[TANKS DLC] Rhino MGS Abysmal Mobility
Reviewed, NormalPublic

Description

https://forums.bohemia.net/forums/topic/215267-tanks-dlc-premium-vehicles-mobility-tests/
It is unable to exceed the mobility of either the Kuma or the Angara. The only vehicles with worse mobility are the Panther family and the Slammer. For a wheeled vehicle, this is unacceptable

Details

Severity
Major
Resolution
Open
Reproducibility
N/A
Operating System
Windows 10 x64
Category
General
Additional Information

Tested on build 1.81.144433

hvymtal created this task.Mar 8 2018, 9:36 PM
Wulf added a subscriber: Wulf.Mar 9 2018, 12:10 PM

By mobility you mean what? Speed, steering ability to move up the hill. The APC has a 120mm cannon and it is wheeled of course that extra weight is going to affect its movement.

hvymtal added a comment.EditedMar 9 2018, 6:09 PM

I was more specifically referring to acceleration and inclines. Yes it is heavy for a wheeled vehicle, but it shouldn't take nearly as long as a 65-ton MBT to traverse a paved incline, far slower than a wheeled vehicle, and it should be able to at least traverse the Stratis steep incline without stopping and having a tea break partway through.
The following comparisons were all performed using fast move (shift+w)
Comparison of the Marshall, Slammer, and Rhino on the Stratis test track:
https://youtu.be/hR4EFrMpRsw

Comparison climbing the hill on the Tanoa test track (time accelerated):
https://youtu.be/o0j5SdriVhs

Comparison climbing a paved hill on Malden (time accelerated):
https://youtu.be/1eb0_9z_81E

I think the speedometers speak for themselves here. May I also point out that the Rhino went last and had more of a run up to gain speed. When you start comparing vehicles similar in role to the Marshall and Rhino, IRL, you will likely find that they tend to have power/weight ratios not far off. If the Rhino is a purpose-built vehicle, then would it not have increased engine power to keep pace with the motorized forces its supposed to support?

To get a little scientific, I don't have stats on the AMV 40 which that Marshall is based on, but since it's roughly analogous to the LAV-25, we'll use its power to weight ratio of 19.5 hp/ton (~15 kW/t). A purpose built 8x8 tank destroyer like the B1 Centauro? 19.35 hp/ton. Type 16 MCV, 21.9 hp/ton. ERC-90 Saigae, 18.7 hp/ton. AMX-10 RC, 18.7 hp/ton as well.

The Rooikat, which the Rhino appears to be based on, 19.24 hp/t. Yes the Rhino has a much larger and heavier gun, but also a more low-profile and lighter turret, and even then a builder would at least try to increase power and torque to gain some of that mobility back. These are all purpose-built vehicles similar to the Rhino, not converted from another vehicle with no powertrain modification like the Stryker MGS.

Modern purpose-built wheeled TDs are designed to maneuver with and support motorized forces. If it cannot do so, then what you have is a lightly armored tank with worse off-road performance. I'm not saying we need to turn it into a racecar, but if I were in charge of acquisitions for NATO, I would send the Rhino back in its current state to whoever built it and demand a more powerful engine. If it has the same level of mobility as the heaviest and slowest, MBT in Arma, then what's the point of it in the first place?

Wulf changed the task status from New to Reviewed.Mar 13 2018, 11:47 AM

Talked with the devs, we will have a look at it.