung) to Gepard 1A2;
3 Likes
These were in the Gepard from the very start though.
Might be a bit poorly worded, but literally the next sentence explains the difference to the old coils…
zsu 57 not problem with 150 mm pen ot the shilka m2 much time play in 6.3, 6.7 br is really fair vs prop planes… or m53/59 have 91 mm pen and more agile vs havy slow tanks zs37 87 mm pen at 3,7 br penetrate tanks in front. all players have problem because have armor max vs low caliber spaas all tanks penetraste it is a panther hull in this br all tanks penetrate this hull its slow and no reverse put in 7.0 to counter pl be happy but okay to play vs cold war tanks in this tier slow tanks wich have only armor vs heatfs and atgms
2 Likes
Even when comparing to heavy tanks, I would not describe the m53/59 as agile.
It may have decent speed (on flat roads and pavement) but it loses a lot when it leaves the road. And the turning radius is pretty bad - better be good at 3 (or 5)-point-turns if you want to maneuver it on anything but a desert.
No one is forcing you to play SPAA as pseudo-IFVs; that’s a choice they make, just like it’s your choice to play WW2 tanks in a WW2 style
Except unnerfing SPAA ground capabilities without BR changes kinda would force me to play pseudo-IFV myself, at least with current maps that seems to emphasize CQB, if I dont want to become just a practise target in someones power fantasy.
Why would I play Easy Eight against SPAAs that not only outmanuever me but also can front pen me with ease?
Why would I play Easy Eight and try to place my shots when SPAA will take every possible shot aviable because it doesnt concern itself with reload?
Sure I might get relatively better survivability by being enclosed. Does it matter if i cant threaten the SPAA in the first place because even with my hull turning i wont get my guns on him before he smokes me? SPAAs will play much differently if they become less restricted by positioning, they will hold much different angles.
I certainly know what I can do with Scimitar even against T-55s, cant imagine what will happen if say M42 will get similiarly if not better performing sabots.
And sure sure commanders MG but
- not every tank gets commanders MG (Centurion, FV4202 etc.)
- not every tank that gets commander MG gets .50cal
- not every SPAA has exposed gunner
Also if you bothered to read through my preivous posts in this thread, you would know I dont have issues with unnerfing antiground capability of SPAA if maps and armor issues get fixed.
1 Like
Its not normal! 14 and 7 kills in the last battle with 2 flakpanzers… They are almost immortal and way too strong at this time.
Agree. Flakpanzer 341 aphe ammo need to be removed. Or give the correct BR: 7.3. At 6.3 way too strong, and funny that higher flaks are much more weaker…
1 Like