Replenishment of secondary ammo?
Yes, even replenishment for the ammo behind frontal plate was done by a mechanism, as the ammo stowage there was mechanised with a system to feed them into main autoloader.
IIRC the crew was kwpt in turret same way as on MBT70 tanks, except two fully functional 775’s been built before MBT-70’s were built (without it’s FCS) a year after.
Design of 775 was ready in 1963, design of MBT-70 in 1965. Hell soviets even dropped the programm first.
1 Like
Ok that’s interesting i am sorry i did not know that. Though still there are other vehicles such as challenger 2 where it takes unreasonably long.
1 Like
Yeah, dont apologise, I understand the reasoning, I think replenishment time is BS myself.
I apologise myself for unnacessary rudeness.
1 Like
The leak of the next vehicles shows absolutely nothing for France.
Résumé
Yeah, naval coastal tree. So FuN…
It’s going to be played by like… 5 people. The blue water tree is already not very famous (and still does not have a decent top tier, sigh). At this point, Gaijin is adding everything and anything but interesting things for France (ground specifically), and when they do… Well, we get the Disappointment. I mean, the Vextra, where the devs acknowledge they artificially nerf it because they can’t be bothered fixing their issue of creating huge gaps in tech trees.
Spoiler
Edit : Looking at the stat card, they actually finally got the name right lol
8 Likes
The Vextra honestly takes the cake for the most historically inaccurate vehicle ever introduced. Outside of the model being visually correct from the outside, they got a grand total of two things right:
- The optical zoom of the gunner sight
- The fact that the vehicle is stabilised
The devs are seriously better off just modelling random French vehicles and just leaving it up to the community to sort everything out from now on lol.
14 Likes
I’m surprised they even got that right. They could very well have modelled the unstabilized turret and called it a day lol
2 Likes
Let’s just say that I was asked for sources about whether or not it was stabilised prior to the dev server opening lol…
9 Likes
looooool
So you really did all the work for the Vextra
1 Like
Just found something interesting. According to British documents, the Challenger 2 should have 500 KE across the turret and glacis:
Spoiler
Why is this relevant? According to the Greek trials, the S1 armour package achieved comparable protection to the Challenger 2:
“[The Challenger 2E’s] much-hyped armour was another negative surprise, being heavy and providing less protection than the Leopard 2A5S and M1A2, but only marginally better than the Leclerc which was at least 10 tonnes lighter”
Spoiler
So that’s another source to add for the S1. The S2 and SXXI achieve better protection. But the S1 in-game would be nerfed to ~500 KE across the hull and turret.
15 Likes
Yeah, might have to see when Rafael get added, although I think this year to be a bit bold cause I don’t think we are ready for AESA just yet. We will need all the AESA/PESA in at once, but I don’t think GAIJING could quite carry that much weight.
Ground force wise I don’t see any top tier stuff that will necessarily change much, I think maybe a thread on General French Ground Force addition could get made. Like this Potential Chinese Ground Force Additions - Machinery of War Discussion / Ground Vehicle - War Thunder — official forum
Buddy that document is for challenger 1 and prospective upgrades that never happened. I wouldn’t delve into challenger 2 protection for buffs if I were you…
1 Like
It’s overperforming in game afaik yea
No? Do you have any sources? This also points to it being closer to ~500 KE…
4 Likes
Frontal arc yes, there is also some argument for the street), the hull is also significantly lower than 500, none of which is helping your case for leclerc… which isn’t anywhere near what modern leopards offer…
1 Like
In-game? Because in-game it’s higher than 500mm:
Gaijin should probably lower the turret cheeks to 500mm @ 40° frontal arc, then change the BR’s as follows:
- Challenger 2 OES > 10.7
- Challenger 2 TES > 10.7
- Challenger 2 > 11.0
- Challenger 2 (2F) > 11.0
- Challenged 3 TD > 11.3
- Black Night > 11.3
- Challenger 2E > 11.3
It’s not that simple, the table shows that a turret armour of 600 mm KE was planned for the mid-90s (CR2 entered service in 1998, so after the mid 90s). And by November 1990 Vickers had already demonstrated that 600 mm KE protection was possible in trials:
In-game it’s 684mm though.
I honestly don’t know where Gaijin got the Challenger 2 armour figures from. For the Leclerc, Strv 122, M1A2 and M1A1 they’ve been pretty open about what sources they use, but not so much for the CR2.
1 Like
Yes, the turret frontal armour is too high in game, as is the hull armour. Which has always been expected given the crazy efficiency of the armour in game.