Side skirts consist of rubber-fabric screens 3 mm thick.Īlthough this is an AA vehicle, its twin 57 mm cannons are still equally deadly against ground units.Hatches and air intake are 15 mm thick.Suspension wheels and tracks are 20 mm thick.The turret is slightly thinner than the original but the difference is negligible. The side armour is 20 mm (+5 mm difference) and the rear armour is 30 mm (+20 mm difference). The open roof renders the WZ305 highly vulnerable to overpressure damage, so nearby artillery, bombs, and rockets will often knock out the crew.Ĭompared to the ZSU-57-2, the upper glacis is significantly thicker at 45 mm of RHA compared to the original 13.5 mm. The paper-thin turret means that enemies with heavy machine guns or autocannons can mow down the turret crew and potentially knock out the tank with a single burst. While the upper glacis is now about as strong as a T-34, this level of protection does not amount to much at its rank. The WZ305 can dispatch light targets, clean up flanks, and clear the skies, making it a valuable asset throughout a battle. Firepower wise it enjoys a new DKY-1 airburst HE shell that makes it far easier to use against aircraft. The WZ305's hull is better armoured, though this adds about 3 tons to its weight, and has a slightly more powerful engine. Cosmetic differences include fender-mounted headlights, side skirts, and the retention of all five road wheels. The hull is developed from a later Type 69 variant, as opposed to the ZSU's chassis derived from the T-54. While outwardly similar, there are some differences. The Chinese counterpart to the infamous ZSU-57-2, the WZ305 will feel very familiar to veteran users of the "Sparka". It was introduced in Update 1.95 "Northern Wind". With a battle rating of 8.7 (AB) and 8.0 (RB/SB). If nothing is added because inaccurate or such i think it needs a BR change, its just not worth even the reparation cost for spawning it as now.The WZ305, sometimes known as the PGZ80, is a rank V Chinese SPAA Tldr _Condottiero_ makes good points, i would argue that with better rounds like DART, Vulcano or PFF it would be a unique and capable AA even at top tier. also i dont think "naval" round like Vulcano(guided 40km range), DART (guided anti missile/anti air) or PFF (anti-missile) are a possibility (they would be cool as hell and solve some issues to be honest)) and has critical flaws in the antiground department given a poor apfsds performance, a limited ammo rack and a veichle not designed to face MBTs in general (mainly because of the MBTs found at that BR). I dont know if devs want realism or prefer keeping the otomatic slightly buffed as it is, but it has critical flaws in the AA department (no missiles, tracers give away your position and bullets cant change route mid air. OTO just doesnt have magic antispall armor or a remote tuttet, virtually any shot at OTO can disable it ( giant breech, ammo ""shield"" and hull ammorack with ludicrous hull armor and 3/4 of the crew sitting in a giant manned turret without armor also easily oneshottable cause all placed near center mass) it cant have fast reload of 12 (iirc) APFSDS but just 3? ok so its a "nerfed" 2s38 (slightly more capable in the AA region) I mean, just balance it according to relistic features. The otomatic have 2 reload dedicated systems and physically is not possible to load apfsds in the main rack loader. The thing is: want realism and have the vehicle fixed in this sense or just buff it because others have? Because shooting all apfsd in sequence is not possible in the real one.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |