Now this… this is funny, you say mig debunked me, when in reality (take your bias glasses off for a second) I debunked him, provided plenty of footage of fellow tankers loading as slow a 8 secs and as fast (lap load) as 3.89 secs.
If I recall exactly, Spookston said in his video the auto loader could load as fast as 0.75 secs, but ran into a lot of reliability issues. (You know, the shells getting caught in one another perhaps?)
I came to read about HSTVL shells, but I’m reading about reloading the T-72 and Abrams
Funny.
Seriously buffed ? What are you on about ?
For example M18 hellcat stock reload are at 7.1sec despite being open top and the ready rack are literally on top of the gun breech . If lap-loading are done M18 would be able to fire second round within 2-3seconds.
Again many others vehicles aren’t having maximum fire rate either.
How does this even matter ? when Gaijin doesn’t use US source on Soviet vehicles.
What are you trying to implied ?? human-loader and auto-loader both has their pro and con. (i’m not gonna list them here as there are many that already do in others topic)
So it entirely depending on how would engineer design their vehicles.
According to trials with the aimed shooting rate, the Hellcat has only about 10 rpm aimed, but this isn’t better than T-44 or T-34 85.
It is about the Abrams, many US (“old boomer”) sources just describe the Abrams with 7 RPM according to an older criteria. Though the reload is actually the same. They’re actually on par.
bias glasses ? Nah just don’t try. Because i have read that entire conversation from the start.
Mig_23 have been provide source and video to show that faster loading can bedone by both video and even military documents. proving that loading can be done faster than 5.0sec. You didn’t provide any source to debunked that loading can bedone under 5.0sec
As i said technical issue aren’t a thing in War Thunder. And HSTV-L also aren’t having maximum fire rate atm just like T-series.
If it not about HSTV-L take it to the PM. I will do that after posting this
Again I’m not talking about trials or average reload rate. i’m talking about “maximum fire rate” which mean as soon as “loader give clear signal for gunner to fire”
older criteria ??. There are old military documets about 105mm Abrams reload rate which is done on the move. loader was able to reload from 5.0-6.0sec
As for 120mm Abrams back in 2015 crew training video. 7second was the limit set to pass training. The example was done in 5second
Also i suggest we take this conversation to PM because it off topic.
I think most people agree that this is an off topic question and only brings in whataboutism into the conversation. You’re wasting everyone’s time and the only thing you’ve done is switching the topic regarding the HSTVL to a more broader question.
If you care about it so much, make a thread yourself along with supporting documentations and an explanation. But don’t do that here. You brought no value to the conversation and you know it.
Sory to be the party pooper but you have been arguing in vain. The XM274 is not the weapon mounted on HSTV-L and RDF/LT // Gaijin.net // Issues, in fact the XM274 seems to only have been mounted on a LAV in this configuration.
All the rest HSTV-L, RDF-LT and even a LAV also:
Are using the ADMAG version of the gun, meaning the original one with the short chamber so there is no XM885 DELTA 3-6 APFSDS the HSTV-L or RDF-LT can shoot.
I think HSTV-L fall into prototype dilemma just like many aircraft (Yak-141 for example) where prototype vehicles receive weapon / engine it never install irl. (maybe only plan or could tecnically use them)
So i guess Gaijin has different standard when it come to prototype vehicles.
USA kids do that all the time lol. Stop being so salty, it’s not good for you.
Not to mention, I was originally talking about how the reload buff wasn’t necessary, but my already easily positive KD in the hstvl has gotten better.
The problem isn’t tank performance, but rather the fact that USA players are generally quite bad.
I used a comparison on how other tanks don’t receive their actual reloads, but USA gets constant buffs thats called being fair to the other nations, I know, might be a hard pill to swallow for you.
What about subsequent replacement?
Just because they do it, doesn’t mean you should too. What, do you want me to accuse you of being a Russia kid? No, that doesn’t make sense.
First off, your original statement was in response to @ileaveuptiers where he was talking about if Delta 6 was intended or not. So unless you replied to the wrong post, yes, your reply was off topic.
Second, having 35 deaths and 47 kills doesn’t automatically make it a good tank. You have to make an argument on the tank’s performance relative to other tanks in that BR range.
