|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
The TOW on the FIST is removed. I believe that's already in the game. There is apparently a stabilizer issue with the older FIST, I don't think this in the game, correct me if I'm wrong. https://i.ibb.co/hsz5YTh/Screenshot-...633-Chrome.jpg All ukranian bradleys are m2 and thus a less upgraded model. The m3 and m7 have a stabilizer. It is implied the older bradleys cannot move and target, specifically the FIST. This might be a general problem with all M2 or just the FIST due to the different electrical work. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
I cannot find a source that the ODS bradley has a stabilizer. There is another model, ODS SA, which does. Ukraine did not get these.
https://i.ibb.co/vXWfp4W/Screenshot-...432-Chrome.jpg The SA is fully modernized and has a stabilizer. This is hard to represent in game as the game assumes stabilizers are harder than thermal sights, based on ww2. A higher fire control value means you have a stabilizer and then a thermal sight. The bradley progression is the opposite as the cost of electronics has gone down and mechanical parts are in shortage. The result is the ODS bradley apparently has a thermal sight with no stabilizer while the SA has everything. I don't know how you represent this in the game but it is a major loss of capability. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Some visual evidence.
https://i.ibb.co/f8rPfDH/070314-A-YG824-002.jpg ODS SA. Note the CITV. https://i.ibb.co/S5TMnX2/Bradley-M2-...es-925-001.jpg ODS model. Note the hood over CITV. https://i.ibb.co/YQdVJSk/JMJTFRFEQ5-...L6-DAPVUSI.jpg Majority of bradleys here resemble ODS, you might be able to find some SA but it's clear not all are SA. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
Note the text "Both vehicles are equipped with Bradley Reactive Armour Tiles" Will adjust... |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
I don't think any IFV has ever used reactive armor in combat, given the reactive armor would penetrate their own thin armor.
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Well that's why we are not paying any attention to what "you think"
https://www.armyrecognition.com/ukra...armor_kit.html https://www.rafael-usa.com/programs/armor/ Quote:
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Mustang - what part of Don's "that's why we are not paying any attention to what "you think"" don't you get?
We don't care what you post. We have told you so. But you just don't seem to get the hint and blithely reply with yet another "you think". Or several!. Your screeds of obsessive "you thinks" on these forums simply aren't worth the electrons expended since their value to us has been proven to be the square root of diddly-squat. Now, please hop it before you get yourself banned, eh? |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
I'm fine with being banned. It's not my opinion. There's multiple factual errors here. Era was never used in Iraq. The bradleys in Ukraine have no stabilizer. And so on. Ban me. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
At the time of its introduction the Bradley was the first IFV with a fully-stabilized main gun. Please note that this is the initial M2A0 Bradley from 1981 -- at the time all this was very $$$$$ -- the UK Warrior IFV doesn't have stabilization even today. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
BTW, copy pasta from /k/:
Current Attrition rates of Western military equipment in Ukraine (According to Oryx, all visually confirmed -- LOST includes damaged and destroyed) Tanks Leopard 2A6 (21) - Lost (9) - (43%) Leopard 2A4 (54) - Lost (7) - (13%) M-55s - (28) - Lost (2) - (7%) Challenger 2 (14) - Lost (1) - (7%) PT-91 Twardy (60) - Lost (2) - (3%) Leopard 1A5 (165) - Lost (0) - (0%) Strv 122s (10) - Lost (0) - (0%) AFVs AMX-10 RC (40) - Lost (4) - (10%) IFVs Bradley M2A2 (182) - Lost (53) - (29%) YPR-765 (196) - Lost (48) - (24%) CV90 (50) - Lost (3) - (6%) KTO Rosomak (200) - Lost (1) - (0.5%) Marder (40) - Lost (0) - (0%) APC M113 (778) - Lost (66) - (8%) FV103 Spartan (114) - Lost (3) - (3%) VAB (60) Delivered - Lost (12) - (20%) Patria Pasi (20) - Lost (7) - (35%) Bushmaster (90) - Lost (8) - (9%) Stryker - (157) - Lost (3) - (2%) |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
For all his whining, Mustang has a point...at what point do we consider a type extinct in service?
