the old document is from 1968, the new from 1993.
Gepard development started in the 60s and first production variant was delivered in '76.
And from what I could find the FAPDS and APFSDS were only designed around 91, atleast I have another brochure from that date that advertises the “new fin stabilized projectiles” including PMD 060, as well as frangible shells.
1A2 could get FAPDS and maybe darts though
any bets which BR the F-4F ICE will be in SB?
It’s either gonna be 13.0 in the tech tree or a 12.3 premium. I still wouldn’t be surprised if they go and make Germany’s only Fox 3 platform until the Eurofighter a premium.
Unfortunately knowing gaijin prob won’t even if it came with a BR change, (which I’d live with) but honestly, please give the RADAR and IRST guided IR SAM’s target cuing, immensely frustrating to have a lock but finicky tone stopping launch.
I remember someone mentionning the 1A2’s used FAPDS for their main AA round due to its higher muzzle velocity and similar on hit effect, while also being a safer round to have/handle.
I never dug into it too much but it does make sense to me considering all the advantages, which is why it bugs the heck out of me that we dont even have the option to use FAPDS at all on the Gepard…
Pls dont remind me, thats one of my biggest pet peaves
Im assuming gaijin are gonna be idiots and stick it at 12.7 with no fix to MP and no IRIS-T, where it’ll get obliterated by everythibg it faces if the enemy pilots are in any way skilled.
That being said, the vast majority of pilots in WT are utter garbage at the game, and barely better than bots due to gaijins consistent handholding of premium players, and ease of access to top tier via premiums.
Overall, with AIM-9L(i)/L(i)-1’s, the F-4F ICE should be 12.0, 12.3 at the very most if MP isnt fixed. Itll just be an EJ kai with better missiles, and the EJ Kai sits at 11.7, no way in hell 120A/L(i)'s woupd warrant a full 1.0 BR increase if MP remains unchanged.
bUT if ThEY cHaNGe MulTI-pAthINg, hOw WIll I fIgHT aGaiNsT rAdAr mISsIlLEs!!
also because in the modern battle field, armoured formations leading infantry on the side or rear are pretty much relegated to training an not actual combat.
thus ERA is more useful because there’s no infantry around anyway
Adding IRST-T, R-73M, AIM-9X, MICA IR, AAM-5B, etc at this stage to any aircraft would be idiotic.
@Mahiwew
Weird of you to accuse NATO of being liars.
Hardkill APS isn’t universal on NATO tanks, it’s on select units.
I’ll take the lack of an actual response as validation that my point has been made.
Or perhaps not, since there is a fixation on only a single aspect of it.
Sorry, but i just couldn’t help myself
bro u did not just…
leave wojak alone bruh!
cant lie though they do come off as a bit russophobic
Aw hell nah I got turned into one of them soyjak folk
🤣soyjak lmfao good one
Wait they are finally changing multipathing?
That’s how the public takes it that’s not really what militaries are doing. Also western tanks don’t typically use “ERA” they use NERA (Non-explosive-reactive-armor) specifically because it lowers the risk of harming nearby infantry.
And NERA is made possible by, you guessed it, having a bigger tank, thus having more space for good standalone armor.
I mean some nato stuff use mix of NERA and ERA between their stuff like the PUMA