devtrackers.gg
8 months
ago -
War Thunder. Official channel.
-
Direct link
Transcript (by Youtube)
| 4s | The Shooting Range |
|---|---|
| 8s | In this episode... |
| 9s | Pages of History: Japan’s Forgotten Bomber |
| 13s | Tactics and Strategy: Playing Infantry Fighting Vehicles |
| 17s | And Metal Beasts: Israeli ‘Leopard’ |
| 31s | Today we’d like to continue talking about the new IFVs |
| 33s | brought to the game by the Seek & Destroy update. |
| 37s | Our next highlight is the Israeli Namer. |
| 39s | Its name is composed of the words ‘APC’ and ‘Merkava’, |
| 44s | but it can also mean ‘leopard’ in Hebrew... |
| 47s | Yeah, right, another one! |
| 54s | The Israeli main battle tank’s most notable feature |
| 57s | has always been the frontal placement of the engine compartment. |
| 60s | It’s an unusual solution for a tank that looks right at home |
| 64s | in an infantry fighting vehicle. |
| 66s | This machine has an engine with 1,200 horsepower. |
| 69s | While it surely is an outstanding number for an IFV, |
| 72s | you should also keep in mind that it weighs a whopping 60 tons. |
| 77s | For this class, it’s pretty absurd! |
| 79s | The vehicle can reach a top speed of 54 km/h going forward and go 23 in reverse. |
| 85s | Nothing to write home about, of course, but don’t expect mobility issues anyway |
| 89s | since it’s good enough to move around the map. |
| 96s | The impressive mass must bring something in return, right? Well, yeah! |
| 100s | The Namer is one of the best-protected vehicles in its class. |
| 104s | Its composite armor in the front can even stop MBT shells in some situations. |
| 109s | And while it’s not reliable enough to tank every shot, |
| 112s | the overall survivability is still beyond compare. |
| 116s | You can see it most clearly when dueling other IFVs. |
| 119s | The Israeli vehicle’s armor is basically an impenetrable fortress |
| 123s | for most enemy autocannons. |
| 125s | That’s why it can win pretty much any fight with a competitor. |
| 133s | In the firepower department, the Namer offers a familiar choice. |
| 137s | Its main caliber is a two-plane stabilized 30-mm autocannon |
| 141s | with exemplary elevation angles: between −20 and +60 degrees. |
| 147s | The main shell is a fin-stabilized discarding sabot |
| 150s | that can penetrate more than 100 mm of armor. |
| 153s | There’s also a missile launcher that can shoot the fire-and-forget Spike ATGMs. |
| 159s | We can’t call them the best for close range combat on the ground, |
| 162s | but they’re a great tool against helicopters |
| 165s | that get too close to the fight down below. |
| 167s | We’d say the best firing advantage comes from the unmanned turret |
| 171s | with amazing depression angles. |
| 173s | You can use it to deliver accurate fire from hills |
| 175s | while your hull is completely obscured by the landscape. |
| 180s | The Namer also comes with a heap of bells and whistles. |
| 183s | There’s smoke launchers and ESS, thermals for both the gunner and the commander, |
| 189s | an LWR and a laser rangefinder, a recon drone, and even commander gun controls... |
| 195s | Basically anything a true top IFV will ever need! |
| 210s | Here’s a Japanese coast-based Naval torpedo bomber called the P1Y1 Ginga, |
| 216s | which means the Milky Way; Allied reporting name ‘Frances’. |
| 221s | Even on the outside, it’s a true engineering marvel! |
| 224s | Look at this nimble fighter hull, a high aspect ratio low drag wing... |
| 230s | You’d expect to see that on a record-setter or some high-altitude interceptor, |
| 234s | not a regular bomber! |
| 236s | But then you might ask: “Tell me more about this aircraft!” |
| 239s | And even the most seasoned history buffs are unlikely to remember more |
| 243s | than just the name, some performance charts, and maybe numbers produced. |
| 247s | Most of them would only recall a short resume: |
| 250s | “Produced too late, had little effect on the war”. |
| 253s | An inquiring mind would start digging for extra data, documents, books, memoirs... |
