the sight movement is not the vehicle rocking back and forth on suspension. look at the video in real speed and you can tell yourself. the sight is being controlled by the gunner.
do you even understand how suspension works? the suspension springs would probably have to be taller than the car itself and be loose as fuck and the car would wobble for seconds to go on and the missile system would be unusable
and the humwee does not have some weird magic electronic suspension that wobbles like crazy for no reason as if the car was being moved by a goliath’s hand and then instantly returns to normal
sorry, no it cant be the suspension.
you can also tell that the car isnt rocking back and forth like crazy by watching how stable the video footage is of the person who is sitting in the car. it is literally several degrees of movement which would be crazy. let me repeat: the humvee is not bouncing around by several degrees. delusional.
the car is completely stable during the firing process and youre talking up non sense. Uploading: 124321141.mp4…
seriously. stop making up false reasons and instead accept the reality
this is actually what a tow gunner would see. the video is good quality. youre seeing what he sees. the tow gunner sees the missile dip and pulls the gunner sight up to compensate.
you can see that after the initial blast the missile comes visible and comes from low, dip and corrects into normal position after some time.
again, youre just ignoring the reality which is infront your eyes and youre making crazy excuses because you dont want to accept the fact that tow dips.
sad that some people are so deeply challenged that they cant accept the reality infront their eyes.
My brother in christ, you can literally see the vehicle rocking, and the rocking continues after the missile has left the tube. Hence my asking for the same result from a static firing position, which you so far have failed to produce.
seriously. stop making up false reasons and instead accept the reality
I’ve expressed no opinion on whether the drop is realistic or not, merely that this video isn’t the evidence you think it is. After all, if it’s such a problem you would have thought there would be hundreds of videos showing the issue.
if the sight movement was produced by the rocking the vehicle would rock for several degrees which is impossible considering the suspension system used in the humvee. not only that but the rocking would start on the missile launch and not after the missile has left the tube and the rocking would continue to move the sights instead of abruplty stop the way the gunner stops it due to the principle you dont know called movement energy.
any rocking in the video is so minimal that it can only be called a minimal vibration and it obviously is not moving the vehicle several degrees up and down to the point of affecting tow sights so much that it moves up
it is not the vehicle rocking.
the tow missile obviously dips and the gunner sight is moved by the gunner. to compensate for the drop.
i found you a video from thermal sights from tow being fired. youll never be able to find a video from the sights where the missile doesnt drop. good luck.
there will be also a surprise for you in some days as im contacting someone who actually deals with the system just to prove everyone wrong even harder ;)
See? Vehicle movement. The sight is attached to the vehicle, therefore the sight moves too. In a test, this would render it completely invalid without sensors on the missile or cameras tracking the missile. This video is from inside the vehicle firing the missile, which moves, along with the sights. I am failing to understand how you cannot see that this invalidates using this video for the drop.
i found you a video from thermal sights from tow being fired. youll never be able to find a video from the sights where the missile doesnt drop. good luck.
Your link failed to work…
My personal take on it is that there is a small amount of drop while the missile accelerates, but it’s is very exaggerated in game.
That exaggeration, combined with the sight usually being in the gun barrel in game, leads to the behavious we were seeing before the changes.
It could be an attempt to simulate a mild form of gathering for the misiles. Noone wants real gathering implemetned of course, stuff like the Shillelagh would be useless inside of around 400m, infact it would make pretty much all earlier ATGM’s efftively useless in game.
thanks for proving yourself wrong because the camera movement in video is not there when the suspension would be returning the sights back on target by moving the vehicle downwards multiple degrees. the vehicle would be moving violently back to its original position based on your own theory but its not. therefore it cant be the suspension and it cant be the vehicle moving up and down
so thank you.
again heres the video just so you see it yourself. its not suspension because the sight returning on target is not caused by vehicle movement but by the gunners hand. also the sight’s movement is simply too slow to be suspension
the sight also moves right a bit on top which can only mean one thing. its the gunner who is controlling the sight there.
you can literally see how the vehicle is not moving a bit compared to the tree background when in your theory the suspension would be returning from its flexed position on front
What I see, is the vehicle movement throwing off the gunners aim.