Russian Ground Forces had (on paper) 557 T-80 variants pre-war. Of this, 396 have been lost (71%) since the war started. Elsewhere, SIPRI said Russia had about 112~ Ka-52 Alligators in 2019. Oryx has visual evidence of 43 Ka-52 losses. (38.3%) One actually just crashed on a training flight earlier this month and one was just shot down outside of Robotyne: https://twitter.com/osinttechnical/s...35784827826365 https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/s...22168301236226 |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
In any case full stabilization is a SA feature and Ukraine doesn't have it, hence the game is incorrect. Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
Yet southward progress is precisely what the Ukrainian soldiers with the call signs Karatsupa, Pan and Taba seek, driving their American-made Bradley Fighting Vehicles down a road that is also, they believe, the road to Ukrainian victory. Every day, under relentless fire, they drive fresh troops in and spent ones out, with just 30 seconds to make the swap on the battlefield. “I’ve been serving since 2014 and I’ve never encountered such minefields anywhere. Just hectares of them, to the left and to the right,” said Karatsupa. “A lot of trenches, dugouts. And all this for dozens of kilometers. They even throw mines at the territory we are taking. Without the mines, we would already be in Tokmak.” .... But without the Bradleys, say the men, no one would have survived. They proudly showed CNN some of the direct artillery hits the US-made armored vehicles had taken, singing their praises repeatedly |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
Quote:
Bradley has always had stabilization for the chaingun since 1981 |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/...94004193448307 https://twitter.com/GloOouD/status/1670766461248307202 :rolleyes: |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
In the videos you posted it is evident the gun is not stabilized. But anyway, you did find it was able to fire weapons, but you also proved the sight is not stabilized. In the third video there is no Oryx loss traceable to the incident so they are firing at nothing. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
https://i.imgur.com/QfbQu2y.jpg From TM 9-2350-252-10-2 for the Bradley. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA147208.pdf
BRADLEY INFANTRY FIGHTING VEHICLE PROCEDURES GUIDE: COMMANDER AND GUNNER (FEBRUARY 1984) PDF Page 19, says that step #7 in shutting down the turret to exit the vehicle is to MOVE TO OFF...the STAB SWITCH. This is a manual from 1984, for the M2A0 -- we know this because the M2A1 was not introduced until 1986. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
When we can verify that there are none left with more than just hearsay evidence. The Russians never really retire anything even though we had some pulled from reserve units until the info surfaced that some were being re-fitted. Even if there are a handful still running unless they are only in a museum it would be worth keeping in an OOB but maybe put the radio code to 3 to keep the AI from buying them and PERHAPS add a note to the unit that purchasing should be keeping to only a few vehicles due to their rarity but then new info may surface making that wrong. It's a judgment call that WE ( Andy and I ) make. NOBODY else |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
Request granted |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
The entire "conversation" was getting ridiculous. We've been doing this too long to not know when someone's talking out of their arse and neither of us has any patience for it. The insistence that the Bradley gun was not stabilized was not quite the final straw... more like the bale that broke the camel's back There are ample sources that support that it is. This in regards to ERA https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...reactive-armor Quote:
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
regarding challenger II loss
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-footage-shows Western sources indicated on Tuesday night that the tank first struck a Russian mine on Monday, which blew a rear fuel compartment, causing it to be immobilised. The crew then evacuated safely, but as it lay dormant it was then hit by a Lancet drone. This is something that's going to have to be SOP for future militaries -- either recover tanks ASAP or have SHORAD units covering the battlefield to prevent recoverable vehicles from being converted into losses by enemy UAVs. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
Certainly a more viable tactic now that it takes a LONG time to get a replacement for it.......IF you get another one at all. Something that can be repaired is worth making the extra effort to recover it ASAP |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
So the supply train issue comes back to haunt future fighting...who would have thought that...oh wait, everyone who is in combat support who point it out in every AAR and get ignored.
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
https://twitter.com/CasualArtyFan/st...05178421092448 It's just...more tanks and other AFV than CSS to recover them. The usual. :rolleyes: |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
So...the Russians recently restarted tank gas turbine engine production after...30 years.
That's a big deal, because they don't have a lot of machine tools and they already have the V92 Diesel (T-90) and the weird Diesel for the T-14 in production. So why restart tank GTEs after 30 years? Because the T-80 fleet has been mostly extinguished in this war, it can't be about maintaining the T-80 fleet. I think it's because the weight of all the addons on the T-90 (massive ERA addons, the cope cage anti drone stuff) over the decades, and the need for mobility and reliable cold weather start/performance has forced this upon the Russian Armed Forces. They need 1500 HP to maintain a mobility advantage over the AFU's increasingly more mobile western tanks; and the V92 Diesel taps out at around 1150 HP; and the T-14 Opposed Piston Diesel simply doesn't work. Soo....gas turbines by default win. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Abrams is "now in Ukraine" per Zelenskyy, and the US is now talking about an additional 30 to be delivered on top of the initial increment of 30...
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
AFU recovery working well
https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/s...02046953418755 (M2A2 Brad being towed by M88 wrecker) |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
Which means the 10/23 OOB date was a "good guess"........ |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
I would rather think it was an "educated" guess at the time. All the signs pointed to it and maybe we've just been doing it for so long as well.
