If you have a jet that carries Paveway 4s you can fly mach jesus and toss them on the helipad
Great when a couple of Mi-28s are rearming or hovering just above it.
RedEffect’s favorite tank isn’t Soviet or Russian.
The primary time he was incorrect was with Arjun, which he made many corrective videos on.
Also, if you’re of average height [5 foot 9 inches], then you should’ve fit comfortably in T-72 turret positions; it’s only if you’re notably above average that you’d be uncomfortable.
I’m above average height, with average build, and have fit into every single vehicle I’ve sat in.
Granted, I haven’t sat in a T-72 myself, but I have a feeling I’d be comfortable in the turret positions. Not likely the driver’s position because they preferred shorter people than average for the driver.
Youre countering Air with Air tho
Shoving everything a lot of kms away will prevent repairing when they get hit
I’m 1.89 meters tall, if I were the loader on an Abrams tank, I wouldn’t feel comfortable standing there.
100% most SAMS cannot deal with it, but toss bombing also keep you out of range of BUK and usually IRIS-T systems
The Abrams certainly does literally, in both directions of travel in fact.
"
WARNING
Keep hands, equipment, and small objects away from ammunition door track (1). Safety switch in leading edge stops ammunition door (2) if door (2) hits object. Ammunition door (2) will not stop in last 1/2 inch of closing. Ammunition door (2) may injure hands or damage equipment or small objects when opening or closing. "
5 Likes
So a manual assist loader…
No im not paid I just love to point out logical fallacies.
Unlike modern loaders that don’t require button presses and simply load the next shells designated by the computer, I don’t see how this is a “auto loader”
Oh I never think X Contry could be X country tbh. They all have their ups and downs, pros and cons.
Cool but can you find any information about T series autoloaders history of choping off limbs ? Because i can’t
That wasn’t even the original claim though, it was that there was no safety precautions such as a pressure sensor in the T series’ autoloader, which is why your “claim” of the the Ammo doors came up.
Can you even source any of the claims you have made?
Really ? Not original claim ?
No i was wrong with that claim but can you find any information about widespread history of T-64/72 autoloader “Biting off pieces of crew” if you so gracefully decided to protect that man claims ?
1 Like
About the only thing they have. And that is just a marginal increase in mobility. Nothing really stands out.
One of the rounds with worst pen. And you know that spall is calculated by residual pen, right? So it is a round with the worst pen and spall, with a 7.1 second reload.
Worse armor than the Abrams isn’t just average.
3BM60, DTC10, KE-W, etc aren’t bad rounds just cause they’re not DM53 and M829A2.
VT-4 has notably better armor than Abrams.
ZTZ-99A has on-par.
False image. That was taken prior to the ZTZ-99A’s model being fixed, it doesn’t account for the size difference of the tanks, and it’s over-exaggerating the turret area of ZTZ-99A.
I’ll do another comparison when I play the game later
[DISCLAIMER: This is a VERY OPINIONATED piece, stemming from the author not being able to find both fun and skill within ground RB, if you are sensible to under-skilled players (like me :>) speaking of these matters, skip this post as it may cause a severe case of being angry at an online stranger. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.]
First of all, don’t we all always hear this same thing? I mean sure, the META at some point will go off-balance but I still to this day find CAS more annoying than a SPECIFIC nation having a bit more win-rates.
Secondly, I really don’t wanna be THAT guy, but honestly, I’ve been enjoying the game a lot more ever since I stopped playing ground, and even if I do, I just play funny stuff in top tier or whatnot. A great example of this is our cute little Wiesel 1A4.
Wiesel 1A4 — ADMIRE IT IN ITS FULL GLORY.
I feel this is a decision a player must face once they are starting to reach insane amount of hours in a game, you either play whatever you like or continue on with the grind, and I get it. I’ve been in both.
I personally think the grind is still a bit too “grindy”, it’s gotten definitely better, but there are certain BR’s that I would call literal hell, one of these being 7.3 - 8.3.
But seriously, top tier as it has “developed” (if we can call it that) has gone a bit too insane for my liking, and I feel both helpless and useless whenever I play it, mainly because despite pouring around 2150 hours of playtime, I still fail to perform well.
Magach 1 — One of the most painful vehicles ever.
