You must be slow because that’s obviously satire and yes they talked up there mig25 to no end why was the west so worried about it then. Common place knowledge what comes out of the east under performs and what comes out of the west over performs and you might ask why? Because we don’t release every tidbit of info in a pamphlet and then when it’s taken apart and realize that’s not the case so we don’t look dumb case in point the foxbat. If you can’t read between the lines when someone says a 10th generation plane talking about a plane from the 70s and 80s you need help my son
Wow, the range of injury seems to be a little too wide.
Calm down. It’s just a game.😂
3 Likes
ah so youre the one whos biased here, i see now, that makes a lot more sense
even if you claim this is a ‘fact’ its still a bias
the west was worried about the mig25 before it got exported so the export propaganda had nothing to do with it, maybe it was the fact it could go like mach 2.5 and set a lot of records, its not like the west knew it could only do that for like 30 minutes before its engines died
i was very intentionally ignoring the sarcasm to annoy you, its sad that you require clarification for this
I’ve been accepted it, dosent mean I have to like it though my brotha. I’m just saying if war thunder wants to pretend it’s based in “sim” or an even a “sim arcade” make it make sense. Can’t tell me a block of ERA is gonna stop a round that can chop through 6 feet of concrete at 2 miles lol we believe this because it says so in the manufacturers brochure lol I wonder when Venezuela bought those s300 sites to protect its sky’s did it read the brochure?
1 Like
why do you not believe its possible? it makes a lot of sense, the explosive charges push the round off of a straight course leading to the round having massively decreased penetration
you shouldnt think of it as the ERA stopping the round but instead it decreases the capability of the round itself
1 Like
I heard that Venezuela’s S-300 system didn’t fire because a mole had shut down the radar.
There are many things in the game that don’t match reality: for example, the main armor around the M1 tank’s gun breech has been weakened, and the lowermost row of Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA) on the frontal upper hull of the Type 99A tank can’t effectively withstand DM53 rounds.
But at the end of the day, it’s just a game. For a better gaming experience, I always have my friend pick the Russian tech tree when we squad up.
1 Like
They didn’t seem to be turned on at all and were located far from the capital for the defense of oil refineries
Some news reports stated that the air defense system in Venezuela’s capital was ordered to be shut down by Major General Javier Marcaño Tabata, a childhood friend of Maduro.
By AI：
Here is an introduction to how Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA) counters Armor-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot (APFSDS) rounds:
How Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA) Works Against APFSDS
Core Principle: Active Disruption, Not Passive Absorption
Unlike traditional composite or steel armor which passively absorbs and disperses kinetic energy, ERA functions as an active protection system. Its primary goal is to disrupt, destabilize, and degrade the incoming penetrator before it reaches the main armor, significantly reducing its armor-piercing capability.
The Disruption Process (The “Sandwich” Explosion):
A standard ERA block consists of a high-explosive layer sandwiched between two metal plates. Upon impact by a kinetic penetrator like an APFSDS rod:
- Impact Detonation: The force of the impact triggers the explosive layer.
- Plate Acceleration: The explosion violently propels the two metal plates outward at high velocity.
- Lateral Force Application: The key effect is that these moving plates strike the sides of the high-velocity, slender APFSDS penetrator rod. This applies powerful lateral forces and shear stress.
- Penetrator Degradation: These forces can:
· Induce Bending/Yaw: Cause the rod to tilt (increase its yaw angle), massively increasing the effective armor thickness it must penetrate.
· Fracture the Rod: Break the penetrator into smaller, less effective segments.
· Blunt the Tip: Deform the critical tip, reducing its ability to “bite” into the armor.
Effectiveness & Limitations:
· Highly Effective: Modern heavy ERA (like the Russian “Relikt” or Ukrainian “Duplet”) is specifically designed to defeat APFSDS and can reduce its penetration capability by 50% or more.
· One-Time Use: An ERA block is consumed after functioning and must be replaced.
· Crew & Infantry Hazard: The outward explosion can endanger nearby dismounted infantry or light vehicles.
· Countermeasures: Advanced APFSDS rounds may feature precursor tips or optimized designs to mitigate ERA effects. Tandem-warhead missiles are also designed to defeat ERA.
In-Game Context (e.g., War Thunder):
Game mechanics simplify this complex physics. An ERA block typically provides a fixed additive armor value (in millimeters of Rolled Homogeneous Armor equivalence) against kinetic penetrators when it is active. If the game models its one-time use, the protection is lost after the block is triggered. The “DM53 vs 99A’s ERA” discussion centers on whether the game-calculated combined protection (ERA + base composite armor) exceeds the round’s penetration value at a given range and angle.
everyone claims to be the best
as for americas SMO, wont dwell on it long but the USA has ALL of Ukraine’s combat and espionage intel on how the BUK and all other russian air defence works. Information wins battles more than anything else
NATO APFSDS is lowballed in values. Weve known this for a decade.
Relict is probably not far off its KE and HEAT protection. like i said earlier NATO darts are lowballed and the anti-ERA designs are not modelled.
NATO ERAs such as ROMOR are just modelled like they are the masonry bricks weve seen mounted on T-72s in multiple conflicts in the last decade or so. Partly because NATO is good at hiding what they can do and partly because Gaijin likes “selective realism”.
one of the heads of the bug reporting website is quite pro russian and that has totally never caused any controversies ever at all with the russian exceptionalism accusations.