Again, that is a more broader topic which requires a more in depth analysis on the developer’s decision making. If you want to talk about USA getting preferential treatment, make a thread about it. This is not the place to do it.
Edit: I’m gonna leave it at there, I stated my case
They were never replaced, the XM274 is a new weapons system using the same operating principles. That is why after 1983 they started talking about them as being the same, but they are not, it’s not a drop-in replacement, the receiver and housing seems wider than the previous version, so you probably need to create a whole new turret, like they did. The HSTV-L and RDF-LT carry their original guns to this day. The easiest way to identify the different guns is to look at the crown of the housing, on the ADMAG there is a cylinder, on the XM274 there is not.
I don’t speak Russian but from the designations, that issue appears to be talking about the ammunition not the guns.
There may be inaccuracies.
In the game HSTV-L indicates xm274 cannon with xm885 projectile (also Delta 3), but the penetration, velocity and rate of fire correspond to 75mm Advanced Development cannon, not xm274. From 274th it differs by 76mm shorter breech - ie smaller projectile with lower velocity.At xm274 with Delta 3 velocity is increased to 1615m/s compared to 75mm AD (the projectile that is now in the game for this gun is not even assigned a name - it is just a prototype telescopic projectile for 75mm gun) Rate of fire at xm274 - 60 vst/min (and later 70 vst/min) - ie. i.e. reload 1 sec.(later 0.85), only in some articles on the internet it is stated that early guns on HSTV-L had 1.5 sec. reload, but in all official sources it is 1 sec. or less.
The penetration of xm885 is claimed to be comparable to m774, I know that in the game the penetration is calculated by a formula and from the above it is now clear why xm885 is so much weaker than m774, because the velocity should be 1615m/s and the weight of the projectile is 2.27kg, so according to the formula and it turns out that with a velocity of 1615m/s and a large weight just and comes out the declared 340-350mm penetration, not 276mm as now.
Screenshots and sources:
Reload 0.85 sec. from Extended Area Protection & Survivability (EAPS) Gun and Ammunition Design Trade Study
Reload time 1 sec. and penetration comparable to m774 from For Your Eyes Only: an Open Intelligence Summary of Current Military Affairs.
Reload time 1 sec. from Jane’s Technology of Tanks’ by Richard M. Ogorkiewicz. Ogorkiewicz
projectile velocity - 1615m/s from Hearings on Military Posture H.R.6495.
Penetration comparable to M774 from Army Research, Development, & Acquisition Magazine 1979.
Reload time 1 sec. from Department of Defence Appropriations for 1984
velocity 1615m/s from Hearings on Military Posture and H.R. 10929: Department of Defence Authorisation for Appropriations for Fiscal Year 1979 before the Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives Ninety-fifth Congress Second Session, Part 3, Book 2, Research and Development Title II.
The penetration is comparable to the M774 from Jane’s Armour and Artillery 1991-92.
Sources for the article, it says that with the change to the xm274 cannon and xm885 projectile the velocity increased from 1463m/s to 1615m/s, also that the projectile is comparable to the M774 and the reload is 0.85 sec. Tank Encyclopedia - The Online Tank Museum.
The velocity is 1615m/s from point 9
So the solution is either to give realistic TTC to the gun and projectile or to rename it to 75mm AD and the projectile without name as it was hardly tested and was just a prototype.
Correct me if I’m wrong but is this not the XM274 in the picture? It has the correct amount of holes and appears to be quite a bit longer than the ADMAG. Also the HSTVL underwent testing until the mid 1980s so I don’t believe it unreasonable to think XM247 was mounted at some point.
Look at the front of the housing and the end of the barrel, that is the ADMAG, not the XM274.
He was, as I thought arguing about the ammo, but he dosen’t argue why the ADMAG is the right gun only to just call it that, given the in-game ammo performance. I leave any discussion of ammo out of my report. That can come later.
Interesting bug report. I was wondering if you can take a look at Spookston’s bug report that was made a while back?
TLDR:
It’s a big oversimplification so I recommend giving it a read.
TL;DR
The hstvl is fine as is, the players playing it, need to learn its play style, but given its recent buff I’m surprised it’s not 12.0
If it got a better round, it would probably be 12.3 or 12.7