| 259s | But they’ll find little to nothing. Why? Well, no one really knows. |
| 263s | But we can deduce a theory if we follow the history |
| 266s | of this plane’s development and mass production. |
| 269s | It all began in the spring of 1940, almost at the same time as the famous Zero, |
| 274s | with Miki Tadanao heading the project. |
| 277s | By early 1941, the Yokosuka Naval Air Technical Arsenal |
| 282s | was ready to build the first prototype of the future Ginga. |
| 285s | It was still a year before Pearl Harbor, |
| 288s | which casts huge doubt onto the ‘produced too late’ statement. |
| 292s | But why did the first Ginga only make its maiden flight in the summer of 1943? |
| 297s | The answer’s simple: it was missing its engines. |
| 300s | The 18-cylinder Nakajima Homares were taking too much effort and time, |
| 305s | so when they were finally ready, |
| 307s | the Army and the Navy fought tooth and nail for each copy made. |
| 311s | It wasn’t just bombers that needed the new motors: |
| 313s | the newest Ki-84 and Shiden fighters were lining up for them, too. |
| 318s | The engineers had foreseen the issue and included an option |
| 322s | to use the radial Nakajima Mamoru and Mitsubishi Kasei engines as well. |
| 327s | Those only had 14 cylinders, but their total volume and power |
| 331s | was the same as what the Homare had. |
| 333s | So why didn’t the new bomber use those alternatives to fly? |
| 337s | Well, the command would have none of it. |
| 339s | You either wait, they said, or don’t fly at all. |
| 342s | Besides, the Navy had no trouble flying the Mitsubishi G4Ms. |
| 346s | As a side note, those would catch fire and even explode after a single volley... |
| 352s | Meanwhile, the Ginga also had great potential as a night fighter. |
| 356s | The engineers tried to pass an obvious hint by adding a gun sight to each aircraft. |
| 361s | The JNAF got the hint and responded: |
| 364s | “Your initiative is misplaced, we’re already making the Tenrai. |
| 367s | So what if it’s still in the blueprint stage? |
| 370s | Your aircraft was made to be a dive or torpedo bomber! |
| 373s | So don’t try to pass it off as something else.” |
| 375s | When the realization finally came in, it was too late. |
| 379s | The Allies had already achieved air superiority. |
| 382s | There was no time left for mass production or experiments with night fighters. |
| 386s | And the Homare engines continued to torture ground crews. |
| 390s | Later, in 1944, when Japan tried its hand at making jet engines, |
| 394s | the engineers proposed the Tenga — basically the same Ginga |
| 398s | but with two rocket boosters under its wings. |
| 401s | The response was the same: |
| 402s | “No need! We’re already making the R2Y2 bomber and the Kikka using jet engines! |
| 408s | We’ve even finished the blueprints...” |
| 410s | After the war, Miki Tadanao discovered that railway companies in Japan |
| 414s | were more than happy to employ his talents. |
| 416s | Have you ever heard of the Shinkansen, also known as the bullet train? |
| 420s | Miki Tadanao was one of its main creators, |
| 423s | and this was his magnum opus that finally made history. |
| 427s | The magnificent Ginga, however, only left a few dry lines... |
| 446s | Every ground tech tree in War Thunder has infantry fighting vehicles, |
| 451s | and each update expands the choice. |
| 453s | That’s why we think it’s time to talk about how you can use IFVs efficiently |
| 457s | when fighting tanks. |
| 461s | Your choice of the most efficient play style is mostly defined |
| 465s | by the weaponry your vehicle has. |
| 467s | Using this criterion, we can divide all IFVs into three groups. |
| 471s | Number one is machines whose main caliber is just an autocannon. |
| 475s | Some good examples are the German Puma and the Swedish CV90. |
| 479s | Due to the caliber being small, their guns lose their punch at range, |
| 483s | but in close combat, these IFVs can outplay tanks just fine. |
| 488s | Of course, you should always try to find some ally with reliable armor |
