FV510 Warrior IFV - Technical Data and Discussion

4 Likes

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/DwNML0loWdY9

DW AMMO STORAGE LAYOUT REPORT

Yeah, I believe @xfgusta has a spall liner report up?
https://www.reddit.com/r/DestroyedTanks/comments/13lpawu/abandoned_british_fv103_spartan_apc_in_bakhmut/

This shows a spartan’s spall liners, I imagine the warrior’s are similar

We have two bug reports acknowledge on this:

Warrior
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/lXLijPeRPADV

Desert Warrior
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/nDblpIPpxRkg

1 Like

My god, they’ve been passed to the developers… Any information on the frontal ark and its spall liner? would make it ALOT more survivable from the front which would be insane.

1 Like

Warrior spall liner… 7 Months ago… Challenger 3 prototype (still in testing) engine hp nerf 1 month… Gaijin wonders why the playerbase gets annoyed.

7 Likes

One requires allocation of modelling resources, one does not.

One improves the players experience… One does not

you mean like the allocation of resources modelling a test tank as a cr3? oh yea that was introduced allong with the oes and they thought they would get payd.

classic gaijin

1 Like

front arc doesnt have any spall liners only buffer padding
i really was checking all image on drivers position and it proves that on warriors front dont have spall liners

If only that was their priority!

3 Likes

Exactly

I wonder why, maybe because from the front it can only be penned by heat or cannon fire, and at that point your pretty fucked no matter how much spalling there is. but from the sides and back it may be susceptible to small arms fire and so a spall liner would provide more usefull. Should make side scrapping bmps and other light tanks a whole lot easier as before they would just create enough spall to hit your crew no matter what.

Well, ive played the Desert Warrior enough to have my honest opinion of it, and quite honestly its easily the worst 10.0 IFV, maybe even the worst 9.7 IFV aswell (If it was 9.7)

The Cannon is lackluster with PMB 090 as unlike on the Dardo it lacks the ROF to make up for the lackluster pen

the ATGMs are closer to throwing shit at the wall than actual ATGMs, not to mention the terrible depression of the Launcher meaning you cant even go hull down like on the M3A3 (one of the M3A3s few strengths)

No commander thermals is a tragedy for a 10.0 IFV

Honestly i dont think it could be made worthwhile compared to other 10.0 IFVs even with M919 or TOW-2 AERO or Commander thermals, its such an incredibly situational vehicle it might as well not exist Especially considering its slower than the M3A3.

Glad to see our first IFV in years is just a worse iteration on one of the already worst IFVs at 10.0.

8 Likes

We must hold out for the CT40’s then.
I thought the base warrior would still be better tbh and here we are.

1 Like

CTA 40s legit would be great tbh any of them, the Warrior, while lacking armour baring maybe the addon kit TES, would give gen 3 thermals for all crew along with a nice 10.0 vehicle with something similar to the CV90s but with a lot more ammo (70 compared to the cv’s 24). And on the other end the big momma AJAX would legit be the most armoured IFV in the British tree for some time if it got its PSO kit along with that sweet sweet 120 ready rack amount of 170 penning rounds. Thats not even going over the other IFVs with the 40, the Boxer, Patria, Both the Lancer FMP and Tracer Sika that should be quite quick and nimble as the Warrior even not more so due to the fact it does 55 mph.

This is the CT40 Warrior I want, I’m a camo net addict

Did any of the 40mm CTA Warriors come armed with ATGMS?

I believe the Ajax/Boxer can mount a Javelin, I haven’t seen the same for the Warriors

Yesn’t, While the RWS is technically capable of mounting a Javelin with some minor modification, but there’s no indication that the army is going to go that way, all the literature points to a deployment similar to how Javelin teams are mounted on Warriors. If you want a British CTA40 explicitly with ATGMs you’d have to look at the Lockheed Martin UK turrets.

Interesting, honestly I’d quite like the CTA-40s to come with just the gun so they dont get upteired like the Lynx or Vilkas. Just let the gun do the work, it seems capable enough

I see the Boxer comes with a 2 x Javelin launcher built in, that could come as a more ATGM based vehicle i guess