The BMPT can’t currently survive ammo racks from the turret at this time, so that question is moot.
Once again, the ammo in the turret currently causes an internal fire, and it’s been that way for over a month now.
Only the external portion of the belt doesn’t. This isn’t my take, nor am I saying this is correct or not.
@Metaltank1990
The theory is that belted ammo can’t cook of near ammo when the belt links are under tension.
I have no evidence one way or the other, so I have no take on that theory.
The only thing I know is 7.62 belted ammo can’t cook off near ammo when the belt is under tension, but 7.62 isn’t 30mm so that can’t be used as evidence.
@Kievskiy_Minipig
Why should those vehicles be immune when BMPT isn’t?
it shouldn’t, but it would still block the turret’s traverse.
however, it would help repair much faster since u don’t have to repair an unnecessary part of ur tank.
I get that, but the point is not realism but consistency. Name any other vehicle in game with a continuous belt and you hit any section of that belt and it implodes.
Again, the issue is not realism but consistency. If they all have parts attached to their turret basket (yes, the autoloader is part of a turret basket) which are critical to actuation, they should all be affected by it. Otherwise, if the bar is the basket itself being critical, none should be affected. Placing a double standard in this way is indicative of a clear bias intentional or not.
Brother, Gaijin models the turret baskets so that even the turret basket floor is a “working part” of the horizontal drive. On most tanks it is literally a plate for the crew to stand on, and it should absolutely not be part of the horizontal drive damage model.
If this is the standard they think is OK, then it should also apply to T-series tanks. The cassette autoloader is also made of sheet steel and is attached to the turret in a similar way as a basket.
Then there is 2s38 still which is just tech demonstrator that didnt enter service iirc. By devs logic, that one shell in crewless turret shouldnt explode with 90% chance.
Crewless turret belts almost do not explode, same should apply to 2s38 as well then. Following devs logic.
as i said, the autoloader should limit the russian tanks’ turret traverse, not block it.
things like the battery of the Leopards shouldn’t block it too. even more, it should allow the Leopards to turn off their engines and have unlimited battery power/twice the normal battery power that other tanks have due to them having 2.
Abrams are well modelled.
The autoloader on T-64/72/80/90 protrudes beneath the turret in the exact same way the basket in western tanks does. It is made of similar materials and connected in a similar way. If damaged, it should have the same effect.
i dont think a minor structural damage in the turret basket makes it to get stuck in a fixed position, at least with APFSDS rounds. Sabot rounds does not deform structural components in a significant way.
the only russian tanks that “touch” the horizontal drive are the T-64/80 series, 72 and 90 don’t.
if u want to claim for that tanks not having it’s turret traverse blocked, go on, i agree.
in that case, same solution: limit it’s turret traverse comparable to no battery power.
Leopards wouldn’t have that issue since they have a battery inside the turret.
