If the Type 11 is an ARH, then we might actually be able to launch it in ‘Maddog’ mode (launch without lock and let the missile find the target with its own Radar), afaik something like this can be done with the AMRAAM trucks as well, but I am not 100& sure.
However, if its true that we can contoll it via OPS, then this is indeed a very interesing vehicle as future SAM (perhaps after Type 81 mod.(C), just like the Pantsir after ZPRK 2S6).
Same thing here;
There will be a follow-up suggestion about the Type 11 SAM once there is enough information; if you want to help join our Japan / SK / ASEAN research Server or post information in the relevan thread(s).
EDIT: I now have two suggestions pending (Type 99-155 SPH and Type 81 mod.(C))
Performance test between Type 74/90/10 long story short Type 10 beats both but also shows how under performing in particular the acceleration the Type 10 is in game.
It seems kinda odd to me that the JSDF wouldn’t have a contingency plan such as SAM vehicles being able to operate by themselves in case the command structure gets interrupted (radar unit/optical unit gets knocked out).
Type 10 uses a HMT (hydraulic-mechanicl transmission), which, if I’m not mistaken, is a type of CVT (continuously variable transmission). It allows a variable gear ratio, meaning the engine can be running at maximum all the time if the driver wants it (within a certain limit).
WarThunder is currently incapable of making variable gear ratios. It is just outright impossible with the current way that the game is coded.
On a side note, those horsepower changes are live.
The way Gaijin compensated was setting all gear changes to 0.
Meaning there are no real gear changes.
HP optimal range doesn’t mean much except for top speed.
Torque optimal range matters more, which isn’t a detail we can see.
CVT isn’t just about not having gear shifting. It’s also about having the best performance for nearly any given moment. It still a acts far from a CVT.
Just the fact that the in-game driver can outright select the wrong gear, by changing to a higher gear too early, or not changing to a lower gear when going slower after losing speed, ruins that.
Besides, there are still gears that have big gaps between each other. The 7th gear tops out at 50 km/h and the 8th at 70 km/h. This leads to worse acceleration when switching from 7th to 8th, which shouldn’t be the case.
Also, if possible, I’d like a source about the gear shifting times.
A vehicle will accelerate better if it runs a higher gear ratio to reach peak horsepower than if it uses a lower gear ratio to reach peak torque.
Even though peak torque is higher than torque at peak horsepower, because it’s running a higher gear ratio at peak horsepower that lower amount of torque gets multiplied by that bigger gear ratio, leading to overall higher torque.
With that in mind the Type 10 would accelerate the best with the HMT changing the gear ratio so the engine is always running peak horsepower.
I think thats fine but they still need to do something to bring the Type 10s acceleration up to what it should be. It should be able to out accelerate Type 90s by a good margin.
Maybe they can within the code increase HP by a good bit and in game keep it saying 1200 hp to simulate the better acceleration?
I found this image of what appears to be a Type 87 with a Type 62/Type 74 MMG mounted in front of the commanders hatch.
I haven’t seen this sort of thing before, but it could be an interesting little back up MG to deal with any open top vehicles when your guns are knocked out.
I have a question about the type 10’s firepower. The in-game muzzle velocity is 1780 m/s, and the 10 apfsds bullet has a length of 748 mm and a diameter of 24 mm, equivalent to the L55/DM53. However, what is the reason why penetration is inferior to L44 and DM53? Also, 10apfsds, DM53, etc. should have considered the opponent’s armor and taken countermeasures against ERA, but why can’t they penetrate ERA at all?
