Re: Thermal imaging
 

Just as your attached image - I don't see the vehicle itself. It may be the up-to-date Lecrerc or Chiorniy Oriol.
Or is it '81 Abrams that I was talking about? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif
As for smoke - I dropped 4 hexes of smoke with the help of tank dischargers and 1 hex with infantry engineer unit.

Meanwhile, I wrote that '81 M1 Abrams is able to see small targets such as APC's at 3500m (the maximum view range for the map - 70 hexes)
Even there is no smoke on the map - why '81 Abrams can identify target as "bmp" at 3500metres? As far as I know even the newest models of MBT can identify the target as "tank" with the help of thermal imager only from ~ 2500metres. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/eek.gif
Well, may be the tanks of 2007 and + CAN identify target at 3500. But why Abrams of 1981 can?

According to your image the TI can be blocked by ~ 5 hexes of off-map arty smoke (why not by tank discasrgers smoke or infantry engineer unit smoke?) That means that each hex should reduce the TI vision range by 20%?

2 Marcello

Maybe this can help?
http://members.tripod.com/dbunger/docs/laser.htm

...."The M-1 Abrahms tank is equipped with a new laser range finding system, that allows for faster targeting and more accurate firing.
Because the laser's beam is pulsed, it cannot be seen in adverse conditions such as fog, rain, or smoke."....

So the smoke is insuperable for M1 Abrams LRF - accuracy IMHO should be severely reduced.

Re: Thermal imaging
 

There is no reduction in vision range due to smoke. It is an all or nothing principle. Either you can see through it or you can't.
Nor is there a fixed amount of smoked hexes that block vision. That's because not all smoked hexes have the same smoke density in the hex (and it's not just the visible difference between fullsmoke and partial smoke either, there's more to it than that). Just do as DRG has suggested you do. Drop a lot of arty smoke and see for yourself through how many hexes you can see. Now keep checking for a couple of turns, as the smoke thins you'll see the view increase again.

There is no difference between a '81 M1 Abrams or any other unit with regards to identifying a target as a specific unit type as opposed to a more generic 'tank' without details (at over 2500 metres or not). It's how the game system works. Either you see it as it is or you don't see it at all. There's no middle ground there.

narwan

Re: Thermal imaging
 

I have nothing to add to what Narwan wrote. This is how the game works. No two smoke hexes are equal so saying each smoke hex blocks 20% of the TI is just a generality. With New and old smoke mixed on a map anything is possible and there is no hard and fast rule I can point to like "each hex should reduce the TI vision range by 20%?" becasue the game code that calculates smoke density is more complicated than that. However, the game itself identifies targets completely once they are seen. There is no middle ground as Narwan pointed out.

Don

Re: Thermal imaging
 

"So the smoke is insuperable for M1 Abrams LRF - accuracy IMHO should be severely reduced."

It depends on who you listen to.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...-grumman01.htm

"The ELRF Main Battle Tank rangefinder has been used successfully by the U.S. Army for a number of years and has proven its accuracy and effectiveness most recently during combat in Iraq,"

"The ELRF is a highly accurate, hardened system for the fire control sight in the Abrams Main Battle Tank. The ELRF gives the tank gunner the ability to determine target ranges in all battlefield conditions including fog, smoke, dust, sand and haze."

As I said being able to see a target with thermals but not being able to lase it is something I have never heard about, neither now nor in 91.

Re: Thermal imaging
 

2 Marcello
Of course http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif
But my example was based on the LRF abilities of '81 Abrams.
Yours - on modern tanks.
Again: I have nothing to say about MODERN tanks - I'm shore that their LRF (ELRF) can function through smoke.
But I'm also shore that 80-90's tanks are unable to use their LRF's through smoke.
I can propose a very unusial way for you to check it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif
There is an old M1A1 tank simulator called "Steel Beasts" (they say it was made by very tough tank specialists http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif)
So there you will see - LRF can't function through smoke.
Also there are several manuals about LRF usage.

2 Don
Is there a way to fix it?
Because it's not right - all game TI's are equal - 80's/90's/2000 and +. It has nothing in common with the real situation http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif

Re: Thermal imaging
 

Dimitry, let's put it this way. I have no problem believing that lower tech LRFs in the 80's, mounted on stuff like the Cascavel or the Type 69 tank, could be blocked by thick smoke. That being said I would not be so sure about those mounted on high end western MBTs of the time. During the Gulf War (1991) there were engagements in such conditions and this issue was never raised anywhere I could find. Nobody ever said "we could see the target on the thermals but we could not lase it due to the sandstorm". Now, I might have missed it but if it actually lowered accuracy by a substantial amount, as you are requesting, I would have expected it to be more publicized. What some guy wrote in 1988 and a videogame are a somewhat shaky ground. For all that we know they might have extrapolated such info from the performances of lower tech LRFs, by assuming they would have had the same limits.
By the way, M1A2s have been around since the early 90's.

Re: Thermal imaging
 

I don't think that this is right.
If my previous arguments are not enough, well, here are more
http://www.edinformatics.com/inventi...itary_tank.htm

«....Some smoke grenades are designed to make a very dense cloud capable of blocking the laser beams of enemy target designators or range finders and of course obscuring vision, reducing probability of a hit from
visually aimed weapons, especially low speed weapons, such as antitank missiles which require the operator to keep the tank in sight for a relatively long period of time....»

Then

http://www.peostri.army.mil/PM-CATT/...appendix_a.pdf

This is a document for VISUAL SYSTEM FOR THE CLOSE COMBAT TACTICAL TRAINER (CCTT)

«....The use of tactical smoke for screening, silhouetting, and blinding shall be simulated. The laser
range finder shall be appropriately degraded due to smoke....»

This document is for the following CCTT modules:
M1A1/M1A2 tank, M2A2/M3A2, M981 Fire Support Team Vehicle, M113A3 Armored Personnel Carrier, High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV).
and so on...

Maybe nobody ever had a problem with entering range manually? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

May be, but no guy wrote about Abrams LRF ability of that time to function in smoke.
Don't get me wrong, I am not talking that tank with LRF, blocked by smoke, cannot fire at all. I just think that 50%-60% accuracy reduce will be enough.

Re: Thermal imaging
 

Not exactly. With TI you still see tank, even it is obscured by smoke. with APFSDS you dont need accurate range, that thing going flat, so there will be no problems to hit a tank.

Modern lasers are strong enough to go through anyway

Re: Thermal imaging
 

Okay. Anybody here in this forum ever used a laser range-finder or target aquisition system in training and through / with smoke? Some first-hand experience anyone?

Re: Thermal imaging
 

Don't take offence, JaM, but the problem of modern lasers already were discussed. I'm talking about 80s-90s, not 2000 and + years.

As for APFSDS flat trajectory (for about 2000 m for Abrams 120mm gun and 2200 m for 125mm russian tank gun), it is not realised in game. Whether the range is 3000m or 600m or even 200m the LRF is used.
If it is blocked - the accuracy should be severely reduced.