Comments by "whya2ndaccount" (@whya2ndaccount) on "Military History not Visualized" channel.

  1. If you are engaging glacis plate to glacis plate, you need a retest on your tactics. The engine is there for a reason, you manoeuvre to engage the enemy from a flank.
    1
  2. Scimitar doesn't have an auto cannon. It fires clips with 3 rounds of ammunition. Scorpion has a low velocity 76mm gun with HESH, HE, Smoke and Canister. Of course if they appeared, they'd come with yet another logistic burden.
    1
  3. For those who like it, great. I'm afraid I remain a fan of eSim's Steel Beasts for modern simulation.
    1
  4. Leo 1 is around 42 Tonne so not really "light". :) Leo 2 is around 62 Tonne.
    1
  5.  @UsoundsGermany  OK the Leo 1 A0 was 40T - agreed not 42T but still not "light".
    1
  6.  @UsoundsGermany  I never said it wasn't an MBT?? In the video its says its "light" 9:20 - 10:20 (in terms of real world weight not "waste of time" fantasy definitions), which is why I made the comment. Jez, if I known it was going to become so complex I would have let it slide since you at least weren't listening.
    1
  7. Sounds like one presenter is very keen for ramming and the other two say "your joking!" Certainly in almost 40 years on AFVs we never thought of ramming as a tactic. Bruises and scraped paint maybe. Maybe in "Total War" but not now. Nice shirt by the way. :)
    1
  8. Also "mobility" doesn't necessarily equal "manoeuvre warfare" (OODA loop, etc.)
    1
  9.  @markfryer9880  This was at Mount Bundey, NT. We burnt them.
    1
  10. Love the content but its unfortunate (in my opinion) that you need to rely on that sponsor.
    1
  11.  chris younts  Sure - probably a better tank sim too.
    1
  12.  @squashiejoshie200000  A real simulation product has maps that are say 15km x 15km (or larger) and don't use ranks / levels whatever. War Chunder's "simulation" mode, whilst better than "Waste of Time" should just be renamed "hard arcade". Things like DCS and Steel Beasts are simulations, not these two junk products.
    1
  13. @Lurking Carrier Pretty sure both WOT and WT have the word "simulation" or "realistic" on their web sites. War Thunder: "collaborate in realistic competitive battles."
    1
  14.  @gooberone  Um yes it is. Here in Australia the publisher of such documents is just as responsible / liable as the "leaker".
    1
  15.  @corneliusmcmuffin3256  I'm well aware. We train for engagements from effectively 0m (coax, canister, etc.) out to 3,500m+ with APFSDS. A 15km x 15km map however allows you to manouevre prior to the fight. Having a map that is less than 1km x 1km is less than my M1 boresights (the process used to zero the gun) at. Even our old Leopard 1A3s (which are allegedly "modeled"in both products) boresighted at 1,000m, so thinking 400m is a long range shot is nonsense (at that range its just point and shoot, no laser range finder or any aides at all). Let alone this idea of numerous hits to destroy a tank.
    1
  16.  @jamestheotherone742  Perhaps but the video refers to "galvanising the plates" (implying coating of all 6 surfaces), not just the washes / bushes / plugs, etc. Not a huge point and I'm not too concerned over it.
    1
  17. Since you are talking to an Australian, maybe "armour"? Sounds like some good stuff coming out of ADFA.
    1
  18. Unsure what a Stug's muzzle cap was made of, but HE rounds tend to arm on setback (i.e. the force of firing the round activates the fuse) so an armed HE round hitting a substantial metal muzzle cap might be "interesting" (risk of detonating the now unsafe outgoing HE round). The MX's common name was "peacekeeper" from memory.
    1
  19.  @dnfixjd  Not here it isn't - its a course. Yes you learn on the job as well, but you can't fill the seat until you are qualified. Crewman Driver Sig or Crewman Gunner Sig, etc.
    1