99% of people cant even be bothered to click a link
the whole
is just manipulative
Lol ‘manipulative’ who am I trying to manipulate? Am I incorrect? Did the Devs enact a bug report that was based on 0 sources or not?
*99% of people cant even read
That source though has no numbers for the turret rotation speed it’s just based on a hunch
Because its citing a source that confirms it had it? I’m not sure what you’re getting at;
6 Likes
this makes 0 sense
the ram is powered by the r-975
i know that tank encyclopedia is not a good source, but why the hell would this one particular variant of the ram recieve an engine that is twice as powerful? to me it looks like the source is mistaken (the guy writing it probably heard “ram is powered by a plane engine” and just went with this for some reason)
pretty sure the cyclone was never used in any ground vehicles? i could be wrong tho
Because it does?
Your tank encyclopedia is wrong.
3 Likes
good to know that but…
that doesnt really look it would fit inside the ram
btw if the engine is right - then the model is wrong
1 Like
There is a track record of mistakes in Canadian documentation. This is another example of it.
Not a single variant of the Ram used a different engine. After all, if it were possible to put that much better of an engine in the Ram, you’d think it would have been in one of the production variants.
2 Likes
The engine itself is, trusting online sources, is not that much bigger. The in game model has a bunch of things around it.
seems like it
i dont think the cyclone would even fit, the r-975 is already a snug fit
Continental R-975 is 45 inches in diameter
R-1820 Cyclone is 55 inches
so it is a difference, not sure how much of a difference it would make tho
Tbh, there are multiple reasons why you would put a new engine into a single, test/prototype vehicle. For example the engine might be tested to be found not reliable, might have fuel efficiency problems etc.
Right, the issue is one document that states that it has it, compared to literally everything else saying otherwise.
On top of it, it was done overseas, away from access to the engine in question(considering the tank the engine was mounted on in question never made it to Europe, so spares wouldn’t have been available(not that Canada would have access to US stock)). On top of the heavy changes to the engine bay, which were clearly not done, else it be noticable do to the cast hull. The only thing done was cutting the upper hull off. Plus, testing was too limited for an upgrade like that to even have been considered.
We’ve been over this on Discord a lot. The documentation is wrong, and it’s not the one piece of Canadian documentation that has issues that bad.
edit: I was mastaken and it was done in Canada, for some reason I thought it was all done in the UK.
4 Likes
Shhhh! 🤫
I won one of these in the Christmas cupcake things. I don’t want the ludicrous engine getting reverted now
Manufacturer sources for the Eurofighter were denied because they seemed unrealistic, aka “marketing lies”. A similar thing happened with the most recent EFT Radar.
I dont see why the Ram can’t be held to the same standard, 800hp is ridiculous and makes zero sense
6 Likes
Is there a better APFSDS that the Ajax could get ??
Nope, limited by the total round length of 255mm, the need for a tip and fin section. And having a tracer at the end takes away possible penetrator length too.
Currently no, but the actual specs of the current APFSDS may be underperforming
In the meantime, im still waiting for gaijin to fix it’s mantlet armour