Ground vehicles Flakpanzer Gepard

[ThrustVector 1,291]

This.  :good:

 

plz god no, no god plz. 3unfair5me

[Desolator7 267]

plz god no, no god plz. 3unfair5me

 

ZSU-57.  :facepalm:

[ThrustVector 1,291]

ZSU-57.  :facepalm:

 

That thing is fine facing jets. 1970's uber stronk SPAAG is not.

[kev2go 5,112]

That thing is fine facing jets. 1970's uber stronk SPAAG is not.

 

agreed.

 

 

"The thing is that AF have a cutoff date at around 1955, while GF can go up to 1970. Read latest DEV's Q&A compilation. They explained that."

 

 

In the q/a ceo said aircraft into the 60s are possible. and the old cutoff was 1953 not 1955.

 

so no mach 2.0 jets fine ok, but  mach 1.2 F100A/C/D super sabres should be added. And whatever, im ok if the ussr can get thier Mig17F, Mig19 and Mig19S to counter them.

 

F-100D would have some limited anti sead capabilties with agm12 bullpop joystick guided missile and the agm84 shrike anti radiation missile.

 

US Navy could get a A6 Intruder attack aircraft with similar capabilities.

 

 

 

Edited August 28, 2015 by kev2go

[VojtaCZE 6]

+1 Yes This will be counterbalance against Shilka :)

[Desolator7 267]

That thing is fine facing jets. 1970's uber stronk SPAAG is not.

 

"uber stronk" You say on the Leopard 1 chassis? 70mm of armor too stronk for your mighty T-10M? Or do you want no counter if Russia gets the Shika so they can have another advantage in T5. Seriously this thing will only be a much better Coelian if anything which is also a driving ammo rack. People over-value things like these because post-war = god right?

[Desolator7 267]

 

agreed.

 

 

"The thing is that AF have a cutoff date at around 1955, while GF can go up to 1970. Read latest DEV's Q&A compilation. They explained that."

 

 

In the q/a ceo said aircraft into the 60s are possible. and the old cutoff was 1953 not 1955.

 

so no mach 2.0 jets fine ok, but  mach 1.2 F100A/C/D super sabres should be added. And whatever, im ok if the ussr can get thier Mig17F, Mig19 and Mig19S to counter them.

 

F-100D would have some limited anti sead capabilties with agm12 bullpop joystick guided missile and the agm84 shrike anti radiation missile.

 

US Navy could get a A6 Intruder attack aircraft with similar capabilities.

 

 

 

 

 

No guided missiles period.

[ThrustVector 1,291]

"uber stronk" You say on the Leopard 1 chassis? 70mm of armor too stronk for your mighty T-10M? Or do you want no counter if Russia gets the Shika so they can have another advantage in T5. Seriously this thing will only be a much better Coelian if anything which is also a driving ammo rack. People over-value things like these because post-war = god right?

 

Umm... I was talking about it's AA abilities and guns, not about the armor. Any sane person would keep their SPAAG out of sight of the enemy.

[Desolator7 267]

Umm... I was talking about it's AA abilities and guns, not about the armor. Any sane person would keep their SPAAG out of sight of the enemy.

 

It's literally a stronger Coelian how OP is that? 

[kev2go 5,112]

No guided missiles period.

 

lel why not agm12 bullpop is a joystick guided. not fire and forget. 

 

guided missiles are coming for ground forces AFVS. Agtm Missiles.  So no  the " NAUUU guided missiles"of any sort argument is out the window.

Edited August 29, 2015 by kev2go

[ThrustVector 1,291]

It's literally a stronger Coelian how OP is that? 

 

Very OP. It's a 1970's SPAAG going against subsonic aircraft that it would have never met.

[Desolator7 267]

Very OP. It's a 1970's SPAAG going against subsonic aircraft that it would have never met.

 

Without working radar, with a slower rate of fire than the Kugel which is probably the best SPAA in this game right now because of its firerate and gun caliber. The only advantage I see that the Gepard has is its mobility (being the Leo chassis) and the gun's velocity.

lel why not agm12 bullpop is a joystick guided. not fire and forget. 