This video was from training I believe, hence a gunner being trained who quite likely doesnt know not to adjust and the sight will go straight back to where it was once the vehicle has settled.This is why we train people after all.
The topic of discussion as TOW drop after launch, I am saying this video is insufficnet evidence either way and it most certainly isn’t the open and shut case you seem to think it is.
If you cannot understand that a sight, mounted on a vehicle, which rocks when the missile fires will cause the sight to move then there is clearly nothing I can to do to convince you.
Again, I’m not saying the TOW’s should or should not drop, just that this video is not suitable evidence either way.
the vehicle literally wasnt moving when the sight was returning and only way it could be that high was if the vehicle would have moved so its suspension would be flexed on front, so its impossible for the vehicle to not move back down when the sight is returning
bro literally hit his shot, destroyed a target and knew to adjust for the tow’s drop
you do understand that if the vehicle was moved multiple degrees up and the suspension flexed the vehicle would also move back down from the flexed position but it didnt because the suspension wasnt flexed
not only that but its completely unrealistic behavior from suspension anyway and if it wasnt suspension it would be a shockwave moving within the frame which would only rock the sight, it would end in a fraction of a second and not move for such a long time. you do understand how fast shocktravels move and stop compared to even suspension, and even for suspension that is an unrealistic stretch
the vehicle was not moving when the sight was going down but based on your logic the vehicle literally would have to move, violently.
ofcourse the guidance system would eventually correct it but better way to correct it is to move the sights up so it corrects faster
the guidance system isnt perfect anyway and i saw another tow gunner talk about the missile fluttering all over
also mentioned low range shots being more difficult than long range ones (wonder why, probably because the missile dips and it can make it hard to fire at low range), if the missile fired perfectly straight then longer range shots would be harder because the further your target is the smaller your target is on sights
you do understand that if the vehicle was moved multiple degrees up and the suspension flexed the vehicle would also move back down from the flexed position
Yes, and you see that happening. What you also see is the gunner trying to compensate for that, not compensating for missile drop as you are claiming.
not only that but its completely unrealistic behavior from suspension anyway and if it wasnt suspension it would be a shockwave moving within the frame which would only rock the sight, it would end in a fraction of a second and not move for such a long time. you do understand how fast shocktravels move and stop compared to even suspension, and even for suspension that is an unrealistic stretch
Dude, suspensions don’t magically spring back into position. There is time as the dampening happens. You can literaly see it in the video which is what is being compensated for All you are seeing is a vehicle suddenly relieved of what, 22Kg while also dealing with the TOW launching, which is not recoilless unlike say, a javelin. Sure it has a launch motor, but that’s not the same as being a recoilles weapon. You wouldn’t fire a TOW indoors for example whereas you can something like a javelin or a NLAW. Attempting to do will cause you and your buddies to not have a good time.
Again, for clarity You are seeing the gunner compensate for the vehicle rocking.
so the gunner is moving the sight down? how did the sight move up if the front suspension isnt flexed?
and it isnt that slow. just because it takes a very small amount of time doesnt mean you get to argue that it takes a huge fucking time (oh and the vehicle literally wasnt moving during the alleged movement back down so your argument is invalid anyway)
its simple
argument that the blast moved sight: the sight moves up way after the missile already up in the air so it cant be the blast
argument that the suspension is rocking: the vehicle literally didnt move when the suspension should have been coming down and the suspension on front wheels wont go up and then somehow not come down
pointless. proves that the suspension didnt flex up by several degrees
No, it’s not. Increasing the alignment error between the missile’s flightpath and the intended target can’t magically increase the force available to the control surfaces of the missile.
Potentially there are even limiters in place in the guidance section that cap the rate anyway.
