As stated in this report, the BMP-1 needs to have its optics replaced before water operations thus it should not be able to swim, however the report was denied
This is no different to the M113 chassis requiring a small splash curtain around the engine (and there are multiple videos of M113s in the water without said splash curtain)
What are these double standards?
That’s because the M113 is not in-game, at least players can’t operate it, M163 VADS is relatively heavier than the base M113 variant which requires more preparation for amphibious operation than BMP-1 like sealing the turret ring, something that BMP-1 doesn’t need and M113 doesn’t have a turret to be sealed. @Jadenbetter-live arguments falls short since all military vehicles need to go under safety check before operations,
BMP-1 isn’t special on that regard, such things like valve intakes, engine parts changing also are done before operations, not in the field. Regarding the turret position, the only moment that it needed to be positioned in the user manual I’ve found since it wasn’t detailed nor explicit said which manual, what pages and so on I couldn’t check myself, is the loading procedure of the cannon, which is required to elevate the gun in +3°:
To load, the autoloader arm hinges upwards, and the grenade is pitched forward over the gunner’s right shoulder and into the breech. To load, the cannon must be elevated by +3 degrees.
Since anything is done before operations, return the M163 VADS amphibious capability but its turret must remain stuck for the whole time during the match if the player wanted to drive through a deep body of water, considering there are no field modifications in the game, yet.
See also:
The arguments used in the video as why the BMP-1 wouldn’t be so effective in water doesn’t correlate in War Thunder: water conditions, soil condition, crew experience, vehicle and parts maintenance and preparation are not in-game, yet if it’s ever considered, maybe never will be.
The YouTube video uses the Handbuch für mot.Schützen II Schützenpanzer. 1. Auflage as primary source, the image above attached are the listed equipments that is needed for the function of the vehicle in amphibious operations, most of which are already inside the vehicle and part of those that the crew can operate without leaving the vehicle.
Going to be honest, i only reported to see the response i’d get
im not looking to remove the BMP bc i assumed even if it would be removed they’d change the rules to allow it
It was also a Dev or Alpha tester that shut down the report if you are interested
It does say it needs to be left at 3° but also later talks about firing the gun so it may just be for the additional sight replacement
You will note in the report that i excluded the safety checks when it came to the overall time and stated how it’d be less time without them and said how long they test for
It used to be able to float in game but now cant, i was also not looking to buff the M163 specifically but instead another vehicle that is extremely similar to the BMPs case, hence the report on the bmp
Its done just before entering the water as its then undone when exiting
Your own image shows some of the required field changes for being amphibious like the rope over the doors and hatches, that blocks the crew and infantry from entering and exiting, its also stated that crew should only leave through the drivers hatch and that all other hatches can only be used in an emergency
However some of the preparations are done by the driver in his seat which are minimal, such as the float screen at the front to block waves
The BMP does not need additional equipment before entering but it does need external changes before entering and after exiting water for safety of the crew and the vehicles own integrity
Like one hatch is stated it needs to be open for swimming which can only be done externally i believe
and the rest is my above comment
Its an arcade game. Stuff like 2S1 (iirc) also can’t swim even though they should be able to.
Yeah it was denied for the above reasons
link to report
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/4aTpuQJsQ4hM
It’s good to see you take the reigns of TIGER_TANK.
There are no double standards.
The optics are replaced every time you hit “to battle”.
For the BMP to be operational in the water the optics need to be changed just before entering the water and then changed after exiting
There is a substantial difference as its noted to keep the barrel above 3° as to not damage it but im not sure how prevalent that is once swimming or firing because it also says to keep the gun left which we know isnt required from images
The image I’ve attached shows no rope or any other field adjustments, if you’re referring to item 13, that’s the intake strainer, has nothing to do with blocking off entrances, that would be a safety issue since in case of emergency the crew would use their respective hatches as exit points and the troops using the rear chassis roof hatches and the rear doors would remain closed to reduce the risk of further flooding in case of a emergency. As you said BMP-1 does not need additional equipment but preparation regardless something that it’s not done in-game regardless of the vehicle.
As the original post mentioned requires a splash curtain around the engine but also other additional equipment that’s not in the vehicle in-game, and in the case of the M163 VADS also needs sealing of the turret ring the gun would either need to be positioned to the left @90° horitzontal, or and fully elevating the cannon above the rear in normal operational conditions, using the Operator’s manual (crew) for Gun, Air defense artillery, Self-propelled 20-mm, M163 (TM-9-2350-300-10) (pg. 71 (archived document), 2-59 & 2-60 (book)):
What I mean is: M163 needs a lot more of preparation compared to the BMP-1, either is in-game limitation to add the equipament or developer’s decision, I don’t know, knowing these requirements is midly fair the removal of the capacity for now. If the developers further add to other vehicles a way to adapt to a situation in the middle of the match, then nice, return the M163 amphibious capability.
