the complete name is KF41 Lynx yeah, because german Kettenfahrzeug 41, isnt realy useable by all, the Lynx goes with the german tradition of naming their vehicles and is easier to pronounce for most nations
first time i noticed that most Lynx variants seem to have the camera on the left side while the hungarian one has it on the right side for whatever reason
They do it the right way. :))
3 Likes
of course that is the comment of the french whose commander cameras are on the right side, just to remind you the leclerc has the gunner camera on the left side as well, and the KF41 needs to shoot it mainly as well. VBCI 2 has it on the left side as well.
Or what is your reasoning for the Scratch the joke with the right way initialy went right over my head
PBM-5A, Charles f Adams , Forrest Sherman and Glamorgan would be epic.
A guided missile destroyer? How exciting!
My first concern would be, how would Gaijin balance something like this? The current approach to bluewater BRs seems mostly “size based”, and it would have to change.
Or else this thing would sit at 4.7 BR xD
2 Likes
Don’t even know if she’d be any good. Only two 5-inch guns and a single missile launcher in the rear. Unless they give Harpoons (which I doubt) she’d be kind of crap I think.
Just a Mitscher with missles no?
In case of Bravy 5.3, this thing would be also 5.3 or even 5.7 because it has better gun and better missile)
Those gun is from Mitscher/Wilkinson so not so big problem as a destroyer. Anti cruiser is different thing though but not a big problem against early cruiser I think.
1 Like
We already have Bravy in the USSR TT which is basically equivalent of this. So it would be nothing new.
1 Like
What is that I need it right now
1 Like
I had a dream when La Royale devblogs were coming that this thing was being shown off in one.
2 Likes
I have learnt a lot too thanks for my research for vehicles in War Thunder!
For example: a few years ago, I used to think Challenger 2 had a 40º/s turret rotation speed because certain British person shared a video where it did, indeed, look like the turret rotated at 40º/s; it completed a 360º rotation in 9 seconds.
For a long time I advocated for a change using that video as proof… until, one day, I rewatched the video- except, this time, with audio, as I had previously watched it without sound only.
As soon as I heard the audio, it became evident for me that the video was actually sped up… by 0.25; when I reverted the video to its original speed, the Challenger 2’s turret completed 360º in… a little less than 12 seconds- that is, 31º/s; just as it is ingame.
That event left me traumatised: I had been deceived by that user, and I had been advocating for a change based on manipulated evidence… ever since then, I have not just double-checked, but triple-checked each and every single piece of evidence or source when it comes to tank technical capabilities, before asking for any kind of change or suggesting anything may require fixes for accuracy, hahahah.
Challenger 2 may require many fixes, adjustments and polishments; but, as it turns out, its turret rotation speed is not among these, as I believed while all of this happened.
8 Likes
Mitscher has the 3-inch secondary guns, Adams doesn’t.
I swear I thought there was one with just 2 5" guns huh guess not
I think itd be quite good Id like to see it
I had a dream the “La Royale” update give a royale number of ships, but it was more La Peasant.
3 Likes
Exactly why they dont take video as proof in those cases
CR2 turret rotation speed is actually still a minor debate :D
A small amount of evidence that it could be rotated faster than the 31m/s but was rarely done/could cause damage or something. Though for the most part. I think the greatest issue here is that the rotation speed is locked behind crew rank and how antiquated the crew skill mechanic is
3 Likes
Meanwhile Leclerc that should be at 40°/s… x)
1 Like