It also has IRST, so maybe even better than 625E cause it can have lower BR.
No, it’s basiclly same ability, a fast firing gun with APDS and AHEAD, and same missile, fire control radar and IRST. 35mm should be better in anti tank, while 30/25mm Gatling gun is better in anti air. 6 or 8 missiles isn’t a big gap.
1 Like
HQ-17AE, 30KM range, 4 targets at same time
1 Like
So 10km of range and one target in game?
The Tor-M1 already has DL for 2 missiles and 12km of range, it’d either have the same or more of such figures but likely more. I’d estimate a grand total of 30km+ of range for the missiles and 4+ channels of DL but this is mostly just a guess, there is more reliable sources than me making stuff the hell up.
The HQ-17 would be a indigenous take of the Tor-M1 so China wouldn’t go for anything short of straight up better.
The HQ-17AE is only the export variant of the HQ-17A which is also just a wheeled variant of the regular HQ-17 from my understanding, so expect something slightly better in-game (HQ-17) as export vehicles (HQ-17AE) are usually slightly dumbed down versions.
1 Like
12km of range in a perfect scenario, have you ever actually hit anything that far away?
improved, 15km range, and better radar
“improved, 15km range, and better radar”
@NCC105 So I’ve been lied to, great information… Jk
You must’ve been talking about radar range if not missile range then, 15km is still a bit concerning when compared to the Pantsirs 20km iirc.
12km of range in a perfect scenario, have you ever actually hit anything that far away
I’ve destroyed a plethora of aircraft outside of 10kms before, it’s nothing new. The missiles are INCREDIBLY responsible and near impossible to evade with raw Gs and the range of them are excellent - it’s my most favourite SPAA for long range engagements.
no, missile range, for it’s type(lasting booster), it’s booster should last to 12km
for kill range, its good, better than VT-1 even pantsir, though the smoke and low speed could still be a problem. so it can’t do fully stealth attack like pantsir.
So the missiles on the HQ-17AE would have more range than the ones on the Pantsir? Missile smoke is also a issue, true but it’s not like don’t you get a RWR warning by it anyways.
The biggest thing I’ve always liked about the Tor-M1 is the combination of multiple DL channels and a decently long range and manoeuvrable missile, the HQ-17AE and base HQ-17 seem to improve on this significantly which is nice.
clearly, it’s 30km. 30 > 20, isn’t it? and pantsir’s missile rely on low drag, long self-destruct range, it’s basically gliding after 10km, if awared, it can be easily avoided, the problem about pantsir is always that you don’t know when it will come.
for TOR/HQ-17, it’s like you enter the kill zone, if you don’t escape quickly, you will die. but you do have enough time to get out, and currently tor’s kill zone is not big enough
Idk if somebody already posted those ones here but would be nice to have it in Chinese Ground Forces on low BR.
Type-70-I 122mm self-propelled howitzer
Type 70 MRL
China need more original stuff on low BR.
8 Likes
By the way, anyone has more info on the missiles used by FK-3000?
1 Like
Nice. Another one.
1 Like
same as FK-2000, except the new smaller missiles.
1 Like
Thanks, that’s what I guessed too.
The smaller missiles, FK-3000/L, should have range of 12KM, right?
Any info on the range of the micro missiles used on the FK-3000 UGV?
unlikely, it’s too small
I’ve read once somewhere that it has a 5km range, have to find it again.
FK-1000 and eventually FK-2000 are more useful additions compared to FK-3000 imo. FK-3000 is more intended to destroy UAVs and small drones.