The red highlighted mechanism is the folding hinge. in this “depressed view” is visible compared with the 0 degrees view. is not modelled properly here anyway, but is there.
1 Like
I did not mean to cause any misunderstanding by calling it a prototype, I very much agree with the fact that it was functional, in fact it’s pretty clear that the test program was taken seriously by those working on it, considering how much they edited the 9040A chassis to show how it’d actually be implemented with the basis of their budget in mind. And that there were seemingly plans to test the BILL missiles being added to some 9040s as early as June 2000 due to what I can only guess is some sort of booklet mentioning it.
(translation per deepL) Studies are currently underway to develop a basis for decision-making for the following new versions of Strf 90: strf 9040BILL (robot 56)
https://www.aef.se/Resmat/IRMA/IRMA_2000-1.pdf page 14
But unfortunately it only stayed a test product since they both couldn’t afford to put it into production and they couldn’t fix issues with sight alignment.
On another note, I entirely agree about your terrain comment! I had already mentioned this previously as well.
Whilst yes, I’m very much doing that, short of me finding actual documentation on this vehicle as in blueprints or sketches I unfortunately have to. But I will agree with you about what gaijin is doing as you rightly say in the latter half of this quote \/
We as users are made to provide highly accurate and sourced info to even ‘potentially’ have issues fixed (Which is actually a good requirement if the requirements were equal for both parties).
But gaijin has their own internal sourcing that they use to prove otherwise and they aren’t made to show said proof, what they’re using also couldn’t be classified since that’d be illegal (right?) so what’s stopping them from showing us?
I’d have no problem with comments like this for any report, not even specifically for this instance as this could be said for any vehicle in any tech tree, if they gave even surface level proof of their claims.
But even if I personally dislike how they run this part of their game, short of having actual proof that can be provided to say otherwise there is nothing that can be done, as defeatist as that outcome sounds.
2 Likes
The sight alignment is talking about the optics integration with the current systems they had already, in TESTING. This is why they even mentioned that the extra optics were placed on the turret and it was controlled by another person an not the gunner during TESTS.
The intention was to have an integrated system, which is more complicated to do instead of building an integrated system from the scratch for testing purposes