HSTV-L has an undeveloped ammo

[rainy2000]

@AlvisWisla

While I am good with light tanks now, I am not nor do I ever want to be an expert in the meta of them.
Not my desire as a player.

Yeah that’s perfectly fine. I play competitively and I have seen countless of times that people take the 2S38 over the HSTV-L in Squadron Realistic Battles. I have always had the feeling that the 2S38 is better, but I understand that SRB is different to regular battles (at least a tad bit).
Especially now that the HSTV-L has a 1.0s reload, I’d say it’s fine being 0.7 or maybe even 1.0 BR higher than it, despite the 2S38’s strengths over it.

@AlvisWisla

I am not and have never said HSTVL is busted/OP/anything other than it’s good for its BR.
And I apologize if you ever thought I meant anything other than it being good.

It’s fine, I may have gotten carried away too.
I think the HSTV-L could be better, but I do want to emphasize that I (mostly) did not have a good time playing with it, and I think many others share the same experience, including the VCC and possibly the 2S38. Even after the buff, there’s still the penetration / spalling problem that makes it so that you must use your rounds carefully and with great precision.

Here’s an example of what I mean (note that this was partially a skill issue too):

@AlvisWisla

Also if I had 100 matches for all my vehicles I’d have over 120,000 matches… that’s not happening for another 5 years minimum. Especially since I like some vehicles more than others.

Yeah, I don’t expect everyone to get 100 matches in each vehicle. Just in the ones that you want to compare your performance in them with others vehicles. Hell, even 50 might be reasonable enough to be honest, but it depends on how much you care about consistency and accuracy.
Let’s say you get 3 kills for 49 matches, and then 13 kills in one match.
That changes the K/D from a 3, on average, to a 3.2, which may or may not be significant enough for you to choose which vehicle is generally better. With 3 kills for 99 matches, and then the same 13 kills in one match, you get an average of 3.1, which that deviation may still mean a lot if you really care, but it’s at least a bit better than letting that one good game or one terrible game affect your average more.

[rainy2000]

@UniqueScorpions

It’s easier to OP the 2s38 than the hstvl.

Yeah, I can see that. Although, Russian HE (or even NATO HE) still works wonders against a hull-down HSTV-L.

@UniqueScorpions

. And given the -17 gun depression vs -5 give ALOT of versatility.

Yeah, you can go over hills and snipe with relative ease, although you only get around -12 degrees of gun depression from the front. There’s only a fairly small window on both sides where you can get the true -17 degrees of gun depression.

@UniqueScorpions

The turret can get hit 1000x times by APFSDS but it will pretty much never kill the hstvl. The ammo sits too low.

The turret / breech is also very close to the hull, though, so there’s also a possibility of exposing the hull when you do try to use that extra -17 degrees of gun depression (happened to me quite a few times).

@UniqueScorpions

What’s its top speed 52 mph?

Yeah, it’s definitely faster than all Top Tier MBTs. Generally they go as fast as around 42 MPH.
Though, the acceleration difference is not too noticable imo.
32.5hp/ton compared to the average 25hp/ton MBT means you’re only really accelerating around 30% faster, which can make a deal on large hilly maps (especially with the top speed), but I don’t think it’s all too noticable in close range maps where you don’t move large distances all too often. Does help with reacting to events, though.

[UniqueScorpions]

@rainy2000

@UniqueScorpions

. And given the -17 gun depression vs -5 give ALOT of versatility.

Yeah, you can go over hills and snipe with relative ease, although you only get around -12 degrees of gun depression from the front. There’s only a fairly small window on both sides where you can get the true -17 degrees of gun depression.

@UniqueScorpions

The turret can get hit 1000x times by APFSDS but it will pretty much never kill the hstvl. The ammo sits too low.

The turret / breech is also very close to the hull, though, so there’s also a possibility of exposing the hull when you do try to use that extra -17 degrees of gun depression (happened to me quite a few times).

@UniqueScorpions

What’s its top speed 52 mph?

Yeah, it’s definitely faster than a lot of MBTs. Generally they go as fast as around 42 MPH.
Though, the acceleration difference is not too noticable imo.
32.5hp/ton compared to the average 25hp/ton MBT means you’re only really accelerating around 30% faster

I really haven’t noticed a problem with a lack of gun depression.

And that hp difference is quite immense, even for smaller maps.

The turret profile / the hill profile give an extreme angle when hull down, meaning unless the hit the lip on the front of the turret, it really won’t will never have a problem.

