https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/IlqqKpYCEgJn
Let’s just hope that the last statement from the moderators won’t go as they say or we’ll really have an Ariete 2.0 situation in our hands for no logical reasons.
Do we not already cement present on Kongou, just add it anyway??? Even if they believe it to be for water-tightness, which I disagree with.
In Italy we say “severo ma giusto” strict but fair. (Referred to your comment)
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/eaL6xjKCpZSB
This is a report I made about the solution on the 381mm RoF problem (and all the 1st, 2nd, 3rd charge confusion that went on), taking multiple sources into consideration.
For the solution without the tecnical gibberish about shells and charges here’s the paragraph about it:
Spoiler
Now on the main topic: how the italians reloaded their heavy guns.
They used a method called “Caricamento ordinario”.
In this method the shell was loaded first and then the bursting charges were loaded into the powder chamber.
To be fully operatonal the powder chamber must be fully loaded so that the carges were closely in contact with the “Cannello” (the igniter) to avoid missfires or, in the worst case scenario, the return of the shell in the powder chamber and its detonation inside it.
For a first charge shot there were no problems as all six charges were loaded, securing the powder chamber, but what happened for the 2nd and 3rd charge shots?
In this case the missing gaps in the powder chamber were filled with a special pouch called “Stoppaccio”. This charge was inert and easily flammable, with exactly the same dimensions of a normal charge.
Its role was to push the true charges against the igniter and secure the projetile, completing the load.
This can be seen in this image (this is a visual representation from the author):
This means that, even during 2nd and 3rd charge shots, the loading mechanism must complete its entire cycle to secure both the chamber and the projectile in place to avoid major damage on the gun.
This validates the average times achieved by italian sailors during the 1941 trials where they reached a 30s average reload due to their better training and solved issues with these massive guns.
If you want to comment the report please only add additional information that support it, do not clutter it as it only slows down the validation process.
Thank you for your attention and the help given.
7 Likes
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/MoRuEzaAdDJP
Please everybody try to support this futher report as the previous one was changed to “not a bug” without even contacting me for an explaination, claiming that only data about 1st charge shots should be given to prove the point, meaning that they didn’t read it fully or thy’re trying to rewrite history as they want.
The explaination was clear as the powder chamber MUST always be fully loaded to fire, meaning that every shot was akin to a 1st charge shot as the reload mechanism had to complete its entire cycle.
Don’t know why they’re trying so hard to butcher the Littorios before their arrival (no cement layer, now no relistic RoF) but they’re trying their best.
If any moderator can also help I would be grateful as I’ve attached to the previous report only raw, hystorical data and disregarding them as pure “explainations” is an insult to the work of many hystorians that are translating and bringing us new sources every day.
7 Likes
Aaand…it get’s immediately closed for the usual “not a bug”.
Enjoy an overly nerfed Littorio without its proper RoF and cement armour.
Just to show how inconsistent are the responses:
1st major report: Community Bug Reporting System
|
|
Answer: prove that there’s no difference in reload times between 1st,2nd,3rd charge shots
|
|
2nd major report ( data given that the reload rates are the same):
Community Bug Reporting System
|
|
Answer: not a bug.
Something needs to be done as someone is clearly closing his ears to factual data to implement a complete different history.
That’s an insult to every naval historian that collected and transcribed those data for everyone.
14 Likes
This is actually sad…
5 Likes
Gaijin are you aware that with these unjustified behaviours your employees are being ridicoulous?
6 Likes
And then they wonder why nobody plays Italy…
6 Likes
The bug report section is becoming a joke. The moderators close anything and everything with such reckless abandon. Countless good evidence ignored, constantly tripping over their own previous arguments and saying the opposite suddenly.
6 Likes
I played Rn Roma today in the dev server… just embarrassing! Aside the armour and the drilling, the dispersion of the bullets is really too much, the gaijin has increased, as it had to be, the drilling but honestly I don’t care because if out of 9 bullets fired only 20% go on the target, the others are either long or are short I don’t do anything about the 900mm, it had a realistic recharge and therefore 2 shots per minute (with obviously crew at maximum, and there are sources where they say that while it was in recharge the cannon with the ammunition carried by the main elevator another secondary for recharging was already) would be prepared Already another speech but nothing to do. We find ourselves with an 8.3 battleship with a mediocre armor, a hole like the Yamato but does not get to hit because of the dispersion, ammunition that does little damage and has an infinite recharge, and then I find myself ships like the Bismarck that on paper fired 2 shots per minute but in combat only 1 per minute (realistic data) and in the game it has a surprising recharge. Gaijin doesn’t want to accept that Italy has good means, congratulations, as always you show yourself indifferent to the reality of the facts after all the information that the community gives
6 Likes
The blatant nerfing of Italian vehicles is an outrage. This is discrimination at a level unheard of. Te buffing of the Bismarck just bc it’s German is BS, Every real naval historian said the Littorios were much more modern designs while the BIsmarck was a rehashed WW1 design bc the German naval couldn’t make ships for twenty years due to treaty restrictions. I have seen Italian ships suddenly get better stats once they are in the Soviet tree as war prizes even though it’s the exact same ship.
7 Likes
It got sunk with just one missile hit.
Bomb, not missile. It was the frits x (i think the only ship sunk by one). Its a 1400kg armour piercing bomb that can penatrate most ships from 5km up.
There is photo footage from the Do 217 weapons officer where you can see it closing in towards the Roma. Looks like a missile. Seems to slam into her side near B turret. A bomb falls down from above. But dunno how its officially classified.
how comes the Roma has no radar?
early on it penetrated ships and went through the bottom so they redesigned the tail
been having that trouble in sim lol, was wondering why i wasnt killing the cruisers. Turns out the damage was it blowing up bellow the ship after going right though it.
Apparently, they decided the late refit doesnt count, no clue why. Probably going to give it to the littorio or something… for an 8.3 battleship it should have its radar. Just stupid.
Its dropped from 5km (roughly, could have been higher), By that time any bomb is going to be going side on quite a bit, especially if its being guided in like the frits x. The glowing bit at the back is a tracer, it was so the crew could guide it in as the minimum drop alt was 5km so it would have made it quite hard to guide.
As its not Moving under propulsion but gravity it would be considered a guided bomb. If it had a rocket motor it would be a missile. Although missiles with ram jets like on the meteor are also considered missiles.
1 Like