Not enough sources or info about it, farther than it being a Rbs 70 launcher
Input the stats of the round on the krupp counter and the calibre of around 8-9mm of the AP core from what blockhaj told me.
Yes, it would definitely be fun to see another vehicle that the Swedish army actually used, like the Pbv 302C. But the reality is that it just doesn’t fit in War Thunder.
Without the BILL launcher (which it never had), you’re left with a 20 mm cannon that’s too weak for higher BRs, paired with armor that only stops MG or HMG fire. The 302C did mount a Ksp 58 as a coaxial, but that would hardly change anything in terms of effectiveness. To make the gun feel relevant, the vehicle would need to be placed much lower in BR — but then its technology and features would be completely out of place and unrealistic for that tier.
So in practice, it ends up in a lose–lose situation: either useless at its historical BR, or completely unrealistic if moved down. That’s why the only reason the current BILL variant works in-game at all is because of the missile system.
Its sad and i really like the Pbv 302s but, at the end. its not a great choice…
Could be a bit OP
1 Like
Not really as you will ammo-rack the vehicle if you shoot the ammo in the launcher tubes,
Fun fact: You can destroy the Pbv 302 BILL if you shoot the missile tube since it will cause the vehicle to detonate… Even if it is a meter above the whole vehicle
besides what karnitin mentioned, Gaijin would also def limit the height of the thing, similar to how they limit telescopic masts
1 Like
You should rather use Gaijins calculator.
2 Likes
1.0 spaa? ehem, shameless plug: Tgb m/42
The Congo modification is the best too! Its got armour for all its crew, the gunner even has protection! And it has two 8mm Ksp m/36
HOLY F-
Even if the inner part was just an AP penetrator:
I used the stats from this ammo guide,
The chell velocity was 905 m/s → 910 so i opted for the later and god
Is this really right??
1 Like
Yeah, you are wrong.
120g stands for entire projectile (explosives + coating + inner segment), not inner segment only.
HVAP-T itself is 130g, so I doubt an 8mm calibre APCR would be 120g if fired from similar casing as HVAP-T.
Tbf gaijin has 2 models to choose from the Mowag Piranha ETS and the M113 ETS
Nevermind i just got word from the team that the wiki WT calculator thingy is broken atm
So the CV90120 just went to 35t, am i crazy or is that not the weight from the version with hardkill APS? If im not wrong thats the late 2000’s model which we dont have in game.
1 Like
Hmm… how heavy is HVAP-T projectile tho?
You see, 246g might stand for complete round (w/ propelent) that is not the right way of calculating the pen.
And HVAP round for the same gun weights 130g, with HEFI weighting 120g, which makes no sense when compared to data.
You sure you are not mistaking “Vikt” for “Total mass” and “Prjvikt” for “Projectile mass” (which would stand for 20mm round, not 8mm insert, like it is with other rounds)?
the one we have in game is a cv90120-t 2007, but without the APS and the Panoramic Low Signature Sight, aka the globe
its so bs that they made its weight 35t, its like they made all M1’s weigh 67.5t cuz the M1A2 SEP V2 weigh that much
Blockhaj just said the Core was 8mm Tungsten,
The round weighs 0.12kg - 0.08kg(HE-I load around the AP) so it weighs 0.04kg
Edit: Forgot some 0s
Last time i asked mods they said it wasn’t the 2007 model but somewhere in between, guess we’ll need to bug report it. I dont have the info currently nor the time since im working on the F 35 rn
1 Like
I’d say even less concearning there is the “nose” of projectile and casing itself.
And also it… doesn’t make much sense, because 0.12kg is 120g, of which 8g is HE-I filler, so the rest (112g) is for core, nose and casing of the projectile.
Yeah problem is the old BAE link for the 2007 model has been replaced with the new link for the later models so its annoying. If i had a few more sources and more time id bug report it.
1 Like