[Abyss_Revenant]

Spoiler

Strange again. If we look at this - XM274 as said author. It looks very similar like on your photo from Stoner interview.
22 XM274 75mm Automatic Cannon
And this

Yes, it looks like ADMAG, but.
We also can say that on HIMAG was ADMAG and… this gun looks also different.

Spoiler

And for me it HIMAG gun looks shorter than HSTV-L gun. This is of course a bad argument.

Spoiler

Of course, it’s difficult to argue, because in some documents and sources XM274 and HSTV-L are in the same sentence… Anyway, if gaijin want, it’ll be with XM274

[HondaCivici]

@AlvisWisla

Good thing military experts are smarter than us forum users.
Definitely just a coincidence the entire planet uses radar/laser over beam riding and not cause SACLOS is an inferior guidance method.

It’s almost as if Warthunder doesn’t represent reality and shouldn’t be taken seriously. Of all people, I would expect you to know. For some reason whenever I criticize nato vehicles, you think I’m talking about it’s performance in real life?

---

@AlvisWisla

You know, the Russian speaking forum likely agrees with all of your posts’ Russia takes.

That’s funny because last time I checked, it tended to be NATO mains in general that agree with me. You do realize doing quick profile searches disproves your claim

---

Still waiting for you to quote me tho. Looks like you have none.

[AlvisWisla]

@HondaCivici
For AGMs warhead matters most as the missile has a wider effective area to hit, guidance type matters a bit especially if you find a spot without SPAA coverage [laser wins over everything if there’s no SPAA coverage], and last speed.

And for HSTVL it remains the fastest tank in the tank with the 2nd best auto-cannon on a tracked chassis.

[HondaCivici]

Here are some of my questions but first let me try to understand where you’re coming from so please correct me if I’m wrong.

---

My interpretation of your report:

The HSTV-L (along with the RDF/LT) never used the XM274 gun, but rather used the earlier 75mm ADMAG (Advanced Design Mobility and Agility) gun

Reasoning:

• HSTV-L was delivered in 1979, while the XM274 only began testing in February 1983. Meaning that the HSTVL had to have used an earlier variant of the 75mm gun.

• The XM274 was a later evolution of the ADMAG system, specifically designed for the MPGS program. This can be seen by longer chamber and redesigned house and barrel.

• The reason why the two systems got mixed up was because they talked about these guns as if they were the same system. Rather, the XM274 was an entire new weapons systems and wasn’t a replacement/upgrade. This would’ve required a new turret due to the wider receiver and housing in order for the XM274 system to be used.

It’s a gross oversimplification, so please let me know if I’m missing anything else.

---

My questions:

• Since the XM274 was introduced 4 years after the HSTV-L was introduced. What was the designation of the gun that the HSTVL used before 1983 (regardless if it did get the XM274 or not)

• What was the capabilities of that gun. What rounds did it use , muzzle velocity, etc?

• One of the requirements for the HSTVL was that it should be able to penetrate the T-72’s front armor. So when the HSTVL was first introduced, did it meet that requirement. If so, what round did it use?

• what does it mean in game? How is the HSTV-L’s gun currently modeled, how it should be modeled, and how should the gun perform?

---

@AlvisWisla
I’m not gonna talk about the hellfire as we already had that discussion previously. The only reason why I brought it up was to give an example (as stated previously)

[VF111_Sundowners]

@HondaCivici

One of the requirements for the HSTVL was that it should be able to penetrate the T-72’s front armor. So when the HSTVL was first introduced, did it meet that requirement. If so, what round did it use?

I did find this picture for the HIMAG in the Army RD&A magazine which would’ve been using the ADMAG gun. It’s slightly confusing because it’s dated 1979 and says it’s equal to M774. But according to the sources STGN showed only XM274 had that performance.

[RemoveCASfromGRB]

We also know that in 1975, a 75MM Ares cannon projectile had a L/D of 12:1 and two different weights were tested to 5360f/s.

A “Two-pound” and “Three-pound” projectile.

[STGN]

1. I answer the first question in the issue report. It should be called the “ADMAG” but I would be fine with “ARES” or “MC-AAAC” too.

2. Well the names of the rounds if they had any are not public. They are refered to as 75mm ARPA APFSDS and 75mm ARPA HE in some reports so that would be fine for me athough there was a HE round called “AAI FF”. The APFSDS round should be a 2.27 kg DU penetrator with either 1463 m/s or 1646 m/s. Another solution could be or maybe two rounds one for level 1 and one for level 4. The HE round should have a muzzel velocity of 1031 m/s.

