compared to soviet counterpart this thing is seriously undertiered if you compared it to T-80B the imbalance is very clear. Kontakt-5 Era, Gen 2 thermal, Commander sight gun control, T-80U series armour
+1, its armour and thermal sight doesnt equal to T-80B at all which only have T-80B series armour and kontakt-1 era
The T-80UD/DU-1 in-game currently has the same armour profile as the T-80UD, the T-80UD itself has inferior protection when compared to the T-80U. It also has the same reverse speed as the T-64BV, this is very detrimental at 10.7 as retreating is almost impossible unless you want to expose your rear side.
So no, it doesn’t have T-80U level of protection
but it is still superior to T-80B in armour layout, era and thermal it is only inferior at reversing
It has a much worse forward speed
i never denied the reverse speed
Both bug reports for the tank gun designation for the T-80UD/DU-1 (BE) were closed with the same-ish bland answer, I honestly give up with Gaijin and any improvements at this point. They introduce entirely ahistorical vehicles, are surprised it’s incorrect and expect you to somehow manage to find information on vehicles currently in service or which just entered service.
I’m just more curious on what source they used to come to the conclusion that the T-80UD/DU-1 ever used the 2A46M-1, it would’ve used the Ukrainian made KBA3 tank gun instead (prior to modernisation, which both of my secondary sources prove). It’s just unfortunate that they hold sources in which they use for vehicle modelling close to them and refuse to publicise them, this makes disproving Gaijin pretty difficult at times (looking at you J-11A).
It’s pretty apparent that as events and battle passes continue, the more C&P they become. This shouldn’t be the case however, unlike games like DCS, modelling vehicles in-game such be significantly easier and especially aircraft, but with the current schedule Gaijin is aiming for these things become drastically rushed and prematurely released.
2 Likes
So what are you planing to do now?
1 Like
Nothing, I don’t really feel like wasting time on a issue which clearly won’t be resolved. The T-80UD/DU-1 could’ve potentially been an amazing vehicle to end the year with but it was a massive disappointment.
I won’t be going back and forth with people who refuse to go through the sources I’ve put up, their argument was that the primary sources I’ve provided don’t clearly state that all T-80UDs in Pakistani service were fitted with the 125mm HIT Tank Gun but if they actually looked at the secondary sources I’ve provided they would’ve seen the part which clearly states that Ukraine shipped said T-80UDs originally with their domestic KBA3 tank gun, not the 2A46M-1.
I’m just happy people at least acknowledged this issue on forums, most of us just want unique or semi-unique event vehicles but Gaijin would prefer to pump out more garbage and try to appease the community.
So I’m probably going to end up taking a large break from the game until something changes at least
5 Likes
not worth arguing with a dumb wall that doesnt do its own initial research well enough and needs to be corrected
2 Likes
tech mod says:
which is funny considering:
HIT makes literally their own hulls and turrets. what a gun too complicated for us???
some tech mods really just label not a bug to get out of work these days
3 Likes
There’s a 1 in 1 chance that the “naiza” is worse than both the 3BM60 and the DTC10-125. besides the fact that pakistan has terrible industry and limited research capabilites, which is understandable because it’s practically a failed state. the “naiza” round is also significcantly older than than the 3BM60, as in 15 years older as it first appeared at IDEX 2001.
1 Like
The link for the gun bug report is broken
I think mod just closed it. Dude is just to lazy to read all evidence supporting the HIT gun. Its his job to read and find inaccuracies, yet he just lable it as bug.
We need to send report on that moderator.
1 Like
I’ll consider one more large bug report for the T-80UD/DU-1 whenever I have time and can be asked, the amount of sources I need for one thing is incredibly ridiculous.
3 Likes
another primary source that clearly states Gun Manufacturing Factory
just in case someone says this is only for gun barrels:
source
2 Likes
shall we try once more?
i believe an updated list of bugs is in order
2 Likes
The information provided by you is pretty good, I’ll make a bug report tomorrow and gather additional information in the mean time. The source you provided also lists the 125mm being the autofrettaged chrome plated which is also listed down for the T-80UD, something which is undeniable.
If you want however, you could gather information from my previous report and information you’ve gathered recently and make your own bug report, or I’ll do it myself tomorrow - either way, it’s very apparent that the upgraded T-80UDs never would’ve used the 2A46M-1.
We also need information of the KBA3 Tank Gun as well, just to put the nail in the coffin and confirm that all Pakistani T-80UDs aren’t fitted with the 2A46M-1 in general, information of the KBA3 Tank Gun is hard to acquire and specifically in Pakistani service, most we can achieve is probably secondary sources.
I’ll also look into the possible usage of the 6TD-II engine on the T-80UD, I’ve found some primary sources discussing it but not specifically mentioning what type of tanks it was fitted on (excluding the Al-Khalid series/VT-1A).
1 Like
@soviet_MoonMan
might also have info since his first suggestion was about the Pakistani T-80UD with the 6TD-IIE
check out his suggestion and the sources he used as well as the first comment he made
also posting old report link here since older links dont work
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/SEElaGVlBtTJ
@kleinerPanzer
also made a report for the gun of the Al Khalid I (named: 125 mm HIT L/48 cannon OR 125 mm Smooth Bore Tank Gun)
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/9ZJynqpEPSzc
1 Like
Wow, amazing. That can be used to reopen the issue
1 Like