We want it, and on that they should always base their decisions.
If Gaijin didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all.
We want it, and they could just ignore it. Its up to them to decide what to add.
1 Like
We as a Community honestly need more say in this imo.
My sources were denied, again.
Everything i provided here is not enought evidence to support that it proceeded past Mock-up stage. So as i promised here is everything i used, i would like to hear your feedback, if maybe i was the delusional one all the time. or maybe this is convincing enough.
Copy of what I shared with Suggestion Moderation
Full analysis of all the sources, so it is clear what I want to point out when it comes to every source. Sources will be talked about in chronological order.
Mockup era:
I decided to split this whole thing into 3 eras: mockup, prototype, and modern. This one will range in time between 1991 and 1992.
JDW 23/11/1991
This source is the earliest one talking about HVM, that I have acces to. It acknowledges that the vehicle is a mockup in its current state, and talks in a very rough detail about what it will become: “Two missiles would be in the ready-to-launch position each side of the turret” and “ZA-HVM would have the same surveillance and EO system as the ZA-35, but it could also have a tracking radar to engage beyond the range of optical tracking”. The same thing will be told in multiple different sources, so i will skip it then.
IDR 11/1991
Nothing new is told here, as at that time barely anything was known about the project, still talked in the future tense.
AF 11/1991
And again, nothing new here, still in the future tense.
MilTech 12/1991
Once again everythign here is in line with the previous sources, and the project is still in the future tense.
Forecast International 6/1996
Wait, wasn’t i supposed to include all the sources in chronological order, and doesent it come from 1996, so it would cancel my later sources. No. As can be seen in highlighted text: “ZA-HVM exists only in mockup form as of late 1991”. That meas that either Forecast have not gathered any data, or they were denied it, so their statement when it comes to HVM is, as they stated themselves, valid as of late 1991.
AI 1/1992
Sadly here also nothing new is said, and the project is also referred to in the future tense.
JLBAD 1992/1993
Once again, nothing new is said here, and the project is still refered to in the future tense.
Thankfully we are entering a era, where the project gets completed into a prototype stage, and more information about it is provided.
Prototype era:
Sources here come from between 1993 and 1997, and they talk about the HVM in current tense.
MT 7/1993
While at first glance this source has nothing to do with the HVM, it is not the case when we dive into it a little deeper. Article states that SAHV-3 can be fiered from Cactus, Kentron own turret and pedestal mount. At this point this also gives nothing, let me explain the connection. There are 3 known systems that could operate SAHV-3
Cactus
Pedastal mount, that is referd to this
And Kentron own turret, but do we know what it is? Yes. There is only one platform left associated with SAHV-3, and that is ZA-HVM turret
And ZA project, that is the turret mounted on the Rooikat chassis is made by none other than Kentron. That proves it is what the article talks about, and it talks in current tense, meaning it is able to fire them at that point in time.
JLBAD 1993-1994
That is the first source giving more information about the program. It gives information about search radar upgrade, informs details about the combined tracker, comfirming its installation and giving details about it. All of that is told to us in current tense, meaning once again that at the moment of writing that article the system can launch the missile. It also confirm stated in IDR statement, that the system can guide the missile both using laser and radio frequencies.
NTW 1/1994
Translation of the document
The most advanced solution, however, is the self-propelled version, whose turret was developed based on the proven ZA-35.
Instead of cannons and ammunition pods, hooks for pairs of launch containers were placed on both sides.
The turret is 2 tons lighter than the ZA-35 and it is planned to increase the number of missiles it can carry to 8.
The design of the turret itself has changed slightly, but a tracking radar has been added to the optronic system at the front, operating in the Ka-band (the Za-35 equipment may also be enriched in the future, giving it the ability to operate in bad weather conditions).
The dimensions of the radar station antenna have been slightly increased, the range of which has increased to 25 km.
The interior equipment has also been changed. The vehicle was given the name ZA-HVM and can be used to launch missiles of both types.
Work on this system is currently at an advanced stage and is expected to be completed in 3-4 years.
A full program of tests of the command-guided missile has already been carried out, as well as tests of launching the passive version at a short distance, without the use of initial radio guidance.
A prototype of a turret with 8 pods to be mounted on the chassis of a T-72 tank or a G-6 howitzer is to be ready soon, which is to additionally accommodate eight spare missiles automatically reloaded onto the launchers.
