Tanks/Vehicles M247 Sergeant York (SPAA)

[MoldyThesaurus 680]

It would be a nice addition after the M42 Duster!  It's always nice to see an SPAA vehicle that can be protected from the machine guns of tanks and aircraft!

[BlitzkriegWulf 4,265]

The "Yenisei" would be great opponent to the "Sergeant"!!

 

I feel that although they're perhaps 15 years apart in development, that they would be decent counterparts.

 

It would be helpful if there was more stuff about it on wikipedia though, the ever-reliable source for everything (/s).

 

We are already meant to get both soon, so I see why we wouldn't be able to get this.

 

Everyone has been saying this recently, and I haven't found a source. Was this on a Q&A somewhere (I can't keep up with those- real life keeps me busy...), or was it a translated stream on reddit?

[GreenAid 944]

It was in the Q&A of the Falcon devblog.

[HardeKern 482]

nope.. nope.. nope.. just nope. if u wanna add it into the game, well there must a big overhaul in game first, First is Separate WW2 and Post War. like: War Thunder Modern Warfare and War Thunder: Classic as example. Than you can add lots of tanks into the postwar even blue prints which are cancelled or unfinished projects, to make it equal with post war. u can't compete with WW2 used/finished projects tanks against the Post war tanks. coz they have lots more technical enhancement / better armored stuff on the lead than ww2 tanks. 

[BlitzkriegWulf 4,265]

It was in the Q&A of the Falcon devblog.

 

Thanks mate :)

 

nope.. nope.. nope.. just nope. if u wanna add it into the game, well there must a big overhaul in game first, First is Separate WW2 and Post War. like: War Thunder Modern Warfare and War Thunder: Classic as example. Than you can add lots of tanks into the postwar even blue prints which are cancelled or unfinished projects, to make it equal with post war.

 

u can't compete with WW2 used/finished projects tanks against the Post war tanks. coz they have lots more technical enhancement / better armored stuff on the lead than ww2 tanks. 

 

You don't need a "Big overhaul", you need more tanks to force a BR spread, and the problem will sort itself. There are two things that war thunder needs: More players, more vehicles. The result of having one or even both would be astounding. 

 

And, I will disagree. Yes, there are certain situations where you are bound to loose no matter what you do. (At that point, I typically prefer to just not spawn... Saves repair cost, and there is no point in trying to prevent an inevitability.). I have killed many, many, many tanks with my WW II tanks that were higher BR. It has to do with A) Knowing what you have, B) Knowing what you're against, and C) properly applying skills and tactics to neutralize any advantage they might have.

[Daddo2 328]

Apparently the forum isn't saving/posting my earlier replies, and I'm too lazy to re-write them....

 

 

 

No, not really..... no. 

 

Anton says tanks up to and including 1970's, and 1982 is about three years off. As others have said, the soviet counterpart would likely be ZSU-37-2, and/or ZSU-23-4. 

 

So the vehicle in active service from 1982 is less "usable" in game than the one that was not even fully developed in 1985...

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,789]

It was in the Q&A of the Falcon devblog.

 

yes exactly, and if i remember it good, US get 20mm Gun (so a M168 gun, derivative of the M61A1 "Vulcan") Bye Bye "Bofors", Welcome "Vulcan"!

[Retry 7,363]

yes exactly, and if i remember it good, US get 20mm Gun (so a M168 gun, derivative of the M61A1 "Vulcan") Bye Bye "Bofors", Welcome "Vulcan"!

Your broken English always cracks me up!

 

Anyways, there's a reason why the Vulcan carriage was slated to be replaced by the Bofors platform.

[BlitzkriegWulf 4,265]

So the vehicle in active service from 1982 is less "usable" in game than the one that was not even fully developed in 1985...

 

If we used that kind of timeline-extending logic, we'd be into 2025 prototypes right now. 

 

Gaijin has set boundaries to their game. When/if they feel comfortable including 1980's vehicles, I'm sure they will come. Because the M247 was created and had some degree of testing prior to the deadline, it can be included. The 2K22 on the other hand was piloted in something like 1977, but wasn't ready for even early testing until late 1980/early'81.

 

 

Also, it matters little when they terminated the program; A4D just got passed to developers, and the cranberry is in game too. I believe both saw active service up until the late 1990's and even early 2000's.

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,789]

Your broken English always cracks me up

i think i have to precise: I'm a French Player, and in France: Learning Foreign Language is very difficult, because Teachers are so Bad!