Ask me like two years ago if i think WT has actual intentional russian bias and i would have said “not really but a lot of russian stuff has questionable modelling” nowadays as ive become more active and met more people in the community i think (and almost know for certain) there is active bias in the mix of systems that run this game. this bias isnt just to russia, when it suits Germany and china has seen plenty of good eating too. So have the americans and to a much lesser extent the minor nations
more that all the ammunition relict sees should have its ERA defeating tech added to calculations
theres some evidence but nothing concrete from observations is going to be public for a long long time, for now theres only speculation.
ok. Its hawk 200 food in game. undertiered sure a bit but its not a flying BMPT
3 Likes
That’s why they don’t best everything in the game, especially with BUK nowadays.
The said invencible and untouchable S-300 you people swear that exist wasn’t active during the incursion, and some of them was also stored, outside operational areas and this was proven weeks ago, it wasn’t the fact that it didn’t worked, they [venezuelan army] didn’t used it at all. You have to consider that in War Thunder vehicles are represented in their perfect status, otherwhise you’d have autoloader malfunctioning, your turbine engine running out of oil or your stabilizer breaking apart because the road was slightly bad maintained.
If for some reason Gaijin fixes the issues pointed by the community related to explosive reactive armor, Soviet and Russian vehicles would have severe performance decrease meaning lower battle rating. The status quo of War Thunder is mostly kept by intentinal changes like ammunition, weaponry or anything that let developers to remove or add into a vehicle. Anti-ERA tips will be a great game changer in my opinion with certain drawbacks with its implementation, which is what I believe there are no massive improvements into more modern machinery in War Thunder even though we’re stepping into next-generation aircraft, but naval and ground vehicles are left behind.
Russian vehicles in War Thunder performs just like any other, I’ve found out that HSTV-L is the bane of Soviet vehicles, I like the gun handling, combined with good mobility and firepower, makes a nice anti-tank vehicle, specially in hilly maps like Second Battle of El Alamein. As I’ve mentioned before, in War Thunder vehicles will be represented in their best status possible, that’s why Ajax isn’t falling apart whenever you go above a certain speed.
To see bias, it’s very subjective. Take a peek into Sweden and ask yourself why Strv 121 is one of the fewer modern main battle tank with APDS-FS rounds stock, as far I’m concerned no Strv 121 is represented in-game under Soviet flag, is it bias or just coincidence? Or maybe T58 at battle rating 8.3 for more than enough to have the battle rating increased? Is it also another Soviet vehicle? I though Soviet flag had one star, not fifty.
I’m not ignoring the fact of how Terminator performed, there’s bias in my opinion but no in favor of one nation, but in vehicles, Premium bias to be more clear, I don’t want to sound crazy, but if BMP-T was never added and BMPT-72 was the only (premium) available option, I can’t unsee a scenario where it was kept at battle rating 10.7 at most. 2S38 is another good example of the Russian bias is true people, for the longest it was at battle rating 10.3 and now is being moved, so should T58 hopefully, coincidentally all of these vehicles are premium with additional of a tech tree variant with BMPT-72 is directly tied to which maybe the primary reason of the early battle rating change.
Make every Soviet vehicle accurate to their operational status and see yourself if you prefer consequentially and intentional undertiered vehicles because suddenly it can’t be held together, there’s concrete and cardboards in the explosive reactive armor bags if it’s bias or balance decisions
2 Likes
Relikt and similar ERAs with big heavy flyer plates do have anti KE penetrators abilities. Look at pictures of Ukrainian tests of their homegrown ERA against french rounds.
The main issue is with how Gaijin models this kind of ERA. The APFSDS needs to strike at an angle where it would get disturbed / even cut in half by the flyer plates. If the dart comes in contact with the ERA at a perpendicular angle, it should do nothing against it.
And exactly this isn’t modeled. They treat it essentially as if it is just a piece of metal.
2 Likes
OK so why doesn’t the same principals apply to Western ERA?
1 Like
wester tanks usually don’t have heavy anti-KE ERA because the doctrine is different. Western ERA is mainly designed to take out threats like RPGs and ATGMs. Main reason being as these heavy ERAs like Contakt-5 are extremely violent and can act as a sort of grenade which can maim and even kill friendly infantry which is in close proximity to the tank.
You assert Challenger 2 TES and OES have lighter ERA than Contakt-5? yet Contakt-5 is more efficent?
It’s basically a stack of cutting charges using the same principals as a shaped charge and copper jet but shaped into a “V” blade instead of a cone spike.
There can’t be that much difference in the explosives and metals used, it’s not top secret physics.
OK upon further research: The AI says Often mistaken for ERA; confirmed to be non‑explosive composite.
OK so why do they explode when hit like ERA? fishy design and misleading.
I have the same question.
Especially on the difference between FY5 and FY4.The anti-KE situation of FY4 is not very good in some angles, so FY5 appeared.
But in the game, FY4 is simply much less anti-KE than FY5.
Gaijin can change anything in the game with his little finger.
1 Like
what is the ERA on the side of the Challenger 2 called? I kinda wanna look if there are any open source infos on what it is made out of
Maybe the formula of explosives is different.（I’m not a professional. If I make a mistake, please point it out.）
1 Like