Next patch and beyond wishlist(Everything except Tech Trees) (Part 2)

[somebody_Else]

@TheArcticFoxxo

What do you mean? You had said the 1982 T-80B is “some weird 219A precursor to the 219AS”.

I said its either a 1978 or 1980 model T-80B.

By extension, that also means I’m saying its not an T-80A.

@TheArcticFoxxo

I would imagine it could, seeing as 1A46 is fully automatic to begin with.

There isn’t an external computer for 1A46, it’s simply attached to 1T46.

Its lead calculation is automatic, but only using information from the laser rangefinder and crosswind sensor. There’s no calculation for temperature, pressure or head/tail winds.

A separate device like the DVE-BS could in theory take the laser and shell information from the FCS, do its own calculations, and then override the FCS’s lead calculation with its own.

Or, more likely, the FCS was just changed to accept the new information for its own calculations.

@TheArcticFoxxo

Better armor would matter quite a bit.

Its the same.

@TheArcticFoxxo

So again, it would be quite erroneous and stupid if it were to receive an Rh120.

Which it wouldn’t because the specific challenger 2 build its based on didn’t have that.

Its not like the T-80U is getting Relikt from the T-80BVM or a CITV from the T-90M.

It has Agava thermals from the specific T-80U build its based on.

@TheArcticFoxxo

it’s a matter of "this vehicle in its setup is effectively fiction

And again, its not. Its based on a very real historical T-80U build. One of them even ended up in Sweden as a potential export.

[Otrabrok]

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@somebody_Else

I said its either a 1978 or 1980 model T-80B.

Neither of which are true, as the very earliest this could have been produced in 1982.

@somebody_Else

By extension, that also means I’m saying its not an T-80A.

TheArcticFoxxo:

I didn’t catch that with what you had said.

@somebody_Else

Its lead calculation is automatic, but only using information from the laser rangefinder and crosswind sensor. There’s no calculation for temperature, pressure or head/tail winds.

There is? Temp and pressure were read via the 1B12, in which head/tail winds was largely irrelevant to focuses of the time.

@somebody_Else

A separate device like the DVE-BS could in theory take the laser and shell information from the FCS, do its own calculations, and then override the FCS’s lead calculation with its own.

That’s what it does on all Catherine or Kalina systems, which must be a godsend.

@somebody_Else

Or, more likely, the FCS was just changed to accept the new information for its own calculations.

From everything I see, the FCS stayed the exact same. If you mean the FCS elements such as the aforementioned sensors, I’d imagine so. With newer vehicles like the T-90 coming out alongside the later T-80U variants, I’d imagine the now privatized industry wanted to do away with the quite old standardized systems.

@somebody_Else

Its the same.

It isn’t. Gorbunov’s assessment of the T-80UM detailed a new ceramic insert for the hull array.

@somebody_Else

Which it wouldn’t because the specific challenger 2 build its based on didn’t have that.

Its not like the T-80U is getting Relikt from the T-80BVM or a CITV from the T-90M.

It has Agava thermals from the specific T-80U build its based on.

Neither does the early production T-80B have a 2A46M-1, extra hull armor, Kontakt-1, or thermals… Nor does a 1985 T-80B have quartz turrets instead of comp K, the old hull array of the initial production T-80.

You’re right, the T-80U is getting the exact opposite and has armor profiles from 1985 whereas it should have the armor profile of the 1992 T-80U, of which it is.
Instead of gaining anything from it, it loses capability by having a bolstered BR due to its erroneous thermal sights and outdated armor.

The “specific T-80U build” never received Agava-2, that was incorporated in 1992-1997.

@somebody_Else

And again, its not. Its based on a very real historical T-80U build. One of them even ended up in Sweden as a potential export.

It isn’t.
The one in Sweden was the one assessed with increased armor protection of the hull, of which we don’t get in-game. That’s what vladimir gorbunov wrote his evaluation of.

[somebody_Else]

@TheArcticFoxxo

Neither of which are true, as the very earliest this could have been produced in 1982.

The Agava tests weren’t new build tanks, they were retrofitted to older tanks. They could have put them on T-34’s if they had wanted to.

@TheArcticFoxxo

There is? Temp and pressure were read via the 1B12, in which head/tail winds was largely irrelevant to focuses of the time.

