Understandable, I was pretty confused as to where that reply was directed.
Which wouldn’t be an issue at 9.7, or even 10.0/10.3 now that plenty of vehicles were moved up.
At 8.3…? Absolutely not.
Smin isn’t a developer, nor is he responsible for forwarding suggestions. You give suggestions to technical moderators and they alone respond to them.
Unless it’s an issue report in the forums… In which he typically explains that it isn’t a bug, it should be posted on the actual issues website, or that it has been forwarded directly to developers.
The KF51 was built off a 2A4’s chassis, and has remained as such for the decade that it has existed.
There is absolutely nothing stating that there is a new hull in the works for the KF51, as it is entirely designed to be an upgrade for existing Leopard 2s, primarily exports.
You mean the Skyranger? The modular weapon system designed to be used on another company’s vehicle?
Rheinmetall is at HEAVY risk of bankruptcy. 51% of their income is from shares, only yielding a 0.07% profit margin.
They’re currently $520M in debt and barely scraping by with a $291k income per year. They still have close to $5.6B in contracts to uphold… Hell, their z-score has inflated egregiously in the last 4 years on top of that.
the standard gepard at 8,3 is physicaly unable to shoot fapds either way
its specialy done for the gepard1a2, still gajin doesnt like it
the old forums had other ways to report bugs, suggestions etc
the fapds was included in it and they did acknowledge it and aware of it
first should clarifiy , the current KF51 is never meaned as a complete new gen tank. Its more of an interim to until the MGS, furthermore even with a leo 2a4 chassis a lot can be done.
Just look at the leo 2 arc 3.0 where the 2a4 chassis is modified for a completly enclosed safety bubble for the crew and be unmanned in the turret.
It is the same for the KF51, the chassis is being modernised in the case of the KF51 a modified Büffel chassis.
And thats not mentioning how rheinmetall is working on completly new chassius as well-
as of now the leopard chassis is still one of the best ones in the world.
yes an upgrade but not necesarily a completly new gen one
and? where is the problem with that, thats a completly valid thing as well. its still hugely succesful
same as everyone and their mother using rheinmetall cannons or licensed versions of it
not that knowledgable in that area, but highly doubt it, one of the reasons for low profit is a lot going straight into development / a lot of open projects new fabrics being built etc
Agreed, though Gaijin has never made a statement on the addition of FAPDS.
And again, I’ve already given you quotes from Smin from the old forum’s suggestions. Not a single negative comment towards it, nor preventing it from reaching developers.
A lot can be done with the 2A4 chassis, but that’s irrelevant to the point that RhMB does not have the funding nor support to pursue new designs or projects. GmbH has overtaken that in its entirety, specifically due to RhmB’s insanely poor financial situation in the mid '20th century. Now KNDS is the frontrunner.
The Leo 2 ARC 3.0 isn’t an RhmB venture, that’s purely KNDS. Between GmbH and Nexter, Rheinmetall has no hand in this.
I can’t help but think that such drastic changes couldn’t be made with RhmB behind the wheel, especially with the technology needed to convert an old platform into a remote turret MBT.
What modernizations are being done to the KF51 that represent any tangible improvement?
Ah yes, RhmB being relegated the inexpensive and hilariously cheap upgrade of BPz 3s… I’m sure it means a lot that they’re simply upgrading electronic systems on a 32 year old recovery vehicle.
Again, what new chassis?
On what basis? It’s incapable of mounting the latest GmbH-MB engine systems without MAJOR reconstruction that’s detrimental to the vehicle, as well as an armor array that banks on composites that are quickly becoming negated.
the first picture literaly said they didnt do it for balancing reasons
an example from me what can be done with a leopard chassis, never claimed rheinmetall was part of it
the büffel is an already modified leopard chassis, u are aware of that right? it is easiyl further modified, thats why my example of the leo 2 arc3.0, they are doing more then electronics
which is being done to the 2a8 partialy, so not sure what u want
we both know thats marketing overdoing.
The KF51 is meaned as a 4th gen mbt. With the APS system as well as the 130mm which they propably meaned in this advertisment
MGCS aims at 5th gen i would say
“They can sometimes be added later if required for balancing. Currently its intended for this vehicle to not have FAPDS.”
2 years ago.
F-16s weren’t in the game, MiG-29s weren’t in the game, based model Su-25s had only been added 2 months prior… Even then they lacked the capability to engage beyond 3-4km.
You responded to my statement on Rheinmetall by deflecting to the KF51. It’s objectively horrible and a massive tell as to how disconnected from reality German bureaucrats are.
Are you saying you’re steering the conversation off-topic?
Yes, and it was modified during a time that Rheinmetall was somewhat successful. Now it isn’t, and the most they can manage is making minor support equipment and converting Nexter battlefield management systems to their own.
The Leopard 2A8 still uses the 873. No powerplant changes are being incorporated even when there are more reliable and powerful packages.
KMW upgrades Leopards with APS, RhmB does not.
KDA produces the Protector, RhmB does not.
Can you tell me what involvement RhmB has in the 2A8? Last I checked the only thing they’ve done to the Leopard in prior history was equip 2A6M 2s and 2A7s with their ACM systems, though had nothing to do with the Rh120’s DSM… the primary upgrade of the FCS.
I know for a fact it’s Rheinmetall’s words from their CEO, who is about as trustworthy as an American Democrat speaking economy.
Again, it’s even more reason to trust Rheinmetall less than GD.
Another KND project! Fun!
What does this do for your argument?
If SPAAs become immune to all ground munitions then I can see removing all non air rounds for SPAAs(or maybe if all players collective agree to stop shooting SPAAs)
Until then, they have to be able to defend themselves.