 

guided missiles are coming for ground forces AFVS. Agtm Missiles.  So no  the " NAUUU guided missiles"of any sort argument is out the window.

 

I meant air to air missiles* Sorry not ATGMs that are wireguided or unguided my bad.

[kev2go 5,112]

Without working radar, with a slower rate of fire than the Kugel which is probably the best SPAA in this game right now because of its firerate and gun caliber. The only advantage I see that the Gepard has is its mobility (being the Leo chassis) and the gun's velocity.

 

I meant air to air missiles* Sorry not ATGMs that are wireguided or unguided my bad.

 

agm12 isnt air to air but rather air to ground missile, thats guided by joystick adjustments.its not fire and forget. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-12_Bullpup

[Desolator7 267]

agm12 isnt air to air but rather air to ground missile, thats guided by joystick adjustments.its not fire and forget. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-12_Bullpup

 

I'd like to see that. If you've ever played Battlefield and have the TV guided missile upgrade I think it'd be like that  :yes:

[kev2go 5,112]

I'd like to see that. If you've ever played Battlefield and have the TV guided missile upgrade I think it'd be like that  :yes:

 

except there would be no tv on a jet like the F100, or a navy attack aircraft like the A6 intruder at least not the 60s intrunder.

 

the pilot would have nothing but a gunsight.

Edited August 29, 2015 by kev2go

[Desolator7 267]

except there would be no tv on a jet like the F100, or a navy attack aircraft like the A6 intruder at least not the 60s intrunder.

 

the pilot would have nothing but a gunsight.

 

Real skill man

[Azumazi 2,848]

Real skill man

Pretty much gotta guide it down like the Fritz-X bomb, with the mark 1 eyeball and a small adjustment here and there.

[Desolator7 267]

Pretty much gotta guide it down like the Fritz-X bomb, with the mark 1 eyeball and a small adjustment here and there.

 

Frtiz-X had a nice flare to help though

[PointyPuffin 5,065]

Yes please.

 

At least the first version.

 

Also the devs said that it may be included, which is giving me hopes for that.

[swpixy 1,220]

I dont see why not.If its an early version,then this would not be a problem.A combined System ROF of 1100 RPM (550 per gun) with 340 RPG (IIRC) is not that high compared to the other things that have been confirmed (Shilka,VADS,Falcon),and its radar/rangefinding functions would almost certainly be disabled if its introduced anyway.So what that would leave us with is a SPAAG that has less ROF and ammo capacity than its competitors,but more damage on hit,slightly higher range and possibly light anti-armor capabilities (If given FAPDS ammo).

[Packal 7,644]

Switching between 2 types of ammo is under 2s :Ps Edited August 31, 2015 by Packal

[arczer25 5,202]

they stated in lastest Q&A

https://warthunder.com/en/devblog/current/816

 

 

6. Any further development of SPAA planned? Any top rank vehicles maybe?

Answer: "Yes it’s planned. Currently top SPAA’s lack fire density and fire rate to fight jets. Most likely we will introduce “Shilka” for USSR, “Vulcan” for USA, “Falcon” for Britain and perhaps “Gepard” for Germany - but not certain about this one, it used complex systems."

Edited August 31, 2015 by arczer25

[_Sync 1,028]

they stated in lastest Q&A

https://warthunder.com/en/devblog/current/816

 

 

6. Any further development of SPAA planned? Any top rank vehicles maybe?

Answer: "Yes it’s planned. Currently top SPAA’s lack fire density and fire rate to fight jets. Most likely we will introduce “Shilka” for USSR, “Vulcan” for USA, “Falcon” for Britain and perhaps “Gepard” for Germany - but not certain about this one, it used complex systems."

gaijoob yyy

[Warlord1981NL 2,235]

With the Leopard and other cold-war tanks appearing, I don't see any reason for this not to be considered.

 

Open for discussion :salute:

 

Does this mean we can propose any cold war weapons?

[YippeeKiYay_ 2,216]

Does this mean we can propose any cold war weapons?

Most things up until 1970 has a chance for ground vehicles.