It would be because the guidance system doesn’t have the time to correct any gross error in the initial gun laying, since performance is initially limited in setting up proper intercept geometry especially since radial rates are more significant at shorter ranges assuming a fixed crossing velocity.
It depends on the system specific installation (e.g. M41A7 vs M3) and actual geometry of each specific launch question due to moment arm and suspension not being perfectly aligned.
the more the target is off the sight the harder the system steers the missile towards the sight. this isnt bang bang guidance where the missile is always either not guiding at all or always guiding at max.
there is no way the suspension would flex enough to move the whole humvee several degrees upwards on front and then not return at all. none of that can account for it. trying to be smart doesnt change the reality
i honestly dont know what makes you even think the missiles fins would be deflecting fully to account for minor changes the tow system glides such guidance would be 1. pointless and 2. waste the energy very much needed energy of the missile. this isnt a gbu-12 where your energy conservation doesnt matter because youre falling towards ground.
the tow missile does not use bang bang guidance and there is no reason to believe that the guidance system is somehow opposite to what would be used here and completely counter intuitive.
Not at all points in time, as a directly proportional system can throw out the balance if improperly commanded, it’s why for example the “Altitude band” autopilot system existed with the AIM-7.
The M41 turret on the M1025A2 is mounted on the centerline, a fair way above the center of mass of the vehicle and most firings I’ve seen has it angled at about 30~45 degrees over one of the forward wheels, which explains why it rocks the way it does, also there is some chance that the soil also settling explains why it doesn’t perfectly return to where it was.
except the sight literally moves way after the missile is already out and again if it would have been the suspension, there is no way it wouldnt return after several degrees.
aim7 isnt even three point guided. talk about the rs-2us if you want to. mge doesn’t even have such information as an input to it.
seems like youre agreeing here with me somewhat, and while the mge is somewhat more complex in practice it works as said.
The mechanics behind both HEAT and AP are literally identical. Both of them use kinetic energy focused on a small area to penetrate armor.
Again, the difference is where the energy is imparted. HEAT gains an immense amount of kinetic energy at detonation to push a very light copper liner at multiple kilometers per second through armor, while AP gains at most 1km to 1.8km per second at the muzzle.
There is no “molten” or “melting” mechanic in play with either. The Munroe effect is transfer of kinetic energy through explosive shockwave. Any heat transfer is purely and exclusively a side effect.
An EFP is a mixture between the two, but is closer to a AP round due to the mass of the liner and instance when it gains kinetic energy. Even modern EFPs have fins to stabilize themselves like APFSDS so they can travel longer distances with reduced dispersion.
For the sake of the accuracy in the game, classing EFP penetrators as AP and giving them resistance against light ERA is more accurate to real life mechanics. An EFP does not interact with light ERA in the same way a HEAT round does. The interaction between AP and light ERA is more similar to the interaction between an EFP and light ERA.
If you bothered to actually learn the mechanics of each round, you’d realize that KE and CE are arbitrary classifications.
A cannon uses chemical energy to impart kinetic energy to a penetrator at the muzzle.
What do you think smokeless powder/cordite/gunpowder does when it activates? It burns and turns into gas. Burning is just a slow explosion.
A HEAT warhead uses chemical energy to impart kinetic energy to a penetrator at warhead detonation.
What does the filler to an explosive do when it activates? It also burns and turns to gas. Except it burns at multiple kilometers per second, creating a shockwave. Explosions are just extremely fast fires.
We do not use electrical energy to accelerate tank projectiles as of now, we use chemical energy to impart kinetic energy to projectiles.
a slug will absolutely be impacted more by era than an actual dart and there is no denying. or go ahead and try to deny it and we can talk it through. the rest of your comment is blabber - slugs arent darts. war thunder model for KE includes conventional rounds which a slug isnt - slug would get advantanges that it doesnt have in real life. look at the modelling yourself. the efp on tow 2b doesnt form a rod. it should not be modelled as ke penetrator in war thunder because war thunder ke penetrators dont have a class for a slug
like i said slugs should have their own modelling none of this laziness is acceptable
