Rheinmetall Oerlikon SkyGuard-M: The Swiss-German six-shooter

Suggestions Ground
34

My point about the radars was only that you said they were swiss, which would imply that that Ericsson is Swiss, which is not the case.

Since Contraves was a separate Swiss company in 1973 and Oerlikon only had limited (if any?) operations in Germany at the time I’d say the evidence for the SkyGuard-M being built in Germany is very flimsy. Rheimetall owning Oerlikon and Contraves later on really has no relevance in where it should go in-game. Again, there would definitely be a case for putting it in the German tree and I get what you say about Germany needing better SPAA, but assuming that it automatically fits in Germany more than anywhere else is a foregone conclusion as there are at least three trees where it could make sense to be added

35

Yeah that was my mistake i concede.
The source was actually wrong about the SkyGuard-M having the Ericsson Radar. The standalone Skyguard system using the VELOS radar uses the Ericsson one, while the standard Fire control radar is made by Oerlikon Contraves, ill fix this in the post above now… apologies.

Only other disagreement is about three trees that can get it as France defo cant, Germany and better Germany are the top contenders, and only contenders.
EDIT: after the revelation that ericcson had no part, only switzerland and germany are the contenders

1 Like
36

+1 They would need to make a new driving mechanic for it? since its base is unique.

but hell yeah, even if it is as event vehicle only, i would love to see this ingame.

1 Like
37

i doubt itll be an event vehicle, SPAA havent been made EVs yet but as for the driving mechanic… its easy as long as gaijin fixes wheel traction smh

1 Like
38

Could the “box” where the crew is (aka the skyguard cabin) rotate or was it fixed? Cause seems like it could easily fall off lol

39

it was fully traversable, and no 😅 it was secured into place via a ‘turret ring’ and traverse system.

40

Ah got it. Cool find btw, it would give germany a platform which could shoot more than 2 missiles at a time, tho with lower ammo capacity. +1

1 Like
41

Heard they’re adding spawn point ammo refill so it should be ok

42

new image found
image

Apparently Germany (FRG) ordered 3 prototypes

The system without the Missile launchers/gun equipped
image
(Wehrtechnik 1972 - 8)

6 Likes
43

I mean, if they are modular attachments, then the “max” of 2 per side should be easily configurable; no doubt that four 20mm miniguns would be able to put out an absolutely mental quantity of lead.

We could recreate that one Dillion Precision M45 quadmount modification that was making the rounds a couple years ago, and that one was only 7.62mm! The missiles are cool and all but…damn

+1 for wherever Switzerland goes, may that be the German tree or somewhere else, but I do think this machine is a Swiss-production through and through.

2 Likes
44

This is one of the worst vehicles I have ever seen suggested.

-1

46

+1

4 Likes
51

Looks like a budget flarakrad and I’m all here for it. +1

1 Like
52

lol this is wayyy better

1 Like
53

Is there any images of it carrying AIM-7s or was it a “fitted for but not with” kinda deal

1 Like
54

The second one lol.
The skyguard is, on a base level, also compatible with the Aspide missile. It can act fully by giving SARH guidance or saclos guidance depending on which missile it is using.
The aio version was still a prototype hence it wasn’t shown with all the tech but it was compatible with them as a means to attract customers. In the images its using Roland containers and a vulcan

55

Ty for the clarification. I thought it would be able to mount sparrows in place of the Roland Missiles on the stand alone vehicle

1 Like
56

That too is true
However given the… performance of sparrows till late… i doubt anyone would’ve gone for them anyway

57

Yeah… sparrows arent too grand as of late (ngl the only good sparrow is the 7P at the moment, wish they added it to the F-15A)

Perhaps the ground launched AIM-7 (im assuming AIM-7M) would have superior range compared to a roland 3 while being less maneuverable. That’s what I think, anyway.

58

yes although I think it would be more manoeuvrable but would have less range due to a shorter burn time