There was a boat load of issues from the inception of the F-4 and yes a lot of it revolved around the branches of services implementation of the aircraft. The other issues was just massive ego issues and incompetence especially within logistics.
2 Likes
too advanced for its own good?
That was AI.
Also, Fair point.
"The MiG-21F-13 wasn’t a “downgraded export model” but rather an early production version. It was the first mass-produced MiG-21 variant and naturally less advanced than later models, rather than being intentionally downgraded for export. However, it was widely exported because it was simple, reliable, and effective.
A better example of true export downgrades would be the MiG-21MF vs. the MiG-21bis (where the MF was often given to client states with less advanced avionics) or the MiG-23MS, which had significantly weaker radar than Soviet frontline models."
ok, but just about every time the US jets won they woudlve had the advantage regardless of it being soviet service or export model.
Kinda. A lot of issues came from branches failing to train their troops on the aircraft. As well the early missiles had reliability issues (Part of the reason being maintenance shops for the missiles being far away on bumpy roads) That’s all without getting into the Air Force’s refusal to use the AIM-9 or AIM-7 I don’t remember which maybe both.
1 Like
Yeah, but its like fighting someone with a disability vs a fully healthy person. Theres still a difference.
1 Like
it is not that big of a difference. its inferior radar vs slightly less inferior radar
Thats not the only difference you know…
They relied to much on the Aim-7’s with the mediocre radar but honestly the IR missiles worked good.
I support your point that there are hanging baskets that can be modeled, but they don’t need to be associated with other structures. The authorities are too obsessed with game balance and give hanging baskets to tanks without hanging baskets, such as the vt-5
I’ve added a new poll for the changes on the second dev server, with the main focus now being the trunnion changes for both the Leopard and Abrams. The previous poll had ~700 votes, with 82% voting no.
(I accidentally deleted it so I had to use an old screenshot)
Second Dev Leopard Changes
Basket was changed, now the hitbox looks like this
A new vertical has been introduced, with the trunnion block now part of the vertical traverse. A solid block of metal is now part of the vertical.
It does not even provide any armour, the block alone should be approximately 200mm of RHA. The wedge, composite block, and trunnion together amount to only 300mm KE.
Second Dev Abrams Changes
It seems that the basket now has a hitbox similar to the Leopard’s. For reference, here is the Leopard’s turret ring damage model:
The trunnion is still part of the vertical and does not seem to provide any protection. Shooting the gaps for MGs shows that there is not always an increase in protection. If there is, it appears to come from the gun itself or another part.
Curious on what others think about the new trunnion change on the Leopard & Abrams, seeing as it was not very talked about before (relative to the basket) :)
Zenturion did a video on it, still doesn’t look very promising until an armor value is specified, and there is still a gap between it and the the frontal armor
1 Like
If mantlets are now properly modelled and turned into firepower kill zones instead of tank insta-obliterating button, I’ll be glad.
1 Like
That’s exactly my issue, there are plenty of examples of the poor gun mantlet armour being unrealistic. But now, even smaller ACs can mostly stop anyone from trying to kill them frontally. Of course, this is under the assumption that it will actually stop you from moving the gun up and down.
1 Like
i dont think the gun manlet would have missing armor, maybe early model to shred weights but the manlet armor weight would be negligible
im think its like something like the Leopard with jam pack composite and sandwich behind a 101mm plate, because the US like matching stuff
I saw the schematic for Leopard 2A5 and onwards’ mantlet. It has about 400mm LOS of RHA not counting the titanium trunnion, not the mere 105 we have ingame.
I would share, but, since apparently now even the first Google Images search result is considered to be a banneable offense, I don’t know, hahah.
I will ask Smin in private if I can share it or not.
2 Likes
The Leopard Gun region is missing a significant amount of its armour. Below is a rough diagram of the entire gun. Not only is the entire array underperforming, as seen here (marked in blue), but crucial components are also completely absent. In the gun area, the cradle, trunnion, and armour are entirely missing (marked in red).
The worst part is that if these components are not missing, it only further proves that Gaijin is deliberately making mantlet & trunnion regions underperform. This is nowhere near what the Swedish trials or other sources showed. Depending on sources used, the red parts could easily add +300mm KE.
It doesn’t help that the modelling is already quite poor, such as the MG being positioned so far up into the armour when it physically couldn’t be there. This is by far my biggest gripe about the entire situation, it’s yet another module that will get sniped, further worsening the armour. I don’t think modules can provide armour protection unless they are penetrated, which only adds to the mountain of issues plaguing both the Abrams and Leopard, without any meaningful changes to address them.
2 Likes
There is a picture from the same source where the exact composition of the mantlet is shown; I DM’d Smin asking if I could share it without risking a ban, hahah.
But, basically, the “105 mm KE” mantlet piece has 4x 80 (?) mm thick RHA plates + the 20mm casing, without counting the wedge or the trunnion. It’s absurdly weak ingame.
So we would be talking about 80mm angled wedge armor + 320mm LOS RHA + 240mm thick trunnion.
2 Likes
It is literally the next page :P
There is also a very detailed video from Yoshi_E on the mantlet, but it’s another case of if you know, you know (while he did clear it with the BW afaik I still dont want to post it). It’s safe to say there is more than sufficient proof that the current model is incorrect.