So? What does this has to do with my argument? In my entire post I didn’t said M163 wasn’t capable of being amphibious, my entire point was regarding the BMP-1 at first. Since you mentioned, this footage was taken from a training procedure which does take in account everything I’ve mentioned and the page of the document used as source to remove the amphibious capability (The engine covers on the back, turret pointed to the rear and so on). (Source)
I did forget to say: Manual recommendations are not going to be taken seriously.
Never have been.
It’s why aircraft in general aren’t G-limited to their safe levels. [7.4 for F-18 as an example.]
This standard has been challenged countless times & stayed the same.
You’re not going to cause Gaijin to change this standard, nor implement a double standard where BMP-1 has to do something while aircraft get to over-G beyond safe G-loads.
It doesn’t need to. The driver has an optional TNP-350B periscope with a bit of extra clearance height to make visibility a bit easier, but its not a requirement, the TNPO-170A and TVNE-1PA can be used perfectly fine.
Its also a very quick swap anyway since its mounted on the inside of the vehicle.
As per your image there is rope or “towing cables” that stretch around and reportedly onto the turret according to the manual tho this image does not illustrate such
But as you can see its required to thread that through according to the manual and attaches to you buoy
Not shown is any other changes required such as “hatch 36”
Theres more to that and not relevant here as on most planes, non fbw, there is no limit you cant get to until your plane literally falls apart, its just in the manual to not do it
Manual makes it out as a necessity but ofc they want safe usage
But given the huge steel plate thats extended ahead of you it is likely important to see where you are going
I assumed as such and so only really chalked it up to a 1-2 minute job, nothing really demanding
I would like to clarify im not advocating for the removal of the swimming or proving double standards, i simply want to understand what is considered “Preparation before entering water” and “Additional equipment” which are reasons vehicles have been denied/lost their swimming abilities
The default periscope can see above the wave breaker straight ahead perfectly fine, the TNP-350B only adds something like 10cm of height for a bit of extra downward vision. But its a BMP, there’s no visibility below the nose in road configuration either.
With or without the TNP-350B, the driver relies on guidance from the Gunner (or Commander in the BMP-2) anyway.
Its just practice to swap over when the crew have the luxury of stopping for a moment, but not required to.
The extra height also reduces the periscope field of view somewhat, so its generally up to the crew if they want the extra height or the wider field of view for navigating.
Fair, im not sure what gaijin do for this, stick to manual or go with minimum requirements bc sticking with manual would result in a few issues but minimum leaves the door open to a lot more given the research
Its like the Ka-Chi ingame, it has optional addon floats but its amphibious either way. The floats were really only required for rougher open sea conditions. In ingame calm conditions, the minimum requirement for floating doesn’t need them.
Those are only requirements depending on the situation if required, or somewhere in your source does it states “It’s required at least 2 infantry fighting vehicles BMP-1 to operate in water environment”? Just like in the Operator’s manual (crew) for Gun, Air defense artillery, Self-propelled 20-mm, M163 (TM-9-2350-300-10), the gun positioning and other requirements can be ignored if the situation doesn’t permit so as listed in Driving Cautions:
Which in case of the BMP-1, towing is a condition, not a requirement and so there’s no rope holding off the hatches making impossible entrance or exitting the vehicle according to your source ИНСТРУКЦИЯ ПО ЭКСПЛУАТАЦИИ БОЕВОЙ МАШИНЫ ПЕХОТЫ БМП-1 (1970) Part 1 (pg. 32 (archived document) and pg. 32 (book)) and even we go all the way to remove BMP-1s’ amphibious capability just because it needs TNP-350B (which is just a higher driver’s periscope, since the wave deflector may block off its view) this would be a huge stretch compared to the M163 VADS requirement. Do I like that M163 VADS amphibious capability was removed? No. War Thunder is a semi-realistic game that tries to work between playable and realism, how developers handle this are not my problem.
I assume thats not all the conditions for floating the M163 as that is less than the BMP1 which needs to do the exact same and more
i believe its required so they are accessible and as to not damage them
It may be for safety too as the crew would be able to grab it much easier than smooth metal
it’s a game not irl if you want irl make it in arma
