I’m just happy they added something.
Oh Mauser Brrrrt would also have been nice.
3 Likes
It does look really awesome!
Yes it does but not like the XM246, the XM247 also had partly 14.5 AP protection but it was too heavy, so they reduced it so the rear and side armor on the M247 to something less. It seems it only has 14.5 protection out to ~25-30 degrees from the front.
3 Likes
Correcting the XM246.
I have made a lot of issue reports to get i closer to the reported real-life capabilities if you are interested in close to real-life implementation, please share your “concern”.
Accepted but not yet implemented:
[DEV] XM246 historically wrong armor. // Gaijin.net // Issues
[DEV] XM246 Missing proper delayed fuze HEI round (SAPHEI) // Gaijin.net // Issues
[DEV] XM246 Historically wrong radar // Gaijin.net // Issues
[DEV] XM246 Missing optical search magnification (WFOV) // Gaijin.net // Issues
[DEV] XM246 Missing historical feature APDS-T // Gaijin.net // Issues
[DEV] XM246 casing ejection missing // Gaijin.net // Issues
[DEV] XM246 missing left side smoke launcher // Gaijin.net // Issues
Rejected:
[DEV] XM246 Missing Optical Tracking // Gaijin.net // Issues
[DEV] XM246 additional optical tracking source // Gaijin.net // Issues
Comment: I tried my best to get the historical optical tracking but Gaijin wanted the word “automatic” to be used in the description otherwise they rejected it, despite the DIVAD requirement for a backup system with the same accuracy and multiple descriptions of a continuous tracking system with laser rangefinder and full descriptions of how that system works in the M247 it was not enough, unfortunately for us the word “automatic” in connection to the DIVADs appears to only be used when the system did the whole engagement cycle, except pulling the trigger.
[DEV] XM246 Crew location wrong // Gaijin.net // Issues
Comment: Apparently Gaijin thinks crew hatches and periscopes are just for show and not for the crew, they need a primary source to move the FCS forward and release the crew from their SPAA dungeon.
[DEV] XM246 missing historical feature HE-VT // Gaijin.net // Issues
Comment: I was not surprised that they chose not to give it HE-VT, is what it is, can still happen in the future.
Fixed:
[DEV] XM246 wrong barrel model. // Gaijin.net // Issues
[DEV] XM246 Historically wrong ammunition layout // Gaijin.net // Issues
11 Likes
These are the same guys who rejected my report on the ADATS missing a stabilizer because it doesn’t fit their agenda, despite my report having army documents says the LOS-F-H had a requirement for shoot in the move - either way doesn’t make sense that M247 and now the XM246 have a stabilizer, but the vehicle from the program that effectively replaced them somehow doesn’t…
Good job and good luck dealing with them in your future endeavors.
4 Likes
The HE-VT situation is genuinely a good thing (atm) until more SPAA vehicles are added to that BR bracket to take its place it shouldn’t receive that ammunition option… Yet. Eventually I’d like to see it folder’d with the York at the same BR featuring the proximity ammunition and at least 2 other spaag’s with similar performance as it is at 8.3 for example.
2 Likes
As of the Dev server shutdown, xm246 still has not received APDS
If they gave it programmable timed fuze, it would at least not be an inferior geapord
1 Like
It isn’t?
More armour and closer guns.
That’s a better Gepard lol
1 Like
armor that’s 50cal proof at the cost of mobility?
You are right about closer guns, I forgot about that. However I do wonder if dispersion is good on these systems rather than having a laser beam
Never had it to begin with. It’s an m48 chassis.
Its armour is a benefit.
Plus, no spaa can outrun a tank or CAS.
If u have the gepard ull know he pain of trying to intercept an incoming munition and failing.
Or how jets can squeeze between ur rounds.
2 Likes
I think we can agree that XM246 will be better than Gepard against air targets due to barrel spacing and superior armor (to resist strafing and bomb fragments)
However, the mobility is not good, much worse than Gepard. Take this horsepower to ton ratio comparison for instance:
Panther G - 13.4
XM246 - 13.8
M60A1 (AOS) - 15.6
Gepard - 18
T-55A - 16.1
ZA-35 - 17.7
Leopard 1 - 20.8
PGZ09 - 21.1
Type 87 - 22.9
And max speeds is also very different, XM246’s 48 km/h is much worse than Gepard’s 65 km/h. You can’t look past mobility, it is vital for evading air attacks and flanking ground vehicles (since you can’t take out tanks from the front)
Also, while the APDS report is accepted, it might not make it to live anytime soon (or at all) due to issues with sources about internal ammunition model. In that case XM246 will have worse mobility and lack effective ammunition against ground targets.
1 Like
in comparison to a leopard chassis. In 8.3 where heat slingers and atgms are common place, armor is less important.
It’s not meant to. The reason why I said mobility is important is because getting into good positions quick helps with ambushes
point taken
But its also true that you cannot outrun a missile or a bomb if it is well placed. Even in the gepard.
Being 50cal proof would mean somewhat more of a chance to survive highercaiber rounds as well.
Although it is slightly a bigger target than the gepard.
@HondaCivici
Armour wrt CAS and 50cals.
Uhh… thats not what its meant for.
Thats not what any spaa is meant for.
Thats not what any spaa can really do other than the ozelot and type 93
2 Likes
You still meet a lot of IFVs, enemy SPAAs, and other lightly armed light tanks. The XM246 will be much more resistant to them.
In real life sure, but in game you can definitely do so. Not staying in spawn, not being completely in the open, turning off your radar are some of the things. Most CAS players expect them to be in spawn so you can surprise them when they are going in for bombing or gun runs (for 8.3).
8.3 SPAA are pretty lethal because there isn’t really any long range munition at the BR along with no RWR. In a uptier, that’s a different story but can be compensated (though by not much) with the some of the tactics I mentioned above.
i agree you have a fair point but that should not serve to lower the BR of the vehicle. if the ambush capability is significant, it can raise the BR, however a lack of it should not affect the base BR
Well I’m not really arguing about it’s BR because with the things you’ve mentioned, I realized both has it’s ups and downs. I’m just asking if armor & gun placement outweighs mobility.