This source is the one that provides the most information about the project. It refers to it in the current tense. It states that the turret got slightly changed, it is 2 metric tones lighter compared to ZA-35 turret, it confirms combined tracker installation, explains in greater detail changes to search radar (it is enlarged). It also states that the project is at an advanced stage, with it going into production in 3-4 years. It also says that full program of tests was conducted, that means the vehicle had to be completed in order for the vechicle to be able to take part in these tests.
This source also provides a very valuable piece of information, that is schematic of the ZA-HVM.
ZA-35 schematic for comparison.
MT 11/1994
This source once again talks about the HVM in the current tense. It once again confirm SAHV-3 can be fiered from the ZA-HMV turret. It add additional information, liek the fact that the turret is simmilar to the one on ZA-35, but not identical, so it is in line with NTW changes to the turret, and it confirms it has combined tracker.
JIDR 7/1996
Another source that talks about it in the current tense. It confirms that missiles were fiered from it, so it is in line with other sources, and once again confirms instalation of combined tracker.
MT 2/1997
This source once again talks in current tense. It confirm it is armed with SAHV-3, and states that BOTH ZA-35 and ZA-HVM have a single prototype for each of them. The thing that might be weird in it, is it says it has the same tracking device as ZA-35, but that is correct, as ETS2400 has the same components as AA-EOT, but adds radar to them.
Modern era:
In this era all sources are over the year 2000, and ZA-HVM is a thing of the past at this point.
JLBAD 2003-2004
This variant of JLBAD states the same things as the 93-93 volume, expect of one thing, it changes status of the project from development to prototype, comfiriming it ended its life as one.
Surviving the Ride: A Pictorial History of South African-Manufactured Armoured Vehicles
This source is the first one to talk about it in the past tense. It confirm it used SAHV-3, that it used combined tracker and that both sytems had a single prototype of both of them built.
South African Armoured Fighting Vehicles: A History of Innovation and Excellence
This source is the last one i have, and it once again talks about it as a thing of the past. It confirms it used SAHV-3, that it could carry 4 of them, and that it used subsytems of ZA-35.
These are all the written sources that i managed to get.
Now i know what you are going to ask for, that will be pictures.
And i am unable to provide them, as there are none i was able to obtain, and most likely there are none that were release to the public. When it comes to ZA-35 system, all the pictures about it that were released to the public come from the original presentation of the system, no pictures were released in the later date. And when it comes to the pictures from the ZA-35 trials, they come from the private collection. If not the fact that their owner decided to share them, they would never be known to the public. It is possible that somewhere in this world there exists a ZA-HVM picture, but it is not publicly available. Thankfully NTW provided the schematics of the system, that will allow for modeling of the system, even with no pictures of it, as schematic represent the system in its completed state with all the details.
Another thing, if anyone who by any chance has anything talking about ZA-HVM, please share it here, i will be very thankfull for it, and i will try to work around it.
11 Likes
Seems like a very thorough and detailed investigation into this thing. If they have an S-37 suggestion on the forums then why not this which has some reasonable documentation over Wikipedia and some random article.
4 Likes
More evidence here than 90% of bug reports that get acknowledged
4 Likes
If Gaijin did what the players wanted, War Thunder would be an enjoyable game. It’s not. It’s just a symbol of Russian political warfare and pure greed.
3 Likes
could you show me the suggestion from start to finish?
there are some minor “standards” they want each suggestion to have and i may be able to help you with it. you can dm me if you wish for privacy?
The suggestion wont go anywhere, as what i provided above is not enough to convince them that it left mockup stage
i think you have enough evidence and even two pictures, you just need to put them at the front of the suggestion
I also thought so, but it is not.
Im having chat with Suggestion mods since the moment my original suggestion got passed, and the deleted
https://forum.warthunder.com/t/za-hvm-sharpshooters-spear-throwing-brother/107829
So nearly 2 months
in the meantime i found even more sources, but they are adamant as saying it is not real as of now.
link doesnt work?
It was deleted
it was approved, got over 100 votes in <12h, and then it was deleted.
3 Likes
was it a suggestion or a normal thread?
suggestion
1 Like
did you change the title without telling a mod?
i lost a suggestion this way lol
No, it was approved by mistake
1 Like
I made the suggestion with ~1/3 of sources i posted above, they approved it, then they deleted it and said it was a mistake. Since then i found more sources, but it is still not enough.
1 Like
My main problem here is that these things should be enough:
along with the schematic
But they are not
4 Likes