And if you say “skill issue” you are totally right! The thing is, I don’t feel like there is a place for anyone to learn and get better at the game, the same problems of spawn-camping are still present, and (in my opinion) the skill curve seems a bit too steep to my liking, yet I keep playing in hopes to hopefully find the dopamine from both performing well and engaging in the planned game loop.
Maybe I’m too bad for online games? I mean, it’s not the first online game I’ve dropped so far.
I’ll continue to avoid ground RB as most as I can, and I think some people in the forums should too for their own sake, sometimes a break is truly needed from this mentally exhausting game that it can be at times.
Remember to touch grass btw, speak to your loved-ones, do something else you enjoy.
Lastly, another issue it seems to be gaining relevance is Gaijin relying a lot on the community for bug-reporting vehicles; and no, this isn’t an exclusive vehicle problem, I’ve seen this in every category of vehicles.
Like, everyone still remembers the entire debacle over tank modules being modeled both poorly and detailed at the same time, the APG-63PSP lack of TWS and PD RAM modes issue, or the entire blow-out panels controversy, right?
2S38 — Detailed modules of this very vehicle showcased in the X-Ray view.
What I’m trying to convey here in these last paragraphs, is that, for a massive company worth millions of dollars, it seems odd that they are getting away with lazier and lazier implementations while nobody bats an eye, and if the community does bite back, everyone then just seems to be content with a mediocre or haphazard solution.
Of course, these are just my opinions from someone who used to be a casual player, and later on left ground RB behind.
Feel free to respond or voice your opinions, or whatnot, I’d be glad to hear 60 comments calling me “bad at the game” when I myself already did that already.
[Seriously what is up with people rubbing “skill issue” other’s faces, there’s a lot more ways to respond to a statement]
“Limbs could be easily caught in the machinery, leading to horrible injuries and deaths. A sleeve unknowingly snagged on one of the autoloader’s moving parts could also drag a crewman into the apparatus upon firing.” (text shown with an explicit parenthetical citation: Perrett 1987:42).
However, you might say that’s an evil biased Western publication. What do Russian sources have to say?
Не так двинулся, не так взялся, не так положил – и, как минимум, синяк на руке или прищемил палец. А можно и что–нибудь сломать или порвать или растянуть связки кистей рук. … Неправильно разместил руку при досылании, растопырил пальцы – и слово “прищемил” здесь уже не подходит. Раздробление. Ампутация.»
Source: Topwar (same article / comment thread that outlines practical loading risks).
Move the gun wrong, grip it wrong, place it wrong—and you’ll get at least a bruise on your hand or a pinched finger. Or you could break something, tear something, or strain the ligaments in your hands. … Position your hand incorrectly while chambering, spread your fingers—and the word “pinched” doesn’t even apply. Crushing. Amputation.
Oh dear. Fun fact, open up any Russian forum thread where T-64/72 autoloading comes up, particularly experiences. Note the not-infrequent occurrences of the phrase жрали руки.
“Ate my hands”
What about experiences of actual users? Surely none of them have any concerns? Erm…
Yes, unfortunately, that’s true. The thing is, the machine gun holds all the shells, and it loads them into the gun. If you stick your hand in there, it’ll think it’s a shell too and try to load it.
So to summarise. Western sources reference the safety issues of autoloaders. Russian sources reference safety issues (particularly hands) of autoloaders.
BOTH sides of the Iron Curtain have references to the same basic issue. Big mechanical thing in small turret, crew placed immediately next to big mechanical thing. Big mechanical thing devoid of safety features.
I can’t really simplify it much more than that.
1 Like
What the heck is this ? Can you give full link to the source or name of it ?
A commentary from news article ?
Where is the proof of it ?
Where is the source ?
Link to site with JOKES this is just impossible. Even the animals could tell that was complete nonsense.
2 Likes
💀I told you what an assist loader is. The T-10M has one.(‘manual assist loader’ as you state doesn’t mean anything by the way)
The AMX-13 has what’s called a semi-automatic autoloader. The reload process has to be initiated by a button press/lever push but the loading itself is entirely mechanical and automated once that’s done.
When even topwar.ru(a pro Russian website) disagrees with you about France doing it before Russia, it might be time to call it quits my man:
“Первым носителем автомата заряжания считается французский легкий танк AMX 13, разработанный вскоре после окончания Второй мировой войны.”
→
“The first carrier of the automatic loader is the French light tank AMX 13, developed shortly after the end of the Second World War.”
Anyway, if you still can’t understand that, I’ll let other people with more patience than me continue this discussion.