The Il-102s nose looks like from the early Hs 129.
1 Like
I wish they would fix AIM-7s and other SAHR missiles that they’ve utterly broken with the release of the latest update
Hell even now my R-24Rs are going off in the opposite direction of the locked aircraft which is something that only happened on the F-15 up until today
R-27s unaffected curiously enough
1 Like
Ruining an entire unique BM Oplot to make into a 100 vehicle only event ?
Atleast we have T-55 and King Tiger in game already.
Ukraine (maybe Thai) Tech Tree is the only place it should ever be, anyway
whoa, whoa … hold on
am not saying, introducing BM Oplot only for US tree … that’d be stupid
I have been strong supporter of @Yontzee ‘s Ukraine TT suggestion. So not suggesting that …
What I am saying though is, introduce captured/preserved vehicles as extremely limited event vehicles.
Like the UK’s Tiger 131(which is pretty famous, ngl) or US’s captured King Tiger, or transferred T-84, BM Oplot or modified T-55 Jaguar and maybe even the T-90A?(lol, nah, too extreme). But much better suggestion than a US’ Merkavas.
Now to Ukrainian Oplots. Since Ukrainian TT is a bit debated topic at the moment, doubt it’ll be added anytime soon (however much we support it) … So getting Oplot or T-84 early in WT, ain’t a bad idea, even though in US’ tree.
Or else Thai Oplots … which again before any standalone Ukr TT can be added to Chinese tree, less controversial than US getting an Oplot. And can be added as regular premium/squadron vehicle rather than extremely limited event vehicle.
1 Like
US Oplot? Doesn’t fit, I’d be nice to see a Thailand Oplot or Ukrainian sub tree for them though.
i would like to see the OPLOT-M 120 tbh
2 Likes
Update! So, now thanks to some photographer, we have some photos to make sure its 1G46 sights for gunner and TKN-4S with commander gunner system as well.
Originally, photographer thought hes getting inside T-80BV, however T-80BV has completely other gunner and commander sights, as well as different turret.
Spoiler
Why am I claiming such things?
Well heres two photos of inside the turret of T-80A and you can see on commander’s place the TKN-4S commander sight (it has TKN-4S literally typed onto it, TKN-4S is also used on T-80U) with the green commander gunner system close.
This is T-80BV commander sight and place for reference:
Images of T-80B/BV insides taken from
Т-80БВ фото (интерьер)
Now take a look again at PKN-4S (TKN-4S, im unsure whats the right name) in T-55AGM modernisation from Ukraine
Seems almost same to me. Photo taken from site describing T-55AGM modernisation:
Модернизация среднего танка Т-55
Now take a look at T-80A gunner place.
Now take a look at T-80B/BV gunner place:
These two are completely different.
Now take a look at 1G46 in some modified T-80U, probably T-80UM (we can see night scope missing but some display for thermal imager)
Now, after taking a look T-80A sight ressembles 1G46 quite closely, with main differences being just texts on sights, as well as missing brightness control on T-80A scope, so by my estimate, T-80A has some early 1G46 sight which simply lacked brightness control but was similar in all other ways.
Now, heres the source of images from the mentioned photographer:
Рабочие места экипажа танка Т-80БВ — ТехФото
Now you can clearly see on prementioned picture of T-80A in museum that place (corner the tank stands in) quite ressembles it, the turret as ERA layout are similar, the only thinga differenting are camos which museum probably changed themselves, and the camera position.
You can also see mud flaps on tank to T-80A literally being similar. All these things (position of the tank, sight systems being completely different from T-80BV) make me suppose that photographer was indeed taking photos of T-80A and not T-80BV like he thought, and T-80A through out years changed its camo in the museum.
As a note, I plan to seeing if I can visit T-80A personally to ensure its T-80A there,as well as continuing my research.
I plan to make suggestion, unfortunately I may or not lack sources that I can credit.
Update:
I found two rich sources about development of T-80A that was going on from 1978-1985, however these sources are focused on 1978-1980 mainly, without telling changes made further on, which is the version of T-80A i was first to bring up, and the one i wish to be added in game.
Heres a photo of one of the earliest T-80A variants from 1979, you can see its different from 1984 model I mainly want.
1 Like
Since France is lacking any high tier support vehicles in the tech tree, I think the VBCI with the T40 turret would be a great addition to compliment the Leclercs.
The chassis for this vehicle is already implemented in a premium, and I don’t think it’s very fair that France gets its only IFV in the form of a paid vehicle.
The VBCI (T40) is an IFV equipped with a 40mm autocannon that fires telescopic rounds (as seen on the HSTV-L) at 200 RPM. It is also equipped with MMP missiles (similar to spikes) and a remote controlled 7.62mm/12.7mm machine gun.
I would really like to see France get something other than MBTs above 8.7.
1 Like
Also !
Spoiler
Heres early variant of Object 219A on trials without it’s ERA (Kontakt-1)
Also from one source it states that around 4 219A’s have been made in configuration that I firstly talked about.
Spoiler
Heres also T-80U with early Kontakt-5 layout.
That hull looks way longer. You can see where it ends at the 90 degree, and it still looks longer
I wonder what the specs of the turret are considering its age? It resembles a T-80U but doesn’t seem as flush.
Thanks for the all the info regarding the T-80A. Very hard to find much on it outside of Russia.