| 492s | when you attack from the front, |
| 493s | but even if you happen to run into someone face to face, |
| 496s | you can always try to hit their gun and then flank them while they’re disarmed. |
| 500s | Overall, flanking is a perfect tactic. |
| 503s | You might want to learn your way around the map to be successful at it. |
| 507s | Another great tip is to use the recon drone to find blanks in enemy defenses. |
| 511s | The second group is IFVs with modest autocannons |
| 515s | and anti-tank guided missiles as the main caliber. |
| 518s | Again, some good examples are the German Marder and the South African Ratel 20. |
| 523s | Their best use case is long range combat where guided missiles can truly shine. |
| 528s | Their main advantage is high mobility: |
| 531s | these machines can often get to any part of the map in a short time. |
| 534s | The third group of IFVs has both strong autocannons and missiles, |
| 539s | providing the widest choice of tactics to the player. |
| 542s | Naturally, this means you can use either of the plans we previously described. |
| 546s | We believe these vehicles play best in close-quarter combat: |
| 550s | they can quickly disarm the target and finish it off with a missile. |
| 556s | Now, firepower is crucial, but IFVs can provide extra value to the team |
| 561s | by using their active scouting ability. |
| 564s | Accurate intel on enemy movement can be the decisive factor |
| 567s | in pretty much any game mode. |
| 569s | That’s why every enemy you mark is a small yet valuable contribution |
| 574s | towards your team’s victory. |
| 575s | In addition to gratitude, you can use active scouting to get a sizable discount |
| 580s | on spawn points required to use aircraft in realistic battles. |
| 586s | Tell us in the comments what tips and tricks you learned while playing IFVs! |
| 591s | Meanwhile, it’s time for us to answer some of your questions. |
| 607s | The first question was sent by a player called pekas: |
| 610s | “How do I play howitzers like the PLZ83?” |
| 614s | Hi pekas! We’ve already made an episode talking about howitzer tactics. |
| 619s | It’s The Shooting Range #292, check it out! |
| 624s | FeaSkad10 asks: “What’s the best loadout for the Kfir C.7” |
| 630s | Hey FeaSkad! The best air combat loadout is four Python 3 missiles. |
| 635s | For CAS, we’d go for the Zuni rockets and 1000-lb bombs. |
| 641s | Another question comes from A Gamer: |
| 644s | “How should I utilize the "Rizz Rockets" on the Bf-109 F-2 |
| 648s | against other planes or even ground targets?” |
| 652s | Hello gamer! They’re not too efficient against ground targets, |
| 655s | but you can find them useful when attacking bombers. |
| 658s | Although, you’ll need to use your eyes to aim, just like in real life. |
| 664s | xXCoolProPlayer360Xx GAMER writes: “Why does the J21A-3 have CCRP?” |
| 671s | Hi there! There’s no mistake here. |
| 674s | The Swedish engineers did install this aiming system on the A21A-3 in 1947 |
| 680s | to drop bombs at a set point. |
| 683s | And the last comment for today was written by SPECTRE PLAYS G4M3Z: |
| 688s | “Should we take the external drop tanks or conformal fuel tanks on the F-15C? |
| 693s | (Can the F-16 get conformal fuel tanks too?)” |
| 697s | Hey, Spectre! Each option comes with its own advantages. |
| 701s | The drop tanks can always be jettisoned to lighten the aircraft, |
| 704s | while the conformal ones have lower air drag and occupy no hardpoints. |
| 709s | We’d like to use this chance to remind you that we’ll be adding conformal fuel tanks |
| 713s | to other aircraft that have them in real life. |
| 717s | That’s it for today. You’ve been watching the Shooting Range by Gaijin Entertainment, |
| 721s | and the next episode will premier the following Sunday |
| 724s | at 4 PM GMT or noon Eastern time. |
| 727s | Subscribe and click the bell if you don’t want to miss our next videos. |
| 731s | Don’t forget that Petards aren’t toys, |
| 733s | leave a like, share your thoughts and comments... |
| 736s | and see you next week! |