3. When the requirements for the MC-AAAC were drawn up the US had severly underestimated the Armor of the T-64/T-72. It was first in 1979 they realised their mistake.
   

   
   
   
   So it might well have defeated the hypothesized T-72 but failed agianst the real T-72 and it would be finring one of the ARPA rounds.

4. It dosen’t have to mean a whole lot maybe a little buff in the pen and a flatter trajectory. Obviously its not going to be 400mm+ pen.

[STGN]

Notice it says XM774, the XM774 was originally a 28mm projectile but it was dowsized to 26mm which was a better balance of muzzle velocity and weight. The 26mm or actually 25.9mm projectile is what ended up in the M774 but I haven’t been able to find the nominal MV of the XM774 only the one used for Special Armor IFV armor estimation.
It’s 80% of Xm774 but there is a grey area in intepreting what that actually means.

[STGN]

We know the weight and the muzzel velocities they tried them at : DTIC ADB069140: Aerosolization Characteristics of Hard Impact Testing of Depleted Uranium Penetrators : Defense Technical Information Center : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive and we know the rough level of performance(See my above post about 80% Xm774 pen) So we know quit alot actually to make a functional weapon. The is no need to give it a different gun it didn’t have.

And to the Yak-141 example, radar missiles are primarily a software connection you can get pretty much any fighter to fire any missile if you code it right. But you can’t shoot a round that needs a longer chamber in a gun with a shorter chamber, it simply will not close. So its an apple to oranges level of deviation from reality.

[Abyss_Revenant]

@STGN

And to the Yak-141 example, radar missiles are primarily a software connection

The Yak-141 is an excellent example, because in real life it had no radar, IRST, flares, RWR… It was just a flying thing.

[STGN]

But then its a lousy example because the HSTV-L had all the parts and did fire the gun in tests?

[Abyss_Revenant]

Well, yes. But as i said. If gaijin want…

[Abyss_Revenant]

Truly, the project still has a little fog of mystery. The generals called the gun XM274, Janes writes about the XM885 and XM274 on HSTV-L. At the same time, the information that HSTV-L does not help, but only complicates everything.

[MotorolaCRO]

@rainy2000

The biggest problem I find is that you cannot spare to waste any ammo, since you only get 26 rounds.

I’d keep both HSTV-L and RDF at 11.7 and give them ammo boxes. In case of the former, this would result in total of 52 rounds which should be more than enough for 5-6-7 kills on average even if you take 10-12 HE-VTs for heli rushers.

I think this is more than enough unless someone’s an ammo waster, but that can be linked to skill issues.

@rainy2000

You can reliably LFP the T-80B and detonate its ammo, you can also probably do it with the Challengers too

I can confirm Challengers can and will get OHK through LFP by both vehicles in question.

@rainy2000

Needless to say, light tanks at top tier are very niche at where they can end up.

Most light tanks at higher/top tier are niche because of their inability to outpace MBTs, where in some cases they’re outright slower which is absurd. One of the only outliers to this are AGS and HSTV-L, which actually have crazy mobility that will even outshine top tier MBTs.

2S38 on the other hand pales in comparison, with MBTs regularly outpacing it which is one of the bigger problems with the vehicle that’s keeping it down in BR.

@rainy2000

They’re all very situational vehicles, which is not a good sign of a great vehicle.

This is why MBTs exist and are “meta” both IRL and in game especially as you don’t have people you have to carry in your IFVs.

@rainy2000

Mobility is important, but I hardly find a time when I’d rather have taken 3 HE-VT rounds over 3 more APFSDS rounds.

In my opinion mobility is one of the most important things on such a vehicle, as that is it’s selling point basically and enables it to be played in the correct playstyle.

@rainy2000

Top tier MBTs are quite fast, and the difference in mobility between most light tanks at that BR and MBTs are quite negligible in most cases.

Something like a Centauro 120 is a piece of shit light, as it only has 20.7 HP/t and is also a wheeled boy. HSTV-L actually feels like a light tank, even when compared to BVM and other speedy MBTs.

[RemoveCASfromGRB]

If this early iteration of XM885 or some unnamed 75mm APFSDS actually had 25.9mm Diameter, then that would put this early version around 310.8x25.9mm because in 1975 we known early 75mm APFSDS had a 12:1 ratio.

and if you use the higher velocities.

