Are you serious? It’s a continuous ammo belt lol. How on earth would it possibly work otherwise?
I meant no one really knows what the ammo feeding system on a BMPT looks like, maybe for some other techincal reason developers modelled it as it is, there were many similar instances, it will get reworked initially.
accuracy reduces chances of hitting an actual target and also reduces max range, sadly i cant post any videos regarding that due to them being war clips
you forgot to put the fact that is 0.5 meters wasnt even specified with the fire mode nor firerate, and to top it off in the same tankograd book from 2015, the cannon has been demonstrated that at high firerates the accuracy quality goes down by a lot to the point that its even called out as an oval due to the excessive gun displacement due to the recoil
this is also another lie, the 2A42 was built as a quick firing autocannon to get rid of multiple squads in an area that’s why accuracy wasnt taken into account in rapid firing modes, it was cheap and did the job, but not as a long range hitter, specially with that accuracy
There is so much stuff that is wrong with your claims that i would likely not end today, but so far a lot of stuff you have said are either a lie or a half truth with no context, if you are gonna post such bold claims, back them with sources instead of acting pedantic and calling people “wrong” for not alligning with your way of thinking
I don’t know what those pictures are supposed to show but yes that’s 4 in total.
There’s literally a video from the inside on the respective thread. Also please do explain how a continuous ammo belt would suddenly magically become uncontinous in the middle. The technical reason why Gaijin modeled it like this is that the thing would be hot garbage otherwise like it is irl.
Compare the design to literally every other unmanned turret design. There’s a reason why the ammo in those is stored completely separately in bulkier turrets with blowout panels and not fed through the crew compartment.
accuracy reduces chances of hitting an actual target and also reduces max range
wat?
What stabilizer do they use, what state the gun itself was, where it was produced, what sort of ammo they used etc., it all affects the results. Compare AKs from Izhmash and from other, even communist-block countries, so you get an idea of what i’m talking about.
this is also another lie, the 2A42 was built as a quick firing autocannon to get rid of multiple squads in an area that’s why accuracy wasnt taken into account in rapid firing modes, it was cheap and did the job, but not as a long range hitter, specially with that accuracy
There is so much stuff that is wrong with your claims that i would likely not end today, but so far a lot of stuff you have said are either a lie or a half truth with no context, if you are gonna post such bold claims, back them with sources instead of acting pedantic and calling people “wrong” for not alligning with your way of thinking
go ahead, post at least something instead of “nuh uh, i feel the other way”.
That’s nothing out of the ordinary. The better question is why does a missile that allegedly exists have no proof of it’s existence whatsoever, no tests, orders or anything like that.
Cool show me a single piece of documentation or picture where the Mi28NM mounts that 2 rocket holder on the inner pylons
You know, all of this happens because the thing called confidential information exists. Most of publically available information are either outdated or not very sensitive and already known. Good luck finding documentation for a 2019 helicopter or a 2022 missile, bruh. The picture clearly shows the possibility of mounting 4 lmurs on 1 side.
i did i posted proof i, and i even posted what tankograd book i took that from.
so sarcastic for sure
i dont even know what are you talking about, im talking about the gun’s max range being affected by dispersion of the gun reducing effectivity of the gun overall, i never talked about stabilizers, the gun was during tests and the ammo was API and HE-T, on what you posted as 0.5 mils for API-T and HE was 0.4 but never specified on fire mode
I don’t know, 9/10 tech trees seem to do ok with confidential information even with 2020s equipment.
Hate to break it to you, but all modern vehicles in-game are they’re their irl prototypes lookalikes with a most of their characteristics and even internal layouts being imaginary.
Are you seeing double?
What’s stopping them from mounting two more on the same side?
the issue is that it never stated in what firemode and later in october 2015, tankograd posted another book that talked more in detail and even stated that during fast firemode the gun was having issues with accuracy due to the nature of how physics work against unreinforced rod objects suffering high oscilating forces and high temperatures
You keep introducing ambiguity where none exists. I said dispersion limits effective range. You responded with stabilizers, production quality, and ammo types none of which I mentioned. Then you claim I’m the one who doesn’t understand my own argument?
You cherry-picked ‘0.5 mils’ from a table that also shows 2-4 mils maximum dispersion, ignored the fire mode distinction entirely, and when called out, resorted to mockery instead of sources.
If the 2A42 is ‘fine,’ explain why it needs a low-rate mode for accuracy. Explain why 2A42 documentation shows up to 4 mils dispersion. Explain why the Czech trials showed Western autocannons hitting twice as reliably. You cant so you mock instead
You are not giving an argument you are defending a preconceived conclusion since you refuse to post sources
