Project Reality Forums

Hurricane wrote: AFAIK the one-shot-spots of tanks ingame (hatches, periscopes) have been fixed already.

I count 1-hit kill spots as places that can be hit and cause a tank to be disabled beyond saving, T-72 has a spot on its turret by the commander scope (at least in coop). Hit some tanks just right and the turret locks and they get tracked, then they are screwed.

here a video showing the inside of the Leclerc auto loader its take 9 seconds to reload.

VERY DEADLY French army amx 56 Leclerc tank rival to leopard 2 and Abrams tanks - YouTube

can that be used as good real life information?

Might be, just worried the mechanism was set up in a way just for the video

lots of internet sources quote a rate of fire of 12 shots per minute, which is 5, which is what is ingame (4 seconds on the file gets +1 ingame)

[R-DEV]Rudd wrote:Might be, just worried the mechanism was set up in a way just for the video

lots of internet sources quote a rate of fire of 12 shots per minute, which is 5, which is what is ingame (4 seconds on the file gets +1 ingame)

here another video show inside of the gunner seat it take 10 seconds to reload in this video(look at the C icon on the lower right corner)

char leclerc 501RCC 2?Escadron au tir Niveau2 session 2011.avi - YouTube

now become a bit inconsistent and what are your sources? could you show me?

Autoloaders don't have a consistent reload time. It all depends where the autoloader actually needs to get the round from to load it. Afaik, the Leclerc is not as bad as some of the older soviet autoloaders for this, but it's still a characteristic of the system. 12rpm is most likely under ideal conditions.

In the Battle of 73 Easting (that big beatdown in '91, US lost 1 and "they" lost 1,000), an American M1 tank scored three kills in seven seconds. Three to four seconds is considered good for a loader. I knew a SSG once who got a challenge coin from a GEN for a three-second loading time (wasn't in theater though). Sabot weighs 41.2 lbs and HEAT weighs 53.3 lbs.

Leclercs have autoloaders. AMX-10RC does not, but it's not a tank anyway. I don't think the ERC-90 has them (don't think PR has this, it's in service with 13e DBLE though, and it's not a tank either). I don't think the Leopard 2, Challenger 2, Type 96 (PLA), Ariete (Italy), K1 (ROK), Pokpungho (North Korea), or Arjun (India) have autoloaders.

Regarding autoloader tanks:

Leclercs can fire one round every five seconds.

Al-Khalids (Pakistan) can fire one round every 7.5 seconds.

The T-90 has an autoloader, in service with Algeria, India, and Russia, but I don't know the rate of fire.

The K2 (Korea) can fire one round every three seconds.

The T-84 (Ukraine and Thailand) has an autoloader, but again, don't know the rate of fire.

The Type 90 (Japan SDF) can fire one round every five seconds.

The Type 99 (PLA) can fire one round every five or six seconds.

Those are average figures on properly-maintained tanks.

The real reason for autoloaders isn't speed (unless you're from the ROK I guess), it's money. That's one less guy you have to pay, feed, etc. If someone is injured or killed, or doesn't show up for work, you can still operate a four-man tank with three guys (commander doubles as gunner, gunner becomes loader). With good training and fitness, a "manual" tank can fire extremely fast, and it's less **** you have to fix and clean in garrison. It just costs more to pay that fourth guy.

Ragnarok1775 wrote:In the Battle of 73 Easting (that big beatdown in '91, US lost 1 and "they" lost 1,000), an American M1 tank scored three kills in seven seconds. Three to four seconds is considered good for a loader. I knew a SSG once who got a challenge coin from a GEN for a three-second loading time (wasn't in theater though). Sabot weighs 41.2 lbs and HEAT weighs 53.3 lbs.

Leclercs have autoloaders. AMX-10RC does not, but it's not a tank anyway. I don't think the ERC-90 has them (don't think PR has this, it's in service with 13e DBLE though, and it's not a tank either). I don't think the Leopard 2, Challenger 2, Type 96 (PLA), Ariete (Italy), K1 (ROK), Pokpungho (North Korea), or Arjun (India) have autoloaders.

Regarding autoloader tanks:

Leclercs can fire one round every five seconds.

Al-Khalids (Pakistan) can fire one round every 7.5 seconds.

The T-90 has an autoloader, in service with Algeria, India, and Russia, but I don't know the rate of fire.

The K2 (Korea) can fire one round every three seconds.

The T-84 (Ukraine and Thailand) has an autoloader, but again, don't know the rate of fire.

The Type 90 (Japan SDF) can fire one round every five seconds.

The Type 99 (PLA) can fire one round every five or six seconds.

Those are average figures on properly-maintained tanks.

The real reason for autoloaders isn't speed (unless you're from the ROK I guess), it's money. That's one less guy you have to pay, feed, etc. If someone is injured or killed, or doesn't show up for work, you can still operate a four-man tank with three guys (commander doubles as gunner, gunner becomes loader). With good training and fitness, a "manual" tank can fire extremely fast, and it's less **** you have to fix and clean in garrison. It just costs more to pay that fourth guy.

Rate of fire from ready rack, I assume?

I seriously doubt Korean K2 can reload in 3 seconds.

Yes, the K2 can fire 20 rounds per minute, it's an autoloading 120mm Rheinmetall cannon. It's a very new and advanced tank, mass production only began just last year.

Those ROFs are autoloading cannons, except for the first paragraph referring to the Abrams, which yes, is from ready rack. I suppose BF2 mechanics won't allow loading a ready rack, and also, autoloaders do not hold all of the ammo (usually around half of it). The autoloader has to be manually reloaded, like manually inserting rounds into a small arms magazine or more accurately, a revolver cylinder. Nor can we use computer targeting...

Ragnarok1775 wrote:Yes, the K2 can fire 20 rounds per minute, it's an autoloading 120mm Rheinmetall cannon. It's a very new and advanced tank, mass production only began just last year.

Didn't they also claim they can penetrate two tanks at once? lol

I don't know about that, they were gonna put a new 140mm on it but the manufacturer decided it was overkill, but the K2 is still made compatible with the 140mm cannon in case things change in the future.

Considering how armored warfare works, I think "double penetration" (don't laugh guys) is not really worth it...you want the round to blow up inside the hull and kill some people and destroy the tank. Not just put a hole in it.

The ROK Army and Marines are no joke, I would not want to fight them even if they had no tanks at all. Conscripts get something like $80/month and there is a lot of corporal punishment, PT is pretty sadistic, and they really believe in the job.

Ragnarok1775 wrote:I don't know about that, they were gonna put a new 140mm on it but the manufacturer decided it was overkill, but the K2 is still made compatible with the 140mm cannon in case things change in the future.

Considering how armored warfare works, I think "double penetration" (don't laugh guys) is not really worth it...you want the round to blow up inside the hull and kill some people and destroy the tank. Not just put a hole in it.

The ROK Army and Marines are no joke, I would not want to fight them even if they had no tanks at all. Conscripts get something like $80/month and there is a lot of corporal punishment, PT is pretty sadistic, and they really believe in the job.

IIRC SK army is more known for boasting about their legobuild of tank than actually have anything.

Chance of K2 being as good as advertised is as good as chance if Arjun being good tank...lol

Well that gets into one of those Leclerc vs Leopard 2 vs Abrams debates...won't really know how good it is until it's combat-tested, tank on tank, not just as a portable shield for grunts to stand behind. Those are all pretty high-tech tanks, but none except the Abrams have ever been in any tank battles as far as I know. Hopefully PR will be the only action they ever see.