As we mentioned already, WIP posts are for the long gaps between major updates. The 3rd, 4th and 5th major updates of the year all come roughly a month and a half or so apart from each other (give or take a few weeks). So the waiting period is much less and there is rarely such a big gap of news or events between them. They will resume in the future.
5 Likes
Only vehicles that historically had CCIP should have that capability in-game
The Mistel didn’t have such a capability, the pilots used an adjusted gunsight to aim the Ju 88 and that is how it should work in-game
just play it in arcade
1 Like
Sure ill just take it into arcade ground battles and use it… oh wait…
On another note hopefully this update we get some advancements or comments on regen steering
Are there any non-premium aircraft planned for China? I’ve almost finished the Chinese tree.
Well, I hope the ZBD04 is in the tech tree. I’d rather not ask about it, so I can cry in peace if it becomes premium.
Being former CR2 crew I will chime in on this, seeing as I have been trained on the CR2 LDT equipment shown in the video.
The APFSDS drill projectile is taken from the rear turret pod rack as described. All projectiles shown in the rear of the turret are immediately accessible.
The APFSDS drill charge is then taken from the rear hull charge bins, the middle set of which have horizontal sliding lids and are accessible without danger of obstructing the turret during traverse. In the video, the charge is taken directly from the bin and laid into the breech in one relatively smooth movement.
The same Armoured Charge Bins from Challenger 1 are used, with the sliding bin highlighted below. The left and right rear hull bins are still useable in the same manner, but care must be taken with their hinged lids not to obstruct turret traverse. The bins are hinged at the front specifically to minimise this danger. All of the rear bins can be accessed while the vehicle is moving.
It should be noted that the loader shown in the video is a Ukrainian crewman undergoing qualification as a CR2 Loader, and his loading speed should be regarded as either the slowest possible acceptable speed for loader qualification, or worse.
9 Likes
Thank you for your reply.
This is obviously quite disappointing news. I am unsure exactly what information the developers could want to furthur clarify this.
Video proof and documentation has been provided to show the potential loading speed does not have any reason to different significantly when using the hull vs turret ammunition storage, as well as primary documentation being provided to show that the Challenger 1 and Challenger 2 both had 20 ready rounds as a specific requirement for their development.
If gaijin would like this to be a balance decision, then I think it’s best they say that, currently there seems to be essentially zero evidence to indicate that there is any difference in reload speed between the turret and primary hull ammunition stowage.
As L2ulan has provided images to prove, the hull charges are not stored in a way that would make accessing them any slower than accessing the turret charges. Their physical location is no further from the breach than the turret charges, in fact, it is closer. Additionally, the video provided in the rejected report shows the APFSDS rounds being drawn from the bustle rack, so this rack can clearly be used to achieve high fire rates.
If the developers have any specific points of contention about why the reload from the hull storage should be longer, it would be helpful if we could know this so we are aware of why the report was denied.
Additionally, looking at the Chieftain, which uses a very similar layout.
The hull ammunition is correctly considered as part of the ready rack, despite being in identical positions to the Challenger 1/2s.
2 Likes
Then throw in the Cheiftains with a very similar layout but the full size ready rack and things just get stupid fast
Yeah, I’m extremely confused as to why Gaijin are so adamant that the ready rack is only 4 rounds, despite all evidence provided going against this and there being none to support it.
1 Like
Simple, It nerfs the CR2s.
What I find especially interesting is nothing has been said about the CR1s yet
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/m22cZZxaNPXJ
Ah, I thought September update was usually smaller than others, because of holidays, same as the first of the year one.
This uses the same document that, despite stating the ready rack should be 20 rounds, was rejected for the CR2.
So this report will also now be rejected.
Please, fix this, as well as the missing spall liners…
All MBTs deserve to be depicted properly; but Challenger 2, as one of the main contenders of the modern world, specially doesn’t deserve to be dragged down as much as it still is.