New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Newest version of the Cold War 2020 TC mod is out!

Get the install here!

This version is compatible with WinSPMBT v3.5, and includes 11 country OOBs: USA, USSR, Germanies East and West, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Austria, France, Belgium, Netherlands and Libya. Comes with 260 new and revised icons and 300 new LBMS.
The mod is playable in all game modes, including PBEM and against the IA (IA picklists included).

To mod WinSPMBT, download the autoextractor, and extract the files to your WinSPMBT directory. In the game options menu, load the custom OOBs from the "ColdWar2020_v0.4" folder, and you're ready to play!

If you want to return to the original game, use the provided uninstaller that will return the game to the default settings.

Enjoy!

Edit: backup link here, the uploader server seems to have its ways from time to time.
New DL location here if needed.

Edit: DL location changed to latest mod version installer.

Re: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Dead link ???
Thanks.

Re: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Try to use this alternate link, on my end everything works fine, sometimes after one or two retries.

Re: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Plasma : It doesn't work...
(le compteur tourne bien, mais le lien disparaît une fois qu'on arrive à zéro : bizarre...)

Tiens, un lien vers un serveur ultra simple à utiliser (links to a very good and simply servor to upload files ):
http://www.rapidupload.com/

Re: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Yep, same here, the countdown works on the second link and then zippo and the first, well that one doesn't even work.

Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

OK, sorry for the bother everyone, looks like i've picked the wrong uploader.

Try this link

Or this one for backup

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Ok, It is fonctionning très correctly, my plasma chéri !

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Ok, the download went well as did everything else. Once again I would like to say top job. Expect an update from m on the mod (Das Reich) soon.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Okay some suggestions on RC 0.4

US Army:
Is there even a plausible need for the Strkyer? Suggest you delete it from the US Army OBAT for RC 0.5, because what's the point of it when you have the M-8 Buford AGS in service; and there's no mania for a lightweight combat team?

Remember. ****shenski kept harping on about how the "cold war legacy force" was obsolete and so we needed a mobile "objective interim force" to replace it....with the cold war still going on in 1999 and 20007; will Shinkenski ever get such idiot ideas?

-----------

All M163A2 Vulcans (Unit 208) would have long been retired before 2007; and replaced with Bradley Linebackers.

-------------

LOSAT would have entered service on Humvees and on LOSAT Bradley.

-------

USAF B-52s most likely would have been selectively retired beginning in the 2000s with a full production run of 132 B-2s (and perhaps more); making the B-2 a cheaper unit in terms of picklist cost

-------------

The USAF F-22; hmm, I'm assuming it IOCs in 1995, as a pure fighter, with no budget delays, programmatic restructurings; etc.

This also means that it never really aquires the "air to ground" mission it acquired in our timeline to get congress to fund it during it's protracted development, so the F-22 really doesn't have any real strike fighter role, except strafing the ground with 20mm and dropping perhaps 1 or 2 iron bombs; until about 2000; or so, when funding is allocated for the F-22C (F-22B is two seat trainer) to turn it into an all weather aircraft.

---------

A-10 Warthog

Suggest you rename units:

151, 158, 870 and 917 to A-10A Warthog

871 to A-10C Warthog (representing a complete systems upgrade of the A-10 to have thermal imagery, etc etc)

Create a new "A-10B FAC" unit based on this

http://www.sky-flash.com/edwards/034.jpg

to stand in between unit 557 (air OP spotter) and 562 (Predator UAV)

---------------------------------------

F-14 Tomcat is replaced from 2000s onward with the Naval Advanced Technology Fighter

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question...2/f22-natf.jpg

-----------

F-35......would it EVEN exist as we know it in a Continued Cold War?

The Joint Strike Fighter Program came about because of a 1993 defense review which said that each service doing their own tactical aviation programs wasn't affordable, and cancelled the USAF's Multi-Role Fighter (MRF) and the USN's Advanced Strike Aircraft (A/F-X), to create the JSF.

