Jump to content

Recommended Posts

PRP-4M obr. 2003

 

http://i.imgur.com/cWhFt0l.jpg

 

http://bastion-opk.ru/VVT/PRP-4_150225_02.jpg

 

A - Storage boxes on both sides are missing.

B - Radar is modelled closed, however on other vehicles it is functional, as it should be on this vehicle.

C - All optics are modelled closed.

 

9P148 Konkurs obr. 1991

 

http://i.imgur.com/SECt2DY.jpg

 

https://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/3310/69185483.550/0_12a5a9_559d971c_XL.jpg

 

A - There are no side viewing ports on the 9P148

B - The actual vehicle's name is 9P148 Konkurs, not BRDM-2 AT-5.

Edited by BTR
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

In terms of UkR side of things, the thing that I can see, is that Tunguska-M looks exactly the same. Look at the optics on this Tunguska-M and then compare them to how in-game they look. Also note how the radar looks (rectangle vs oval):

57ug2Ok.jpg

Edited by BTR
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

B - Laser rangefinder is missing. An honest mistake as it get’s taken down most of the time. 

I take that back for BMP-3/K/M for 2015. The rangefinder is appropriately mounted on the turret. However, could be a good case for CMSF with earlier, export BMP-3's. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Did this in light of my investigation into recon battalion TOEs. 

 

BRDM-2A (BRDM-2M) obr. 2008

http://i.imgur.com/9nLSI5J.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/RbNZ11t.png

http://i.imgur.com/vtkSRLp.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/sqOjHPs.jpg

A - BRDM-2A has BTR-70 doors on both sides.

B - BRDM-2A has widened wheelbase, wheels and suspension from BTR-80.

C - CMBS model is missing has extended mudguards that came with the extended wheelbase.

D - The lower front cover on the 2A(M) model looks shorter.

E - The nose-cone shape is a little off.

F - NV, traffic and nav lights are way too big and are of a strange arrangement.

G - RW Mirrors are missing.

H - Sidewheels are removed on BRDM-2A

I - BRMD-2A has different back-vent configuration that came with its diesel engine.

 
IN case anyone needs all of my previous findings in one place here is the google doc I use with all the model IRL discrepancies in one place: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m2xIW__DRVWWugbz2h_BJZPbMd75hCkbXQwDMJ_EHlk/edit 
Edited by BTR
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

BMP-3M (ERA) is missing some era tiles from turret. or is that because those tiles are hard to see so they are left out intentionally? ERA however didn't work (M320, partial penetration)
g9wn3eK.png

and BMP-3M (Arena) have ERA that it shouldn't have...it shouldn't have 

qcUwg7M.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the ammunition for the ARENA consists in a row of close toghether bricks that are filled with explosive and act as an ERA when launched in the air, I belive they are as effective as any other "passive" ERA (ok it's active), when they don't blow up by ARENA's call... therefore I belive they are treated as a row of ERA bricks around the turret.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't generally trust western sources on our technology, unless they are explicitly DoD test reports, because they tend to rehash our domestic material without taking in lobbying angles put in by different publications. 

Edited by BTR
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

You will be interested to know that all issues mentioned in these posts are being addressed.

I can´t give a date when it will be done but I can say we have been working on it for some time.

If you have any additional observations to make regarding Russian/Ukranian hardware now is the time to do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...