1 Like
ah yes, the matte black painted seeker is obviously a real missile
every russian IIR seeker we have seen has a reflective cover over the seeker, which is very obviously missing here and replaced by matte black paint, hence the seeker is very obviously fake
eh, thats what they used for the M1128 despite lots of evidence that it isnt the autoloader speed, so I dont see why they shouldnt use that for russian tanks too
what other seeker heads are you talking abt ?
images of LMUR, the other kh-38MT mockups etc.
all of them have reflective glass over the seeker
i dont think a mockup missile will have tags ?
1 Like
why wouldnt it? and those look more like an extra strap to keep it from falling off the hardpoint, which makes it more likely to be a mockup because a real missile should not have that issue
i think u are wrong those straps are not used to keep it from falling off.
u can see the straps on aircraft in active service.
I honestly don’t understand why, after realizing that top-tier games are simply unplayable right now, people don’t just avoid that BR.
I’m just going to stop playing my Leopards for 2–3 months and focus on the lower tiers and the Chinese tech tree instead.
It’s fun too, and the Russians can go back to playing against themselves with their wonder weapons for a while. Just like when they introduced the totally not overpowered Obj 292 at BR 10.
yes those are safety pins, however they look very different from the straps in the brochure image, such as how none of them are wrapped completely around the missile, where both the mockup missiles have a strap wrapped completely around them, which does not make sense for the type of strap used on real weapons
i love how the russian auto loader work as spall liner direct hitedd the ammo and only yelow… but nato spall liner spalling gg…
2 Likes
that is nice, though I must say, I do extremely well with the mk3 compared to how I thought I would.
Think its because its 11.3?
The uhm auto loaders on the leclerc and type 90s do the exact same thing dude
My man, realistic Abrams would reload faster than it does now. In fact, realistic reload would be a massive buff for NATO. Tanks like the M60 would go from 7 seconds reload to ~3 seconds ace. Same for all Leopard 2 and 1 with ~3 seconds reload ace.
The only autoloaders that are reliably faster than humans in the real world are the bustle rack autoloaders found on JP tanks and the Leclerc. Or the fastdraw prototype system on the Abrams. Other than that, you really need to get into big caliber like 140mm for the inferior carousel autoloader design to outspeed a human.
1 Like
As I said previously, fix the gap. Instead of 5.0 secs, make it 5.5 secs, it makes it a much more fair field. And that’s still being in favor of the US. If I was to say make it any higher than 6.25 secs, then it would be more factual based on average reload time is roughly 6.25~ secs.
But if the M1s got a 5.5 sec, and the T-80s were corrected to 6.0 secs, then the only issue would be things like the Type 90, which would likely see an increase in br.
Talk about yourself more. People don’t agree with your falsehoods
Wearing absolutely no gear, he was able to pull off (his first reload was the only true one) in 5.0 secs. Now add all the gear, helmet, Kevlar, etc. it slows down.
Before you say “but his other reloads were quicker” yes they were. But he knew the tank was going to fire, and he left the blast door open. He’s not feeling the shock of the cannon, or any internal vibration from it firing. It’s a training simulation, and not a true to life one.
Dog, the auto loader was in game a full year before the turret baskets, talk about double standards.
Spall is determined by the residual penetration.
Firing M774 from that angle will make it go through a decent amount of armor.
1 Like
Since when France isn’t in NATO ?