[igeticsu 3,400]

i think i have to precise: I'm a French Player, and in France: Learning Foreign Language is very difficult, because Teachers are so Bad!

play more video games :P I didn't learn English from teachers, I learned it from talking to people who wouldn't understand my native language (Danish). :D

 

Anyway back on topic, I still support this. And it would be a good transitioner from the M42 to the, whatever cold war era super SPAA US is getting :P

[Daddo2 328]

Also, it matters little when they terminated the program; A4D just got passed to developers, and the cranberry is in game too. I believe both saw active service up until the late 1990's and even early 2000's.

 

Well, as far as I know, most important date is the one when was the vehicle put into the service. That was why I was comparing the 2K22, which was in active service since 1982 with M247 that was never put into the service and wasn't even ready to be put into service in 1985, when the project was cancelled.

[Deathbringer007 118]

Done historically, the radar and fire control system should not make this more accurate. While the manuals may hype up how great this system was supposed to be, there's a reason it wasn't accepted for service. It couldn't track targets quickly enough. It was complex and unreliable. And most notoriously, the tracking system once locked onto a bathroom fan thinking it was an aircraft target.

 

It was in development long-term, up until 1985, when the project was finally put out of its misery. Air defense units continued to rely on the M-163 Vulcan until the Bradley-based Linebacker system came about, which didn't last long itself.

Well that's what happens when you try to modify an aircraft radar.

[Z3r0_ 4,128]

I suppose this could work for an end-tier SPAAG, considering that in spite of all the hype about it when it was developed it was a pretty spectacular failure.  It's a shame that somebody like Sergeant York had to have such a huge POS named after him,

 

 

dat radar doe

 

The radar didn't work terribly well, in spite of it being the same as the one on the F-16.  It could be disrupted by RAIN DROPS.

[Iron_physik 3,485]

Sure why not?

I would like to see a better heavy hitter in the US tree.

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,789]

wait the A4D-1 "Skyhawk", it's a good Fighter Bomber (if not the best in War Thunder, when they put it in, it's Passed to Devs)

 

On many picture you can see this bomb load:

 

6* Mk82 Bomb of 500lbs (Central hardpoint)

2*: 6* Mk81Bombs of 250lbs (external hardpoints)

 

So many bombs! + 2 Colt Mk12 20mm Guns!

Edited March 25, 2016 by Cpt_Bel_V

[Z3r0_ 4,128]

wait the A4D-1 "Skyhawk", it's a good Fighter Bomber (if not the best in War Thunder, when they put it in, it's Passed to Devs)

 

On many picture you can see this bomb load:

 

6* Mk82 Bomb of 500lbs (Central hardpoint)

2*: 6* Mk81Bombs of 250lbs (external hardpoints)

 

So many bombs! + 2 Colt Mk12 20mm Guns!

 

Which is about the same payload as a medium bomber from World War II, and the cannons only have a couple hundred rounds between them and burn through them very quickly.

 

But that's WAY off-topic.  Wrong thread, perhaps?

Edited March 25, 2016 by Z3r0_

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,789]

Which is about the same payload as a medium bomber from World War II, and the cannons only have a couple hundred rounds between them and burn through them very quickly.

 

But that's WAY off-topic.  Wrong thread, perhaps?

 

not wrong thread, the above me demand a better hitter: it is the better hitter.  :Ds

[CokeSpray 7,274]

Moved to Further discussion. 

[Mercedes4321 4,695]

Moved to Further discussion. 

nice, I really want to see this vehicle in game.

[igeticsu 3,400]

Any stats on the penetration values with different ammo types? I'd like to compare them to the ZSU-57-2's and the Super Coelian's ammo :D

[WakeUpdude 33]

I dont play american but its to see this tank in game. Gib +1

[Z3r0_ 4,128]

not wrong thread, the above me demand a better hitter: it is the better hitter.  :Ds

 

You seem to have misinterpretated what they were saying (not that I blame you, English isn't your first language).  He was referring to the Sergeant York (the topic of this thread) being a harder-hitting SPAAG than the M42 Duster.

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,789]

You seem to have misinterpretated what they were saying (not that I blame you, English isn't your first language).  He was referring to the Sergeant York (the topic of this thread) being a harder-hitting SPAAG than the M42 Duster.

 

 don't worry, i have good understanding.

 

i'm been "irionic" (not sure on this word), and i'll pretend the A4D-1 could be better than Big Caliber Guns on SPAA.

[Sir Rebral Palsy 2,423]

 There are are really only 3 options for the U.S Vigilante, the M247 Sergeant York, and the M163 VADS. Anyone of those should be enough...^^