Tracking sights & Stabilizer issues

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
,
1

So as I’m sure a majority of people know, the addition of tracking sights have been added for some top tier MBT’s like the Type 90, Type 10, and Merkava tanks, which makes me now raise the question many people have asked for quiet a long time on the Strf 9040’s.

Why are the Strf 9040 lacking their IR track?

These have been missive for a very long time and seems to always be ignored. Some may say that ‘they were never fitted with the proper kit’ however the system is built into the fire-controls and sight, and should be included to the B, C, and BILL (Demonstrator) with their proper BOFORS 3P rounds.

Another thing I’ve recently noticed on the Strf 9040 BILL is that due to the addition of the BILL twin launcher on the side of the turrets the sight and gun refuse to be stabilized now. Is the proper course of action just a bug report with a video clip?

3 Likes
2

I thought it was always like that? Because the Strf 9040 BILL was based on an early version of the CV90.

3

Idk what version each CV90xx is, but none of them have IRST, other than the SPAA one, which also has radar. (And I’m not sure off the top of my head if it actually has IRST or is radar lock only.)

4

It uses IRST for the lock; the radar is the SRC component. Also this has been disproven multiple times that the normal variants are capable of locking helicopters and low flying aircraft.

5

It not only has the ‘STAB’ in the circle at the bottom, but it’s based on the Strf 9040 B with thermals too, which it has and are unlockbale.

6

And what’s the problem with that? It has stab that works up to 30 km/h.

It seems quite well accepted that the BILL was based on the 9040A, though I don’t have any sources on hand to show than. If you have sources to the contrary feel free to report them.

7

Hmm, is this meant to be in the naval section of the forum?

1 Like
8

Just notice that, lol, fixed.

9

“balance…” or just bias

russian bmp 2 md got one, and it is still lover br than cv90.

10

that’s based on the 9040a, You can see the box on the turret that’s part of the stabilizer. You only see that feature on 9040a.

12

Until gaijin decides to implement some form of a manual tracking and automatic leading mechanism to the game, the cv90s(prior to mk4 and mk3c) that use the utaas sight cannot be implemented correctly.
Those things use an automatic leading system that attempts to predict the position of the target and points the gun there. But the position of the target is actually updated by the gunner manually tracking and continuously lasering the target. The 9030 and 35 have some form of an “air mode” that only need the gunner to laze the target once and then the sight automatically follow the target through inertia tracking(again this is NOT IRST by any means). While doing this the gunner only need to provide small adjustments. This type of automatic leading isn’t exclusive for the UTAAS, rather a function that is available on many tank sight like the one on the m1.
Personally I think this is a very easy to implement thing that gaijin refuse to think creatively about. We already have a “false tracking” for radars when planes disappear behind trees or mountains. Our radar simply attempts to follow the plane’s prior trajectory and gives out a corresponding lead indicator. They could’ve just give the utaas a really short tracking time like half a second and then transit into a “false tracking” state. this will actually be quite similar to how the utaas behave irl, the player(gunner) do have to manually track the target to get an initial lock and an indicator to fire at. But the player have to continuously re-lock the target since the lock goes into a “false tracking” state(hence the required manual adjustment).