[Abyss_Revenant]

260 Brinell hardness number must be btw.

[rainy2000]

@MotorolaCRO

I’d keep both HSTV-L and RDF at 11.7 and give them ammo boxes. In case of the former, this would result in total of 52 rounds which should be more than enough for 5-6-7 kills on average even if you take 10-12 HE-VTs for heli rushers.

RDF probably wouldn’t benefit from being given ammo boxes.
I’d definitely agree with the HSTV-L, though.

Unfortunately, I really don’t think it will ever get ammo boxes, as it’s only a mechanic for TDs and SPAAs at the moment. And if they do start thinking about giving ammo crates to light tanks, I doubt they will carry though that idea since I don’t think many light tanks need ammo boxes either.

The only way I think you can buff it is by lowering its BR to 11.3 (which might be more reasonable), changing its designation to a TD (like how the hellcat changed from TD to light tank, though it loses its scouting ability and recon drone), or give it its better round and move it up to 12.0.

@MotorolaCRO

In case of the former, this would result in total of 52 rounds which should be more than enough for 5-6-7 kills on average even if you take 10-12 HE-VTs for heli rushers.

Yes, I agree.

@MotorolaCRO

I think this is more than enough unless someone’s an ammo waster, but that can be linked to skill issues.

Yeah, 52 rounds should be enough to stay on the flanks and get the amount of kills you usually can get with MBTs.

@MotorolaCRO

I can confirm Challengers can and will get OHK through LFP by both vehicles in question.

Yeah, the Challengers (Chally 2E in particular) would be pretty good vehicles if it weren’t for their lack of safe ammo and decent round.

@MotorolaCRO

This is why MBTs exist and are “meta” both IRL and in game especially as you don’t have people you have to carry in your IFVs.

Yes, that is true.
However, I have had better luck with things like the Object 685, M18, Object 906, 2S25M etc… just because their differences in mobility can supplement the lack of armour to a large degree, unlike the HSTV-L in a lot of cases.

Stuff like BMD-4 and Object 685 can still be meta in competitive matches because of their unmatched firepower and mobility.

@MotorolaCRO

In my opinion mobility is one of the most important things on such a vehicle, as that is it’s selling point basically and enables it to be played in the correct playstyle.

@MotorolaCRO

Something like a Centauro 120 is a piece of shit light, as it only has 20.7 HP/t and is also a wheeled boy. HSTV-L actually feels like a light tank, even when compared to BVM and other speedy MBTs.

Yeah, the Centauro (and you could probably also include the CV90120 here) have pretty decent firepower (5.0s reload + M829A1) for 11.7, but they’re honestly not that fast for light tanks at top tier. They’re generally a worse 11.7 Abrams, and possibly a side-grade to the 11.3 M1A1 Abrams.
I could probably see both of them being fine at 11.3.

@MotorolaCRO

Most light tanks at higher/top tier are niche because of their inability to outpace MBTs, where in some cases they’re outright slower which is absurd. One of the only outliers to this are AGS and HSTV-L, which actually have crazy mobility that will even outshine top tier MBTs.

The problem is that their mobility is not that much better compared to other MBTs, especially light MBTs like Type 10s, ZTZ99s, T-80BVMs, and Leclercs.

Like I stated here:

@rainy2000

That is true, but that doesn’t mean you can’t flank - everything can but it just takes more effort to do so.
Even with it being fully spaded, its top speed is roughly 22% better than the Average MBT, and its acceleration is only 30% faster.
For comparison, the hellcat has roughly 60% higher top speed, and 70% better accerlation than the heavy/medium tanks at its BR.
Another example is BMD-4M, which has roughly 27% higher top speed, but 80% better acceleration than the average MBT at its own BR.
Needless to say, light tanks at top tier are very niche at where they can end up. The only real thing I’d say the HSTV-L has over the MBTs it faces is the very small silhouette and pretty good gun depression, although I often think the Type 10 can do a better job in most cases.

@MotorolaCRO

2S38 on the other hand pales in comparison, with MBTs regularly outpacing it which is one of the bigger problems with the vehicle that’s keeping it down in BR.

Most MBTs around that range have around 26/27 hp/ton, whereas the 2S38 only has 23.3 hp/ton.
So yeah, it is somewhat difficult to get into a flanking position with it, and so that’s why you can say that it’s reasonable that it is able to face lightly armoured MBTs found plentiful in a full downtier (unlike the HSTV-L’s full downtier atm with the round it gets).
Though, I’m still not sure how balanced that is (in the 2S38’s case).