However, there was a delay which will probably push it back to JAN 2024 before they get all 31 tanks to form the Battalion that will operate them. So far none of the Western tanks or other tanks (M-55S.) have been fielded before their Battalions have received them. They will receive 6-8 in the initial shipment. All are Ex-Marine tanks. I feel the 80 some FEP tanks the CORPS had, have by this time finished their conversion to the M1A1C. The FEP tanks were modernized enough to minimize the time to convert them to the M1A2C standard. I'm guessing saving three to four months less on the production line then the current 18 to 24 months for the rest as has been already posted. https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...aine_soon.html https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe..._pentagon.html Also, I didn't intend at the time to mean nothing more than we wouldn't see the M1A2D (SEP 4) before the game ended. Well thins have taken a dramatic turn NO ONE will see the M1A2D (SEP 4) . "On September 6, 2023, the U.S. Army announced its decision to halt the ongoing upgrades of the M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tank. Instead, the Army has initiated the development of a new armored platform, referred to as the M1E3 Abrams, with the objective of addressing the evolving requirements of future battlefields, particularly those expected to emerge beyond the year 2040." "The Army's official statement indicates that the M1E3 Abrams is anticipated to achieve its initial operational capability in the early 2030s. This timeframe coincides with growing concerns surrounding evolving warfare scenarios, as exemplified by recent events such as the conflict in Ukraine." "This modernization initiative is expected to bolster the effectiveness and maneuverability of armored brigade combat teams on a global scale, achieved by reducing sustainment demands and improving operational and tactical mobility. As part of the transition process, the Army will continue limited production of the M1A2 SEP v.3 until production fully shifts to the M1E3 Abrams. Additionally, critical technologies will be carried forward into the SEPv4 Abrams modernization program." (In other words; the current SEP 4 technologies will serve as the baseline technologies for the M1E3 ABRAMS.) https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...ttle_tank.html Regards, Pat :capt: |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Poor don and andy...:hurt:
Looks like the Russians pulled some BTR-90 pre-production prototypes and used them up in Ukraine. https://twitter.com/praisethesteph/s...74425119367238 Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
My head hurts........
FORTUNATLY they still exist in old OOB's I had saved :D BUT That was not a 30mm gun firing in the second X post and that link to what it claimed was a BTR https://t.me/btvt2019/6252 This is the translation Quote:
Does not show the same forward hull in the video as that link they are totally different This is a BTR-90 There is in an old OOB a BTR-90M-FSV that has a 30mm gun AND a 100mm gun but that was not what was shown firing in that link https://www.militarytoday.com/apc/btr_90.htm The few made could certainly have been sent. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
So for next years patch the US Army loans to the USMC are downgraded to the M1A2v2 SEP. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Just got back very late Sat. night after 4 days out West to see U2 in concert at the Sphere. Yesterday was a recovery day after the both of us walked just over 25-26 miles in those four days in sandals. Don't mess with CINCLANTHOME she can hold her "own powder" quite well. :p
So, I figured, I'd look in and saw my Marine Buddy is on top of her game with the above post. Now about the APS issue with FEP, WELL THAT CAN WAIT UNTIL ANOTHER DAY. It appears the USA is certainly taking the same road to FOC with the M1A2C as they did with the M1A2 SEP 2, where the "magic number" was at least 8 fully equipped and trained Battalions as my memory serves from my submission a few years back (In FB Patch Tread.). As a reminder, the M1A2D as posted is DOA. I know we go back and forth much like Don and I do as well. At the end of the day, I know no matter the outcome, it's all "water under the bridge" and we move on. You have my utmost respect and I've never forgotten that you and IMP (John) were there when I first posted out here and guided me through those initial (And at times current ones as well.) rough patches. I've made a point to NEVER forget those that have been there in my life no matter the circumstances. And I've personally thanked every one of them. In that regard, my conscious is clear before the "big move" occurs. Though I'm quite content to stay where I am for a little while longer if that's OK with the "Big Boss" :angel If anyone thinks you made it on your own, then now would be a good time to wake up and get yourself a STRONG cup of coffee/tea (Or whatever. I like an Ovaltine with a couple of shots of St. Bernards from Londonderry/Derry (N) IE about 5 times a year. ) or "smell the roses". Now that I've digressed, I'll just say good night and have a good morning! Regards, Pat :capt: |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
I have to wonder about the armor package the USMC Abrams had. It was (according to what I could find) the "Heavy Common" package. Did the US Army M1A2 of various iterations use this same armor package or an upgraded one? If the same then yes upgrading M1A1 FEPs to M1A2C shouldn't be too time intensive. BUT ... if the M1A2C uses better armor then ... takes time to manufacture and replace armor ... lots of it. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
That is why my thought was the time saved in the conversion process might only be about 3-4 months not so much because of the armor as much as the electronics was much more advanced on the M1A1 FEP as compared to the rest of the USMC tank fleet at the time.