Considering both T-80U sources describing turret and T-80A sources I could stumble upon state same materials being used in a same way, I think its safe to assume they have same turret arrays, so basically take turret of T-80U we have in game and remove K-5, there! Kontakt 1 sure does exist but all its effect on KE is just a small metal plate, nothing else. Thats about 1984 version, I think 1979 version uses different turret.
T-80A took a lot of changes during its development time, it had completely different turret and possibly LFP layout, had different FCS. However the one I wish for is 1984 version with K-1, 1200 hp engine, 1G46 sight and TKN-4S commander sight with commander gunner system.
So basically imagine T-80U we have in game but no thermals, its heavier, slightly worse engine, reload rate is 7,1 seconds probably, complete lack of K-5.
Plus I have several sources state that T-80U was based on T-80A.
I plan to make suggestion for it tomorrow or other time, I plan to make an option in vote for adding it either with 3BM42 or 3BM46. And I know I am making Kontakt-1 researchable thing, as I have a scheme of T-80A showcasing its look with out without K-1, sadly I dont seem to have any photos of it without K-1, not counting without the one with mounts for it.
USA:
USS North Carolina (BB-55)
Spoiler
USS Washington (BB-56)
Spoiler
USSR:
Sovetsky Soyuz
Sovetsky Ukraina
2 Likes
In the branch of the USSR and Germany.
Why Germany? That makes no sense
2 Likes
On August 16, 1941, German troops occupied the city of Nikolaev, where the hull of the battleship “Soviet Ukraine” was located on the slipway in 7% readiness.
At first it was planned to complete it for the German navy, but there was no suitable project. During the war, the hull of the “Soviet Ukraine” was partially dismantled (about 4,000 tons of metal were removed), the armor and part of the structures were dismantled and sent to front-line needs. During the retreat on March 28, 1944 from Nikolaev, the Germans made a lot of efforts to bring the ship into a condition that precludes the possibility of completion. In 1944, it was considered that the technical readiness of the ship eventually decreased by more than half.
1 Like
I don’t think you make claim a battleship off of this, this exact logic can be used against the Germans in this case by literally everybody, Germany would have nothing unique at that point, also do you have supporting documentation? it would be a interesting read.
Also we don’t need conjecture.
The ship was at 17% readiness by the time the war starting.
5 Likes
The unfinished battleship of the project 23 “Soviet Ukraine” on the slipway in occupied Nikolaev.
The Soviet Union-class battleship Sovetskaya Ukraina was laid down in 1938 at the A. Marti plant in Nikolaev on an unfinished slipway (factory No. 352). By June 22, 1941, the technical readiness of the “Soviet Ukraine” was 14.91%. By the resolution of the State Defense Committee of July 10, 1941, the construction of the battleships of project 23 was suspended and the work was mothballed. By order of the People’s Commissar of the Navy on September 10, the “Soviet Union”, “Soviet Ukraine” and “Soviet Russia” were excluded from the fleet, and at the end of the war, the unfinished ships were
14.91%
https://vk.com/wall-2169946_57843
Where does the information about 17% come from?
The battleship Sovetskaya Ukraina (ave. 23) was laid down in 1938 at the A. Marti Shipbuilding Plant in Nikolaev. According to the plans, the ship was to be delivered to the customer in 1943. The construction of the battleships was stopped on July 10, 1941. At the time of the termination of construction, the readiness of the battleship was 7%. In the post-war period, it was decided not to continue the construction of the battleships ave. 23, and in 1946-1947 the ship was dismantled on the slipway
7%
№ 162. Resolution of the Council of People’s Commissars of the USSR and the Central Committee of the CPSU(b) No. 2073-877ss “On the plan of military shipbuilding for 1941”
on October 19, 1940
It’s top secret.
(Special folder)
In order to accelerate the construction of light surface forces of the Navy (light cruisers, destroyers, patrol ships) and submarines, especially of the Stalinets type and small twin-shaft, the Council of People’s Commissars of the USSR and the Central Committee of the CPSU(b) decide:
For the construction of battleships and heavy cruisers
-
Do not make new bookmarks of battleships and heavy cruisers at the shipbuilding plants of the People’s Commissariat of Industry.
-
Oblige the People’s Commissariat of Justice (T. Nosenko) from among the battleships and heavy cruisers under construction to focus construction on the following ships: a) battleship “Soviet Russia” at plant No. 402 in Molotovsk; b) heavy cruiser “Kronstadt” at plant No. 194 in Leningrad; c) heavy cruiser “Sevastopol" at plant No. 200 in Nikolaev.
-
Set the following dates for launching heavy cruisers: a) the heavy cruiser Kronstadt — in the third quarter of 1942; b) the heavy cruiser Sevastopol — in the third quarter of 1942; c) for the battleship Soviet Russia, bring the appropriate readiness by the beginning of the third quarter of 1943.
-
To establish for 1941 the following advance in technical readiness for the ships specified in paragraph 3: a) for the heavy cruiser Kronstadt — by 18%; b) for the heavy cruiser Sevastopol — by 18%; c) for the battleship Soviet Russia — by 12%.
-
The issue of the caliber of the main artillery for heavy cruisers should be resolved no later than mid-November.
-
The construction of the remaining battleships in 1941 should be limited and the following launch dates should be set for them: a) the battleship “Soviet Union” at plant No. 189 in Leningrad — June 1943; b) the battleship “Soviet Ukraine” at plant No. 198 in Nikolaev — June 1943.
-
The construction of the battleship “Soviet Belarus” at plant No. 402 in Molotovsk should be suspended, and the metal put on the slipway should be dismantled
12%
1 Like