To be fair, most information about top-tier tanks is based on assumptions and estimations. However, that is not an excuse for Gaijin to pick and choose the sources they prefer, fabricate information, and then refuse to make changes when confronted. Good examples include the 20mm thick breach / trunnion, worse mobility than the Type 90 and jumpy suspension.
4 Likes
I have a question whether the nanocrystalline steel from which type 10 is made is correctly reproduced in the game?
As I know, it is lighter than ordinary steel and much more durable
it is not ingame there is no such thing as nanocrystalline steel ingame what it should do its basically be 1.5x more effective than RHA ingame while keeping the same thickness effective thickness should be partially better
Is it possible to report incorrect armor material as a bug?
it is as long as you have sources and a picture of the ingame material, btw the material is the whole thing outside its not the composite RHA needs to be replaced with NCA
I saw some articles about nanocrystalline steel so I may look for them.
actually type 10 from the game, using this armor destroys its technical specification which assumed weight reduction.if we assume that it is made of ordinary steel and not nanocrystalline steel, its weight should be greater and mobility worse
what they did its make the armor thiner in order to replace it with nanocrystaline steel, it offers almost same weight while making it much more resistant, in fact most of the weight reduction comes from the RHA replacement consisting in a weight reduction of almost half the weight compared to a normal RHA frame and external armor
We have this document that state the usage of nanocrystalline steel in both the type 10 and type 16. We also have a study that shows what effects it has against kinetic impacts.
3 Likes
great job like always drag0oon
1 Like
:D
I believe someone made a report on those two some time ago. I’m not sure if it was rejected or not. However, generally, I think this special steel has the highest chance to somewhat improve the armor of the Type 10, or at least make it autocannon-proof.
not really, as much issues as the VT-4A1 i will say the type 10 has more open bugs for what i know
- incorrect model of LWS and tracks
- incorrect turret rotation speed
- incorrect armor values
- incorrect armor model(in the XRAY its upside down and facing the wrong direction)
- incorrect material
- incorrect mobility
- incorrect reload (for now ignored cuz its too overpowered)
- hydropneumatic its too slow
- hydropneumatic lacks use on the move function
- incorrect ammount of breech armor values
- breech trunion has incorrect thickness
- roof has incorrect thickness
- incorrect performance of the hydropneumatic suspension making it bump while moving if you set the supension too low
16 Likes
its not really fair comparing both since type 10 has been out for more time and so there is more bugs known about it since players had more time to see it and meanwhile the VT-4A1 was recently brought to the game so not much times to adress every single bug so that depends on the people
2 Likes
I read in one article about the Type 10 that the side armor can withstand hits from 35 mm bullets.
1 Like
Is there any solid evidence of the type 10 being able to change the suspension on the move? That is, are there documents that says it can?
I don’t think it does have the ability to. The current armor satisfies the condition of being 14.5mm proof, which is being at least above 50mm in protection.
If all of this armor was turned to nca, then there would be an expected armor improvement to around 75-100mm. This is still under the figure of 127mm of 35mm apds
There’s also the magical armor package that increases its weight by 4 tons and makes it 30mm resistant nearly everywhere needed, which is around 100mm in total protection
this is for the 48 ton version wich adds side armor but we dont have pictures of that version yet we havent seen it
there is videos of it the type 10 suspension uses a smart workings wich dampens on specific zones when detecting changes in the terrain aswell as providing with active dampening while shooting
here is a demo of the active suspension for terrain climbing
1 Like
Yes, but I’m afraid that those won’t be accepted as they are videos. Is there no details hidden somewhere in a document that mention this?
ill have to search in a documents but this was already reported and acknowledged just that there is no such thing as an active suspension unless they copy part of the one used for the strv103 and paste it into the Type 10 code the speed tho its wrong
Ah so it’s already an acknowledged thing? Ok then I guess it’s just part of the list of issues acknowledged for several years with no action.
Speaking of which, is there a list of issues with the type 10 and a status of acknowledged or denied, similar to the lists the people in the leclerc thread make?