The entire reason why 3BM60 takes 6.4s instead of 6.0s on MZ autoloaders is because it cannot physically be loaded without a staggered setup. You can “nuh uh” that as much as you want, but this is still the reality of the game.
This isn’t about the T-72 autoloader? Are you lost?
And, once again, the original loading sequence was based on the autoloader passing over 3 shells to load a 4th. Even now, despite Soviet / Russian autoloader buffs, cartridges that cannot physically be consecutively placed have an increase in reload time.
My brother in christ the MZ autoloader already has a slower reload than AZ autoloaders for current prospective cartridges.
Any and all balancing decisions in prior patches as well as current patches reflect this.
Yes but it’s not due to skipping charges it’s due to the length of the penetrator.
Yes 3BM60 takes tha tlong due to the length of the penetrator that’s it.
The fact you’re saying this T80BV with 3BM42. not 60 would load slower than the T80U due to staggering of the 3BM60 which is due to the lenght of it makes zero sense.
Not at all, But there is no actual modeling of skipping charges in warthunder. The closes we had was the old fire rates of the T72.
the original loading sequence was based off of the fastest the cyclograms could show us on both T80 and T72s.
While they both use seperate auto loaders it’s also why teh T64s and T80B had a 7.1 second reload.
They modelled it as a T72 loader.
Now only russian shell which has a different load time is the 3BM60 specifically on the T80BVM, nothing to do with skipping the charges, it’s to do with the sheer lenght of it. The damn forum post 1390 odd comments has smin mention it was done for balance as well.
That’s the first I’ve heard of it bar for their largest AKA the 3bm60 round.
As far as I am aware every T80 can load two AP rounds side by side due to the size of them.
AKA 3BM46, 42 etc.
Also literally any google search show sthe MZ loader able to hold the APFSDS next to one another past the charge used for each round IRL.
So again, in game it isn’t modelled to skip over charges or rounds.
Again my point exactly, as the size of it and the charge required means it acnnon go AP AP.
he is stating VBM22/3 which is incorrect, primarily cause its a 3BM59 round which isn’t even in game:
My initial point for the T80BV was on the damn 3BM46 anyways, a passing comment on if it got the 3bm60 it would be a higher BR.
He then proceeds to say it would have slower loading times than the T80U when it’s the same damn auto loader + same ammo without the 3BM46,
Which was another point I was trying to ask, why on earth would the BV not be capable of firing the 3BM46 round if it’s capable on the same auto loaders / cannons found on other T80s.
finally he stated Gaijin balances auto loaders “on the fact that they have to pass over multiple charges to laod the next.” , which just isn’t true, they balance auto loaders by changing their BRs based on the fire rate they can attain, example in the T58.
VT4 and such finally got close to their real reload rates as well previous reloads were based on teh fact gaijin cocked up what model they used for the auto loaders. Not as balance.
The T-80Bv and T-80U have the same exact cannon and auto loader.
@TheArcticFoxxo
The 2a46M-1 can fire both 3BM46 & 42, and 48.
The later (past 1990) T-80Us received an upgraded cannon capable of firing higher power rounds.
Tanks that are past 1990 with the 2A46M-4 (which are capable of firing 3BM60):
T-80U obr.1990
T-80UK
T-80UD
T-80UE
T-80UE-1
T-80UM
T-80UM-1
T-80UM-2
Black Eagle
So there’s actually an in game error technically speaking, as all these tanks (in game) are lacking 3BM60.
Although, irl it requires a slight modification to the auto loader, it would be a separate upgrade package if added to the game.
We also don’t have 3BM48 for the pre 1990s tanks. Like 1986-1990 I believe.
The T-80B was never once fitted with 6ETs43. Ever. The handful of T-80AVs that were pushed out in late '84 and early '85 were, but they’re as prevalent in the armored world as T-80Bs brandishing Agava… Good luck finding more than the half dozen in existence.
Yeah? And? 6ETs40 cannot physically load 3BM46.
2A46M-1 is already capable of firing any 125mm subpenetrator in Russian service, as to-date there is no cartridge that pushes beyond the M-1’s 650MPa maximum pressure.
The only difference to be found between the 2A46M-1 and 2A46M-4 is that the 2A46M-4 is a modular cannon. Each section is machined to a more fine standard, giving it 3x less tolerances and a reinforced cradle meant to be used with 2E42-4 instead of 2E42-2.
Uh… No? Tanks that were modernized in 2004~2006 with the 6ETs63-2 are capable of firing 3BM60 regardless of cannon configuration. 2A46M-1 can fire any ammunition that 2A46M-4 can fire, with the only exception in the lineage being that 2A46M-5 is the only cannon harboring a breechblock capable of the 690~700MPa pressures put on by 4Zh96M.
All of those tanks would be lacking it to begin with.
Each and every single one of those vehicles in their factory configuration are limited to 3VBM20. T-80UA from the BV-RM era (including the BV-RM itself) and any other configuration that included the modernized 6ETs43 can load a limited supply of 3BM60… Though all of your listed T-80s predate that modification.
Would be a great addition, instead of the current trashpile of modifications that makes some tank into an entirely different one (T-72B3 → T-72B4 and such), incremental upgrades should be used instead.
We’d simply have to get the correct T-80s in-game to begin with… As of now we still deal with Frankenstein’s T-80B and a T-80UM with MANY features left out.
Well there’s not much to add to russia mate as they mostly did just create tanks based off of the T64 / T72 series.
We could get more T62 or T55 variants as well.
Or maybe stuff like object 277 but that’s about as far as I can go
What is your source? From what I’ve found the m-4 hold higher pressure, not by a drastic amount mind you, but enough that with its auto loader, 3bm59 and 60 are loadable only in that and the T-90s and newer. (Autoloader for the shell length of course)
Also, for anything T-80BV or newer, they can load, and fire 3bm46.
I dunno what source you have but it is not correct.
Here is the video showing a reload cycle. Counting the raw reload at the factory for testing, counting it from the moment it stops, picks up a shell, and to the point it closes the breech and the loading push rod is out of the way is 3.86~ sec.
I don’t think we need this in game btw. It’s 6.0 factory locked time, and cyclogram data time is perfectly fine.
Vasiliy Fofanov lists the upper tolerance of both 2A46M-1 and 2A46M-4 as 6500 bar. In checking back I’ve found a bit that escaped my mind, specifically changes to the chamber throat and loading window.
Once again, 6ETs40 is incapable of loading 3BM46. 3BM48 as a whole is 635mm, while 6ETs40 only has clearance of up to 575mm.
Fair enough, it feels to be in a far better position than it was previously anyway.
3BM48 is no different than 3BM46, it’s simply the designation for the penetrator’s cartridge.
3BM48
3BM46
It’s the mix-up people have with other cartridges, and every cartridge has separate designations for each and every part of its design.
3VBM60 comprises of the 3BM60 penetrator inside the 3BM66 cartridge paired with a 4Zh96 propellant
3VBM20 comprises of the 3BM46 penetrator inside the 3BM48 cartridge paired with a 4Zh63 propellant
There are many different words used to describe them, but none of them are translated well.
We don’t have any of these.
I don’t personally see the point in 3BM32, as it’s effectively the same as 3BM42 but with worse angled penetration and composite performance. It would serve as a far better intermediary shot than 3BM22 though.
Both 3BM26 and 3BM29 would be horrendous though. If we didn’t have a godawful T-80B amalgamation those penetrators might have some use to them, but we can only dream…Especially with how enigmatic 3VBM12 is as a whole.