1B11 is just a crosswind sensor. Checking again, there’s also the 1B12 temperature sensor so slight correction on my other comment, the FCS does handle temperature.

But pressure and head/tailwinds are new with the DVE-BS.

@TheArcticFoxxo

From everything I see, the FCS stayed the exact same. If you mean the FCS elements such as the aforementioned sensors, I’d imagine so. With newer vehicles like the T-90 coming out alongside the later T-80U variants, I’d imagine the now privatized industry wanted to do away with the quite old standardized systems.

The idea was cost-effective ways of modernising. Replacing the FCS completely is more expensive than retrofitting in DVE-BS sensors.

@TheArcticFoxxo

It isn’t. Gorbunov’s assessment of the T-80UM detailed a new ceramic insert for the hull array.

That seems highly unlikely since it would require tearing down the vehicle to replace. Post-soviet modernisations typically work with better ERA, it doesn’t require tearing down the vehicle and rebuilding.

But even if it did, the composite function against APFSDS works on alternating density zones, its probably going to have very little impact on darts, more of HEAT.

@TheArcticFoxxo

whereas it should have the armor profile of the 1992 T-80U, of which it is.

Which again, the same profile as the 1986 model. The only thing the Agava T-80U changed was the night sight.

@TheArcticFoxxo

It isn’t.
The one in Sweden was the one assessed with increased armor protection of the hull, of which we don’t get in-game.

It was the same. Its already ingame, and its the same. Again, it was just the basic 1986 with Agava, and both were sent to Sweden, one with and one without Agava.

[quartas121]

What’s the point of all this T-80 talk? We all know Abrams is gallons of JP-8 better

[somebody_Else]

Apparently the T-80B and T-80U ‘need’ to be removed from the game.

He personally doesn’t like playing them so noone gets to play them.

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@somebody_Else

1B11 is just a crosswind sensor. Checking again, there’s also the 1B12 temperature sensor so slight correction on my other comment, the FCS does handle temperature.

Pressure is dealt with via 1B12, as said.

@somebody_Else

But pressure and head/tailwinds are new with the DVE-BS.

DVE-BS does indeed deal with newer wind headings, though that’s effectively it.

@somebody_Else

That seems highly unlikely since it would require tearing down the vehicle to replace. Post-soviet modernisations typically work with better ERA, it doesn’t require tearing down the vehicle and rebuilding.

The vehicle didn’t need to be “torn down”, Omsk produced a little under 700 T-80s from 1989-1997.

@somebody_Else

Which again, the same profile as the 1986 model. The only thing the Agava T-80U changed was the night sight.

I’m not talking about the T-80Us featuring Agava, I’m talking about 1992 spec T-80UMs… Of which a new hull was devised.

@somebody_Else

It was the same. Its already ingame, and its the same. Again, it was just the basic 1986 with Agava, and both were sent to Sweden, one with and one without Agava.

The “one in game” is quite literally a copy/paste T-80U. So much so that the original TPN-3 was erroneously placed on the vehicle.
Do you have anything showing a T-80U was sent to Sweden without Agava?

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@somebody_Else

Apparently the T-80B and T-80U ‘need’ to be removed from the game.

They don’t?

@somebody_Else

He personally doesn’t like playing them so noone gets to play them.

Never once said that, but go off.

Boowomp x1

[somebody_Else]

@TheArcticFoxxo

Pressure is dealt with via 1B12, as said.

I made a typo, its 1B14, not 1B12, and its just an ambient temp sensor.

@TheArcticFoxxo

I’m not talking about the T-80Us featuring Agava, I’m talking about 1992 spec T-80UMs… Of which a new hull was devised.

You said “You’re right, the T-80U is getting the exact opposite and has armor profiles from 1985 whereas it should have the armor profile of the 1992 T-80U, of which it is.”

It has the armor profiles from 1985, because that’s what the Agava T-80U is.

@TheArcticFoxxo

The “one in game” is quite literally a copy/paste T-80U. So much so that the original TPN-3 was erroneously placed on the vehicle.

Because it is the same tank, it really didn’t need any major changes other than the name.

But then the other T-80U Sweden tested had the TPN and not the Agava, so its not completely out there.

