You’re missing the cover for your attached document.
That’s why you can’t provide a single argument, and all primary and good secondary sources say 6?
And yet, not a word about any combat or standard reload.
In the book, I gave “less than 6” as 5. Otherwise, you’d agree that based on Soviet documents on the T-64/72/80 turret traverse speed, which state “at least 20 or 24,” it’s worth giving them a value of 100? That wouldn’t be inconsistent, would it?
Based on the documents, the Leclerc’s reload time is slightly less than 6 seconds at BEST. Something like 5.8-5.9.
However, even for the T-80, the developers didn’t take the best time, because the best time is achieved when the gun is immediately at the loading angle. This eliminates the need for the last step of the cyclogram, which takes approximately 0.25 seconds.
The video I linked above shows a reload time of between 7 and 8 seconds.
This conversation is simply not serious, as you can’t provide any evidence to contradict the authoritative documents.
They take this into account when reloading the T series, even though the barrel does not visually move.
Can you show me even one source that supports your words, which is more authoritative than the GIAT brochure and other sources that I provided above?
It’s just the Swedish Tender that Gaijin themselves have referenced and shown pages of across many of their development blogs over the years.
But anyways, I’ll include a screenshot of the front page.
-Edit- Done.
3 Likes
Others have already responded mate. I shant reply more.
As stated above I can make that at home extremely easily.
However I’ve already conceded the point to @Gunjob earlier as you can quite clearly read above.
Rather thanr reply to response from before hand please read what I’ve said then respond
I haven’t seen a single argument.
Essentially, I have a primary source against fantasies.
This is a frivolous dialogue. People invent absurd meanings based on their own desires and have nothing to back it up.
Primary sources, videos where the reload time is even longer than 7 seconds, don’t interest them.
Im sorry but Gaijin would not have buffed the leclerc to 5 seconds years ago if it was incorrect.
There is more to this that we can’t see.
There are a plethora of secondary sources which debate your point as folks have said.
Not really frivolous as well as that, if you feel as such, stop responding.
Videos have never been used as sources for warthunder. Especially for reload rates.
cause you’re refusing to see them.
As to which point, it begs the question why are you here discussing.
You can also see me above , if you had read, me asking the other user for their source for the 4 seconds.
5 Likes
So, does that mean that everything in the game is automatically historically correct?
Amateur magazines aren’t even considered a source, as gunjob already told you.
Even if there are 1,000 of them, the manufacturer’s original source will always be higher.
You’re essentially denying reality.
They simply confirm what the manufacturer itself says.
People have written here many times about “videos confirm it in 4-5 seconds,” but that’s a lie.
Just another argument against it.
Historically correct isn’t what gaijin does and we all know it.
No he stated that janes usually isn’t however there is more than just janes in there.
not at all again you’ve ignored what I’ve stated a few times now.
Which can be clearly seen.
Also your “manufactureres” source as I have stated I could conjur that up exactly saying 5 seconds.
On top of all of that, as far as I’ve searched the auto loaders fire rate is largely ambigious due to classifications.
6 seconds seems to be the standard firing for trials etc as far as i have read.
Now Rather than try throw shade at me, go relax somewhere.
Not really, I’ve seen leclerc videos firing in 5 seconds, hence why I find it quite odd why so many books, magazines and videos show it as 5 seconds, yet manufactor will say 6
show video with 5 sec
can i link a reddit video of inside the leclerc?
Like genuinely asking or will I get forum banned xD
Source? I have yet to read that anywhere.
I mean, surely if a Dev said that you can provide me the comment / post / Devblog you’re basing yourself on?
Sure, how about these 2 videos ? You know, the ones the bug report already provides. And they’re pretty hard to hand-wave away:
- French MoD video: reload in under 3 seconds, without losing firing position
2:15 — https://imagesdefense.gouv.fr/fr/bande-a-themes-amx-leclerc.html - “De Leclerc au Leclerc” documentary: 5 seconds reload, again without barrel movement
39:38–39:45 — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CN6eYouePNM
But you would know that if you weren’t actually ignoring what doesn’t fit your narrative…
So you’re ignoring official footage, ignoring documented tests, ignoring what the devs already reviewed… and cling to a single isolated “6 seconds” line. You aren’t being rigorous. You’re just showing how shaky your entire argument actually is…
As Napoleon said “When you’re at the bottom of a hole … stop digging”. 😉
5 Likes
Directly from the french MoD I see.
