oh neat
1 Like
🤔🤔🤔
it did
It HISTORICALLY did
“Grace a la stabilisation par gyroscope de l’armement. Et a terre cette meme capacité de tir en mouvement contre des cibles également mobile a pu être intégré à un char de moins de 40 tonnes l’AMX 32”
“Thanks to gyroscopic stabilisation of the weapons. On the ground a similar capability to fire on the move against moving targets has been integrated to an under-40t tank : the AMX 32”
(so yes it is)
I also have a bit more detailed explanation in a suggestion :
source : Another AMX APX video (in the suggestion linked down below)
it’s in a very nice suggestion AMX 30 Valorisé - First of the AMX 32 (definitely not self promoting)
“(Taking about gunner’s station) On remplace la référence inertielle du viseur APX M453 par une deuxième référence inertielle liée à l’artillerie”. => “The inertial reference of the APX M453 sight is replaced by a second inertial reference point linked to the artillery (understand the main gun in this context)”.
What does this lingo means ? It just means that when the gunner takes over the control of the gun, the FCS switches from the commander’s hunter killer (director stabilizer, using both the the gun’s and the commander’s gyros for stabilisation operations) mode to a classic gun stabilizer (using only the gun gyro for stabilisation operation).
While the video showcases (in the suggestion linked below) the AMX 30 Valorisé, the system is used on the AMX 32s and the AMX 40s. The problem comes from marketing that considered this function as a backup mode and not the normal way (being the director stabilizer) to use the main armament.
The mistake about the AMX 32 not having any stabilizer is due to 1. translation mistake between french and english (a director stabilizer was not called stabilizer in french but a complex string of words which got messed up during translation, as the french described the process and not the effect as english did ) and 2. the fact the more classic gunner mode that could have been translated with less mistake was not advertised as well as it was only considered a backup mode and hence not a marketing point. To be fair not many tanks had a 360° quick hunter killer (director stabilizer enabled) capacity back then.
9 Likes
i have awoken from my sleep did i miss something interesting?
1 Like
Nope
Vt1 Systems ito 90m got acknowledged to be ACLOS systems, does that count?
2 Likes
It came to me in a dream. US is getting (F-15 + F-18)/2
F-16.5 confirmed!
2 Likes
What’s the name of the bug report?
Here
4 Likes
Nice, thanks.
that does count and that makes me get even more sad about the fla rak rad germany really needs a new top tier SPAA more than an MBT
Its the question if they will just implement it for the FlaRakRad as well. In the first place it never qas able to shoot VT 1 missles and that was only a plan for the future that qas never realised
i mean it easily could since the fla rak rad its technically not “real” since its just a prototype vehicle if im not wrong it wasnt even able to fire VT 1 irl, basically never used
So what i wrote yeah 😂
yeah basically, aka give germany an AA to compete with top tier cas
The FlaRakRad itself was very much real and in use with the german navy.
That being said israel, italy need ones more urgently first and japan needs access ro their radar missle variant.
Only after that it is germanys time. UK and US are argumentatively in need of a real top tier spaa without increases spawn costs as well TT
radar missile in game files so mark that one down, now italy and israel really need an AA, and the US and UK really do need a new one specially the UK but what would be the options that arent too op?
also i cant recall any flarakrad in the german navy tbh, do you have any picture or archive stating that?
1 Like
Yeah plenty of pics around
weird didnt knew the thing would actually be in service
Only need about 175 pictures of it to get to part 3!