That leaves a conversation time of 18 to 20 months to complete the process. FEP was more than the FCS and associated systems. For an upgrade such as FEP you're talking about installing more digital subsystems, rewiring, upgrading the powerplant to provide the extra power required to operate the systems and mechanically modifying the cooling systems to protect the circuits and equipment from overheating. It's not much of a leap to think about a Submarine and Tank to be related when it comes to electronics onboard, they both need the same systems to maintain a healthy onboard electronic environment. As I've pointed out in the past, that's why onboard a Submarine we try to maintain an ambient temp. ~70 -72 degrees and cooling systems (Thing a High-End gaming computer using a chill water system.). I used to get some crap out here when I brought that up about tanks many years ago, IT NEVER WAS ABOUT THE CREW; IT WAS ONLY ABOUT THE ELECTRONICS. Thailand when they got their OPLOT-T tanks were ordered with AC units due to the operating environment. While the Ukraine was in Thailand providing tech support for about 2 years guess what they discovered? Besides the fact as on a Submarine the crews worked more efficiently (A side benefit.) which by extension meant so did all the onboard electrical and electronic systems. So, what do you think happened with the OPLOT/OPLOT-M? They also got A/C (I mean this as a general term.) and Chill water systems to support all the above including laser systems as well. Armor advances always DU ARMOR is sandwiched normally between applique armor materials along with ceramic coatings and tiles or both. The primary advances are in applique and ceramic armors. We along with other countries that use DU will use a combination of the above or all together such as us and Israel (As has been rumored). That is why I submitted those foreign sales tanks the way I did. And I feel they are still pretty robust again because we are always advancing the science of armor. I need to hit the rack. my vacation will be over at 1445 later today. Have a good something wherever you are. Regards, Pat :capt: |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Ran across something relatively new and recent for the Russian OBAT. :cold::shock:
https://twitter.com/AndreiBtvt/statu...13509385392522 TOS-2 Tosochka in action in Ukraine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOS-2 https://tank-afv.com/coldwar/ussr/TOS-1-Buratino.php For the TOS-2 Tosochka, they put a new rocket launcher (with it's own on board crane) onto a 6x6 Ural-63706-0120 chassis; combined with a newer longer range rocket. Apparently the TOS-1A can fire three types of 220mm rockets: The original TOS-1A had only a 2700m range with the MO.1.01.04 rocket. This was later extended to 6000m range with the MO.1.01.04M rocket at an unspecified date. In 2020, along with the TOS-2, they introduced a new rocket type - M0.1.01.04M2 (sometimes called TBS-M3?) which has a slightly heavier warhead and 10 km range to counter the longer ranges of modern ATGMs. However, minimum range rose from 400m to 1600m, so the shorter ranged MO.1.01.04M will continue in service for "short range" targets as necessary alongside the longer ranged rocket. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
https://twitter.com/AndreiBtvt/statu...84359725822409
Ukrainian Ministry of Defense has officially adopted three modifications of Leopard tanks for the AFU - Leopard 2A6, Leopard 2A5 and Leopard 1A5 tanks. The corresponding orders were signed by the Minister of Defense of Ukraine Rustem Umerov. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
https://twitter.com/AndreiBtvt/statu...57182767169669
An interview in which a soldier claims the new missiles for TOS-2 have a maximum range of 20 km (?) and at 0:14, a nice top shot for icons: https://i.imgur.com/byjbL2O.jpg |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
1 Attachment(s)
It'll be a few months before the next OOB update which will give more time for research but
https://www.deagel.com/Weapons/M0.1.01.04M/a003355 Shows max range 10km for the M0.1.01.04M2 https://www.armyrecognition.com/ukra...n_ukraine.html shows Quote:
So unless there is a new version nobody knows about except the X poster it has the same range as Russian OOB weapon 150 so I need to do a bit more digging into this to see a new one exists that hasn't been documented yet Good 3D view here https://p.turbosquid.com/ts-thumb/E8...os2_prev06.jpg WIP https://forum.shrapnelgames.com/atta...1&d=1697812151 |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Also, both
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=17571fa1b876 and https://www.armyrecognition.com/ukra...r-50p_apc.html Report Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
......sometimes the "closest available covered spot " is hard to find or not as covered as was thought
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgD4w8y7LVI |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
S--t happens.
If war was safe maybe we could convince the politicians fight them and let the young folk stay home. |
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
Quote:
|
Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarV...ls_great_fear/
StrV 122s (aka Leo 2A5 variant) are shown near the front with their "Barracuda" anti-IR camouflage installed. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:16 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.