About as accurate as it can get for how fast it can reload then, So most sources stating that it’s likely 5 seconds combat reload, 6 seconds out of combat etc are more accurate than not?
I said so too but hey ho I’m not gonna waste too much on it.
Hence why I thought better to bring the discussion to the Leclerc thread rather than hidden on a T series thread.
2 Likes
I now don’t need to as there are more than one shown, if you google it , there are plenty videos showing 5 sexonds
The cyclogram literally states that after loading, the gun returns to its original angle, which takes about 0.25 seconds.
If the loading time for a gun already at the technical loading angle were taken into account, the time would be shorter.
You’re literally not reading what I’m writing. The timer in this video is complete nonsense. You’re supposed to measure the time from the shot to the moment the gun returns to the same spot where it was fired.
The timer measures complete nonsense. It starts much later than it should, and ends much earlier.
In fact, in the video, loading takes 7-8 seconds.
The fact that you don’t understand this means that you don’t understand how the autoloader works in general.
There’s no full cycle here. You completely fail to understand that loading a shell into a gun is only part of the cycle.
Let me cut out a fragment of the T-series shell chambering and tell you that they load a shell in two seconds?
Unfortunately, you understand this issue so poorly that you can’t even realize that the first of your videos shows nothing, since it is only part of a cycle, and the second one shows a reload time of less than 6 seconds.
Even if we pretend barrel travel is the pacing element (it isn’t), the math still isn’t right. Once again, FCS processing time isn’t a thing in War Thunder so that’s out of the way.
The Leclerc’s resting alignment is around −1.8°, max depression −8°, elevation speed ≈30°/s. Worst-case travel adds ≈2 x 0.2 = 0.4 seconds total.
So even under your own premise:
- operational cyclic ≈ 5.4 s
- maximal cyclic ≈ ~4.4 s
Meanwhile, Smin has said repeatedly that vehicles are modeled in their best achievable configuration … except for reload, which is subject to an additional balance check.
So with its highest possible cyclic rate, the reload sequence would still be, 4.412 seconds, so
what we have in-game is fine.
That’s exactly what we have in-game, backed by MoD footage and documentary evidence that the devs already reviewed and accepted.
The Devs could have gone as low as 4.4 seconds but balance is essential, and it is why MSC still doesn’t have a 3 seconds (or even 4 seconds) reload rate right now. Same goes for Type 10 which could reach a reload rate in the realm of 2 seconds.
So in other words, even according to your logic, barrel travel doesn’t magically justify 6 seconds … 5.4 at best, and even then, there is still a point about it being 4.4 because of the maximum cyclic speed. So yeah. We just went all over the same things the Devs went through to decide that 5 seconds would be the most appropriate now.
7 Likes
Why do you keep using these fictitious numbers?Have you ever seen 4 seconds in any source? Not a single good source even claims 5.
That video doesn’t show a full charging cycle. Even the fragment shown is only 5 seconds long, and it doesn’t show the gun being brought into position or the conveyor fully rotating.
The video doesn’t even show the moment of the shot, although the recoil of the gun and the extraction of the shell tray takes 0.2-0.3 seconds.
From this, you’ll get ~6
Literally here you see 7-8 seconds
Here you see 5 seconds for an INCOMPLETE cycle.
There is no:
- firing
- recoil of the breech
- extraction of the shell tray
- bringing the gun to the loading angle
- returning the gun to the firing angle
- unlatching the gun
Taking into account the remaining parts, you get 6+
You literally made up your numbers, denying primary sources that say exactly 6, denying a number of authoritative secondary sources that say 6, denying videos that never show the full cycle from shot to shot in 4 or 5 seconds.