It's well known that the Soviets are rather pathetically lacking in useful SPAA vehicles between the brackets of 3.3 and 8.0, as every vehicle between these BRs mounts a high caliber cannon with an extremely poor firerate, making them near-unusable versus the vast majority of aircraft you see, as well as the bracket of 8.0 to 10.7, this hole purely by virtue of there being no vehicles between the ZSU-23-4 and 2S6, which leaves you very vulnerable as for the 9.0-10.0 bracket the ZSU-23-4. I'm making this post to detail the large number of extremely effective AAA vehicles that could be added to these holes, as I've seen a couple responses to people requesting more SPAA that essentially amount to 'there isn't anything the Soviets made that would fit these holes', which is blatantly untrue. Many of these have already been suggested, but I would like to bring attention to them again. The ones I'm absolutely sure haven't been brought up yet are mostly missile systems near the end, so if you don't want to retread any content, you can probably safely skip the first half.
I should note that there would still be a gap between 3.7 and 7.3, but it would be much more managable as the BTR-152 ZPU-4 would remain, like the M16 MGMC, effective for a very long time.
Also I just realized every single missile system I'm bringing up here is amphibious. This is not an intentional decision or bias on my part, the Soviets apparently just took river crossings super seriously.
- Modification of BTR-40 scout cars for SPAA/infantry support role. Mounts same twin 14.5mm KPVT ZPU-2 mount as the BTR-152A, but on a much shorter and less unwieldy frame. Good BTR-152A alternative for 3.0, trading crew count for a small size.
- Same idea as the BTR-152A, but with twice the guns and thus twice the burst mass. Would make a good 3.7 as the Soviet 3.7 lineup has no AAA of its own, instead relying on the 3.0 BTR-152A or 3.3 ZiS-12. Should note that the pictures of quad gun BTR-152s with widely spaced guns are not this variant, those being Israeli modifications with quad .50s.
- A BTR-152 with the 23mm ZU-23 mount on top, which mounts two of the same cannons the ZSU-23-4 uses. Like the ZSD63 developed from this system, it would be limited by a relatively small magazine (50rds per barrel) requiring frequent reloads, although with the smaller caliber and more convenient chassis the reloads would be much, much shorter than those of the ZSD63. Would make a good 3.7 alternative to the ZPU-4 BTR-152, trading sustained fire capability for improved kill-per-burst and anti-armor capability.
- A ZSU-23-4 modified for infantry support with the removal of the Radar and a doubling of ammo capacity to 4,000 rounds. Would serve as a great 7.3-7.7, both being lineups desperately in need of an SPAA.
A sister program to the ZSU-23-4 developed to provide longer-range antiaircraft coverage. The program ended up getting cancelled after a prototype run as missile systems were now more efficient at range and the ZSU-23-4 managed a higher kill-per-burst and sustained fire capability at the ranges at which gun systems were judged to be more efficient than a missile.
The system was based on the Su-100P chassis, and mounts a pair of 37mm guns with a high firerate (524 RPM per barrel) and extremely high slant range of 4.5 km, in addition to the same RPK radar used on the ZSU-23-4. IIRC these guns had an HE-VT shell, but I can't find much on them, so take that with a large grain of salt. This system would be good for 8.0, or 8.3 if it gets HE-VT, and would, as it was intended to in real life, help compensate for the issues the ZSU-23-4 has in the form of low slant range and low lethality versus large targets, serving as something of a Gepard or Sgt. York equivalent.Загрузка...
A short-range IR-guided air defense system based off the ubiquitous BDRM-2 chassis, and designed to support the ZSU-23-4. Carries four Strela-1 missiles, and although reloads are not typically carried, I have read that it is possible to fit up to four inside the vehicle. I'd recommend this for 9.3, as it is outside of mild armor clearly worse than the Type 93 in that the missile is much lower performing, with lower range, much more limited tracking capabilites, and being less manueverable.
If I am incorrect, and internal reloads cannot be carried, then a BR as low as 8.7 would be justifiable.
Unique in being the first missile system designed as a single mobile unit with TELAR and radar systems mounted to the same chassis, this air defense system would be very useful in that it manages a better range than every other SAM system until the ADATS at 10.3, propelling a 19kg Blast-Fragmentation warhead out to 9KM, allowing it to comfortably engage any attack helicopter in the game at standoff distances.
The system does, however, come with some major drawbacks. The first is survivability: The vehicle is massive, being nearly as large as the Maus at 9.4 meters long and 4.2 meters high, and is very poorly armored at a mere 5mm all-round. This means it is incredibly easy to hit and will almost invariably hullbreak in response to hits by chemical shells, especially ATGMs. The second is ammunition stowage, as there is none. The four missiles carried ready-to-launch are all it gets, as all reloads were carried in a separate reloading vehicle.
In my opinion, these drawbacks make it an acceptable choice for another 9.3 SPAA, fulfilling the same role in-game as the Lvrbv as a long-ranged (for War Thunder, at least) missile system able to deal with any helicopter it may meet.
Designed as a replacement to the 9K31 mentioned earlier, this system is slightly less mobile, being on the same tracked MT-LB chassis as the Shturm-S, but altogether more advanced, firing 9M37 and 9M333 missiles as opposed to the Strela-1's 9M31. It was also backwards compatible with the Strela-1's missiles, if Gaijin wanted to make the stock grind on an SPAA even worse than usual. Four missiles are held ready-to-launch, with another eight held in reserve.
As mentioned earlier, the missiles are much more advanced. The 9M37 and 9M37M both have much more advanced seeker heads, being twin channel as opposed to single-channel, are longer ranged at 5.0KM as opposed to 4.2KM, Faster at 517M/S vs 420M/S, and have a larger warhead, at 3KG vs 2.6KG. The 9M333 is even more advanced than the 9M37s, having a more advanced laser proxy fuze, a three-channel seeker, a 5KG warhead, and the same range.
This system would probably be best at 9.7, being a significant improvement over the 9K31 and about on-par with the Type 93.
- Same chassis and radar outfit as the standard 9K33, but armament revised to six 9M33M3 missiles. In addition to being carried in greater quantity, these missiles have been vastly improved: Warhead weight was doubled to 40KG, and range was increased to 15KM, which would make this the longest ranged SAM system in the game, allowing it to comfortably engage targets from outside the range of any ATGM system yet implemented. Standard issues with the system still apply, with no internal reloads and cardboard armor on a massive frame. I'd recommend this system for 9.7 as a long-ranged counterpart to the 9K35.
u/clockworkraider for the missile systems.
That's the end of my post. Sorry if it was not good. If something's wrong, tell me so I can change it because I promise I wasn't wrong on purpose.
Source: Original link
© Post "Gajin pls: an actually good Soviet SPAA tree." for game War Thunder.
Top 10 Most Anticipated Video Games of 2020
2020 will have something to satisfy classic and modern gamers alike. To be eligible for the list, the game must be confirmed for 2020, or there should be good reason to expect its release in that year. Therefore, upcoming games with a mere announcement and no discernible release date will not be included.
Top 15 NEW Games of 2020 [FIRST HALF]
2020 has a ton to look forward to...in the video gaming world. Here are fifteen games we're looking forward to in the first half of 2020.