No point in lying.
he might be exaggerating but I played 10 matches with US 13.0 and only won 1
so idk what your doing but I wish I got your lobbies
On targets farther than 2km which clould be error related to FCS maybe specifically to this T-80U on 1500-1200 meters range accuracy was 90% so this is something that could interprited as unsignificant on game realities.
Test 12 — Firing Accuracy During Movement
Range: 2000 m
Target: stationary target board, 2.3 × 2.3 m
Tank firing on the move at 40 km/h, 10 rounds, AP ammunition.
Results:
- Hit probability: 30% (Committee requirement: 80%).
- After firing, the 1G46 sight reticle drifted by 0.25 mil to the upper-right along the vertical correction axis (UVKV).
- A correction of the 1G46 sight alignment along the UVKV was performed.
- The test was repeated by the Russian crew.
- Hit probability: 20%.
- After firing, the sight reticle drifted again by 0.25 mil to the upper-right along the UVKV.
By agreement with the committee, a repeat of the test was authorized, but it was not carried out due to GOP malfunction.
After the tank returned to the motor pool, the gun mounting, the sight installation, and the stabilizer were inspected. The inspection revealed:
- The gun mounting wedges were tightened.
- The irreversible backlash of the 1G46 sight was up to 0.5 mil to the right.
- After the barrel and the parallelogram linkage of the 1G46 cooled down, the sight reticle along the UVKV returned to its original position.
Test 14 — Engagement of a Stationary Target While Moving at Night
Range: 1000 m
Target: stationary target board, 2.3 × 2.3 m
Tank firing on the move at 40 km/h, one shot, AP ammunition.
Result:
- Hit probability: 0%.
The original Russian text.
1 Like
Conclusions. Fire Control System
The fire control system is significantly inferior in firing accuracy at distances of 2500–2000 m compared to NATO tanks.
The required hit probability at these distances, against a standard target (2.3 × 2.3 m), both from a standstill and on the move, for an AP round is no less than 90%.
The permissible deviations and tolerances during manufacturing, adjustment, and boresighting of the 1A45 FCS of the T-80U amount to 0.5 mil, which at a distance of 2500 m is comparable to half the size of the target.
To ensure the required accuracy, the permissible deviations must not exceed 0.25 mil.
Due to turret drift during hull rotation, the insufficient power of the weapon stabilizer does not allow achieving the required accuracy when firing on the move at speeds of 25–40 km/h (NATO standard).
Operation of the stabilizer with overshoots leads to increased time required to fire a shot and also reduces firing accuracy. NATO tank stabilizers operate without overshoots.
During intensive firing of the main gun (80–100 shots over several hours), boresight drift of more than 0.5 mil occurs due to barrel warping and the influence of thermal instability of the drives and the sight.
The daylight channel of the commander’s sight does not meet NATO standards for target detection, identification, and firing accuracy.
1 Like
So this is FCS issue that doesn’t exist in game because most of aiming done manually by player.
This technical issue is absent on every tank in the game.
You literally trying to apply something that doesn’t exist in game.
And also.
Spoiler
Test 19: Accuracy Firing at a Moving Target
Range: 1,500 m. Target: 2.3 x 4.6 m mobile shield. Firing from a stationary position: 10 shots, armor-piercing projectile, target speed: 20-30 km/h.
The T-80U tank fully completed the test. Hit rate: 90%. Adjustments were made to the alignment before firing, taking into account drift.
Test 20: Accuracy Firing at a Moving Target
Range: 1,500-1,700 m. Target: 2.3 x 4.6 m mobile shield. Firing from a moving tank at a speed of 40 km/h: 10 shots, armor-piercing projectile, target speed: 20-30 km/h.
The test was conducted twice. The Greek crew failed the test. Hit rate: 60%. The Russian crew completed the test. Before firing, we disabled the target velocity correction and performed a 0.3 td. adjustment (preliminary aiming point transfer). Hit rate: 90%.
An analysis of firing tests 19 and 20 revealed that, in addition to errors in the fire control system, the ZP31 practice round’s trajectory also mismatched the trajectories of armor-piercing sabot projectiles (BM15, BM22, BM26) programmed into the computer. For example, at ranges up to 1,500 meters, its ballistics roughly matched those of the BM/115; from 1,500 to 2,000 meters, roughly those of the BM22; and at ranges greater than 2,000 meters, it did not match any of the projectile types programmed into the computer.
Therefore, aimed fire with this type of ammunition is difficult (aiming point adjustments are required depending on the range to the target).
The reason topics like this appear is precisely because the game does not model the aspects of military equipment that could disadvantage the vehicles of one specific nation. Its armor isn’t modeled with the absurd real-life weak spots, its missiles don’t underperform in range or guidance compared to their real counterparts, it never gets completely broken, unplayable vehicles at release, and so on. This is exactly what the notorious Russian bias consists of.
1 Like
Fakken lold.
So reverse speed, reload speed, vertical angles and vertical/horizontal aiming speed doesn’t exist ?
MiG-29, T-64A/B, MiG-21F-13, MiG-23M, Yak-38, Mi-4AV.
First of all, we’re not talking about real-life flaws of the vehicles brought into the game, but about broken mechanics and munitions in the game itself. Second, what, are the developers supposed to remove absolutely all shortcomings, otherwise it doesn’t count?
I remember perfectly well the patch in which the T-64A was added, so I don’t understand why you’re writing this nonsense.
Huh ?
And i aslo remember when T-64A was added when Soviet team had 0 speed to compete with German/American team. It was like teams pureley made of Hellcats but better.
both statements are wrong, your bugreport was not good. mz speeds ingame are optimistic already, the cyclogram whilst on the manuals is pretty much going against all other evidence including multiple videos, one i think is referenced in the bugreport itself. as much as im going to say on the matter as its not the place to do so + im pretty sure we already had this argument a long time ago .
1 Like
It seems you skipped most of my post.
That was in TRB. In TAB the situation was completely the opposite — the T-64 was a barely vulnerable, monstrously overpowered killing machine. Unlike the MBT and, even more so, the Chieftain Mk.10.
i mean the video is cool but there are literally cutting the loading times + t90m uses AZ which is slower than mz on top of other differences.
- there is a plume of black smoke that is visible in both shots behind the flag and there is significant distance from 1 cut to the other.
and you can see it has risen.
No thats was your whole argument that Soviet weaknesses wasn’t implemented in the game.
Okay but how that debunks it was weak in TRB your argument didn’t implemented that we was talking about TAB specifically.
the first shot is cut out so disregard that, the second shot took 9 seconds, i timed it from the moment the tank shotto the frame the barrel started lowering(so i gave it a very fair shot) even if we give or take a few decimals that is not what you want right?
Meanwhile, my entire argument
We were talking about the game as a whole, you’re the one who for some reason is talking only about TRB.
Dude, why is everything you write on this forum just dull demagoguery and nitpicking over details? Maybe go back to the Russian section or something.
Most accurate, factual statement ever uttered on this forum ever.
2 Likes