@TheArcticFoxxo

Do you have anything showing a T-80U was sent to Sweden without Agava?

https://tanks.mod16.org/2015/04/09/report-from-terrain-trials-with-t-80u/

the Swedish army borrowed two Russian T-80U’s and subjected them to a number of trials.

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiqAAuoL3_A

The footage quality from the trials isn’t the greatest, but around the 6:57 timestamp, there’s footage of the 2nd T-80U, with TPN and an IR spotlight.

Earlier in the video, the other T-80U doesn’t have the IR spotlight, and has the more distinct Agava sight housing.

[AR_M4Sopmod2]

Similar to the Stryker…but not American

[Bigboi_SaiGon]

Guys, this thread is becoming a T-80’s thread. Please focus on the main point of this thread or create a new thread.

Spoiler

I just wanna see people wish list for WT.

[LelutooDS]

The Lvkv fm/43, any day now…

[simsimkek]

inb4 its added, given powerful ap belts and turned into a light tank then uptiered to a br where its useless as an spaa…

[aDSD]

Your post is full of mistakes, like T-80U-E1 being for export/when specific tank got x thing/ or T-80A designation (never existed), ssme with T-80UM-2. majority of photos for Object 219A are not Object 219A with only last one in museum being Object 219A, also could be described as T-80U 1984, as thats the original shape it came with. T-80UD didnt come new new turret compared to T-80U. Object 219A itself doesnt relate to T-80B too, they coexisted at same time with 219A being improval of T-80 series while T-80B was just getting T-80 to T-64B levels.
1982 T-64B turret is not a thing.
1984 K-1 is fake while 1985 5 layer T-80U like composite is actually from 1984, same year as they moved the Tucha to the sides preparing to wield K1 ERA they tested back in 1982.
And yes it’s T-80U-E1 not T-80UE-1, T-72B2 is also not a real designation, tank only officially carried Object 184M.
Russia didnt order any T-80UM’s but they did have T-80U’s with Agava 2, differences being radios and different self entrenching equipment T-80UM is easily described by.

T-80U with Agava 2 and T-80UA of Russian armed forces

Note the serial T-80UA carrying Plisa thermal like serial T-80U-E1 opposed to prototype T-80U-E1 and T-80UA/T-80BA and serial T-80U’s retrofitted with PL-1.

lol the censorship

[PlayedStatue626-live]

I wanna see the Irish Churchill VI equipped with a merlin engine

Churchill mk. VI w/ Merlin Engine

poll Salutations everybody This is a suggeston for the Churchill mk VI that was modified by the Republic of Ireland to take a Rolls-Royce V12 55M Merlin engine [Irish Churchill] After a successful training stint in England the Republic of Ireland was leased three churchill mk VI in 1948 followed by a fourth in 1949. Ireland continued to rent the vehicles until 1954 in which it was asked if they could be outright bought, which they were. The Churchills were driven to Glen of Imaal twice a year…

[LelutooDS]

Well it does have access to APDS rounds in the same way the 37mm Bofors does in game (That being the rounds existed but weren’t used in service). So depending on how Gaijin wants to add it then you’re probably right yeah…

[Raiden_Black]

@AR M4Sopmod2@live

but not American

Never said its American?

@Otrabrok

[Raiden_Black]

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@somebody_Else

I made a typo, its 1B14, not 1B12, and its just an ambient temp sensor.

1B14? You mean the gyroscope?

A gyroscope that measures ambient temperature?

That’s certainly a new one!

@somebody_Else

Because it is the same tank, it really didn’t need any major changes other than the name.

But then the other T-80U Sweden tested had the TPN and not the Agava, so its not completely out there.

It’s a 1992 T-80UM.

Once again, I’ve never heard a single mention of the basic TPN-3 in use during the trials. The only picture evidence shown of a T-80U in Sweden displays that of T-80Us with Agava.

[quote=“somebody_Else, post:2884, topic:210501”]

@somebody_Else

The footage quality from the trials isn’t the greatest, but around the 6:57 timestamp, there’s footage of the 2nd T-80U, with TPN and an IR spotlight.

Earlier in the video, the other T-80U doesn’t have the IR spotlight, and has the more distinct Agava sight housing.

Great vid. Hard to tell anything by the sight shroud itself, though the spotlight is most definitely on the vehicle.

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@Bigboi_SaiGon

Guys, this thread is becoming a T-80’s thread.

Oh no?