I've been interested in the East German military for years, partly just as a contrarian (it seems like every other era of modern or early-modern German military gets massive attention). So it's just so much fun to see them get some serious solid focus
I don't remember being able to see the moon through thermals IRL. It doesn't really give off any heat. I don't think you could see it on an A3 Bradley, and they use FLIR
@@letsgotactical2435 The question is: Which type of thermals are people using NOWADAYS. Most thermal images these days are FLIR, but the Bradley didn't have FLIR back in 1985, just straight thermals. The image quality was nowhere near as detailed as what the modern Bradley or Abrams use. I have no doubt that the devs have done all the necessary research. I was just questioning it because I never thought to look at the moon using thermals IRL. I have looked at the Sun by accident before.
Yep. Manage to penetrate hull bottom as this T-72 just started climbing small bump. Lucky 25mm AP-I pass thru 20mm of bottom armour and struck one of HE- Frag shells in ammunition carousel. Proper lucky shot. 😄
It looked like the round went right through the turret ring. There are a couple of spots you can hit on a T55 that will kill it. But, in my experience, they're very specific and you're better off just chucking a missile at it. It's actually easier to kill a T72 with the 25mm providing that it's a flank shot
@@99bimmer you can kill T-72 with 14.5mm MG found on BRDM and BTR-60, if you shoot the lower side hull near where the lower ammo carousel is you can get a shot through after trying for a short time
Why do you think that 50x228mm ammo would be carried less than 35x228mm ammo when the only difference is that the 50x228mm is just a necked up full bore 35x228mm, the casing diameter is the same for both rounds which means that if the width isn’t any different and the 50x228mm height is barely even taller, you might as well go for the more powerful option since using less shots to destroy vehicles is better, because which is better, going gradually from 30 to 35 to 40 to 45 or so on or making a big leap from 30 to 50mm or maybe it’s just me preferring even numbers, like I mean do you prefer autocannon cartridge projectile numbers to be even or odd? Also, how much of a huge upgrade do you think 120x570mmR is over 105x617mmR? I think it was a big and important upgrade. Anyways, good content
Yes , you right on that one. Bulk of cartridges will be roughly the same. My point is about general concept of employment of auto-canon. 35mm will feel to operate as beefed up 30mm , but 50mm more like medium artillery. And 35mm AP-I may have actually better performance then 50mm one. (More powder to propel smaller round giving it bigger kinetic energy) Regarding NATO 120mm. It is apparently designed effect of German research on what is maximum practical weight, length and bulk of tank round to be effectively and rapidly hand loaded. Anything heavier then 20kg is getting difficult for loader to handle. Shorter length is beneficial , as rounds in turret bustle are stored with warheads pointing away from crew compartment and need to be “flip” before going to breach. Obviously 120mm is better concept then 105mm as it been developed to replace former but apparently US 105mm DU M833 had better performance then German Tungsten 120mm DM23 . It was probably due self-sharpening effect of DU and more mature development of US round. Way of development for future tanks gonna be probably autoloader with 130mm Rheinmetal gun or maybe some 120mm “magnum” rounds with longer case , allowing to use longer Sabot penetrator and have more “powder” behind it.
@@letsgotactical2435 oh ok, I mean, I’m pretty sure the 50x228mm is using APFSDS-T not AP-I, after all, if you are on land, you use APFSDS for more penetration than AP-I. Ok, here’s an idea, how about 50x228mm Chain guns for land vehicles and 35x228mm guns for aircraft?
I've been interested in the East German military for years, partly just as a contrarian (it seems like every other era of modern or early-modern German military gets massive attention). So it's just so much fun to see them get some serious solid focus
1:57 "Gunner SABOT... Chopper?" 😳
Comander called ammo type already in gun breach. When Mi-24 charging you any second is important to start firing back.
Imagine if there was infantry and the commander said “GUNNER SABOT SOLDIER”
I don't remember being able to see the moon through thermals IRL. It doesn't really give off any heat. I don't think you could see it on an A3 Bradley, and they use FLIR
Good point. 👍
Just google it and apparently you can see moon in thermal camera.
@@letsgotactical2435 Hmm. Must be the wavelength of the light
They mentioned long waves infrared.
@@letsgotactical2435 The question is: Which type of thermals are people using NOWADAYS. Most thermal images these days are FLIR, but the Bradley didn't have FLIR back in 1985, just straight thermals. The image quality was nowhere near as detailed as what the modern Bradley or Abrams use. I have no doubt that the devs have done all the necessary research. I was just questioning it because I never thought to look at the moon using thermals IRL. I have looked at the Sun by accident before.
4:39 WHAT
tell me you have the AAR report from that
Yep. Manage to penetrate hull bottom as this T-72 just started climbing small bump.
Lucky 25mm AP-I pass thru 20mm of bottom armour and struck one of HE- Frag shells in ammunition carousel.
Proper lucky shot. 😄
@@letsgotactical2435 Luckiest shot ever period 😀
It looked like the round went right through the turret ring. There are a couple of spots you can hit on a T55 that will kill it. But, in my experience, they're very specific and you're better off just chucking a missile at it. It's actually easier to kill a T72 with the 25mm providing that it's a flank shot
@@99bimmer you can kill T-72 with 14.5mm MG found on BRDM and BTR-60, if you shoot the lower side hull near where the lower ammo carousel is you can get a shot through after trying for a short time
i need multiplayer
It is planned.
Please check link to GHPC development roadmap.
gunnerheatpc.com/news/articles/ghpc-early-access-roadmap
Why do you think that 50x228mm ammo would be carried less than 35x228mm ammo when the only difference is that the 50x228mm is just a necked up full bore 35x228mm, the casing diameter is the same for both rounds which means that if the width isn’t any different and the 50x228mm height is barely even taller, you might as well go for the more powerful option since using less shots to destroy vehicles is better, because which is better, going gradually from 30 to 35 to 40 to 45 or so on or making a big leap from 30 to 50mm or maybe it’s just me preferring even numbers, like I mean do you prefer autocannon cartridge projectile numbers to be even or odd? Also, how much of a huge upgrade do you think 120x570mmR is over 105x617mmR? I think it was a big and important upgrade. Anyways, good content
Yes , you right on that one. Bulk of cartridges will be roughly the same. My point is about general concept of employment of auto-canon. 35mm will feel to operate as beefed up 30mm , but 50mm more like medium artillery.
And 35mm AP-I may have actually better performance then 50mm one. (More powder to propel smaller round giving it bigger kinetic energy)
Regarding NATO 120mm. It is apparently designed effect of German research on what is maximum practical weight, length and bulk of tank round to be effectively and rapidly hand loaded. Anything heavier then 20kg is getting difficult for loader to handle. Shorter length is beneficial , as rounds in turret bustle are stored with warheads pointing away from crew compartment and need to be “flip” before going to breach.
Obviously 120mm is better concept then 105mm as it been developed to replace former but apparently US 105mm DU M833 had better performance then German Tungsten 120mm DM23 . It was probably due self-sharpening effect of DU and more mature development of US round. Way of development for future tanks gonna be probably autoloader with 130mm Rheinmetal gun or maybe some 120mm “magnum” rounds with longer case , allowing to use longer Sabot penetrator and have more “powder” behind it.
@@letsgotactical2435 oh ok, I mean, I’m pretty sure the 50x228mm is using APFSDS-T not AP-I, after all, if you are on land, you use APFSDS for more penetration than AP-I. Ok, here’s an idea, how about 50x228mm Chain guns for land vehicles and 35x228mm guns for aircraft?