Obviously, with the commies still around, cost is no object.

So lets look at both the programs which gave birth to the JSF:

The USAF wanted the Multi-Role Fighter (MRF) program (begun in 1991) as a relatively low-cost F-16 replacement. Similar in size to the F-16, the MRF was to have been a single-seat / single-engine aircraft, with a unit flyaway cost in the range of $35 to $50 million.

So this most likely WOULD be built, looking I would imagine very similar to Lockheed Martin's X-35 entry, but designated F-24....which is what Lockheed was calling it; they got really pissed about the F-35 designator.

Meanwhile, the US Navy after the A-12 was cancelled along with the NATF; created the A/F-X program; an advanced, “high-end,” carrier-based multi-mission aircraft with day/night/all-weather capability, low observables, long range, two engines, two-crew, and advanced, integrated avionics and countermeasures. The Air Force participated in this new program from its initiation, still seeking a replacement for the F-111 and, in the longer term, the F-15E and F-117A.

With the A-12 not being cancelled....the Navy wouldn't even create the A/F-X program.

I would imagine that the aging F-15Es, F-111s, and F-117As in CWC verse get replaced with your FB-22 (which is already in).

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

There's also a bunch of other what ifs:

http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/1973/boe70s2stm6.jpg

From the 70s, but you can probably use the concept somehow...

http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/4...apache4qj5.jpg

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Now for some commie what ifs!

http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/6...yan1011hh7.jpg
http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/5...yan1012ch4.jpg

Mikoyan Product 101
Crew: 2
Take-off Distance: 150 m
Range: 2,700 km at 530 km/h
Range: 800 km at 670 km/h
Engines: Two Klimov TV7-117SV turboprops of 1,864 kW each
Payload: 3,600 kg

A competition for a COIN aircraft similar to the American OV-10 Bronco was initiated in 1980 to meet the demands of the war in Afghanistan. The Mikoyan proposal designated izdelye 101 won against designs from Sukhoi and Ilyushin. Interest in the COIN aircraft later faded, however, and the 101 was transformed into the 101N, 101NP, and 101N.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Mark, thanks a lot for all the feedback and ideas!
My US OOB will need a full-scale facelift in the near future anyway, so glad you can help.
Just a few words on most of the points:Well, I have kept the Strykers for now, but I was considering a new icon series and a whole new identity. The need for light deployable brigades would still be here no matter what, but I may go for a more sophisticated (think Piranha-IV or Pars/Colonel) design and remove the whole "interim" backstory that's still supposed to remain attached to the Stryker (as in Interim Armored Vehicle).I'm keeping it up alongside the other basic M-113 series (until 2010 or so, Reserve and NG included), to balance the unbearable cost of the Bradley/block-III equivalents.Currently considering the Buford-based version, Bradley is an option if there remains room in the OOB. It will also depend on my ability to come up with either a Buford icon series or decent Bradley derivates.Good point, but not much incidence since the level bombers are player-only units. So keeping some old B-52 available till the end of times can be interesting.Why no fighter-bomber role? What else could replace the F-111 and F-15E on short notice? Both the FB-22 and A-12 are largely more expensive and less devoted to tactical missions. I still need a first-line support fighter to go in-between the A-10 and FB-22.Good idea, I'll see what kind of upgrade can go in on top of the TI.No armed spotters allowed and no need for that one when there are UAVs aplenty. If room allows, some OA-10 could be used as strike/COIN fighters using lighter weaponry based on WP rockets.I'm keeping track on this one, but that's OOB13 stuff only. I'll see which version I can come up with, but don't worry, it's somewhere on my drawing board.Thanks for the info on the Lockheed program, that's one I didn't know about. Mmh... you're right, I'll certainly stick with it for the USAF, I'll need something to replace the F-16. The USN is another matter. I still think the JSF or whatever replaces it is needed in a niche inbetween the A-12 and the F-14 replacement, say as a follow-on to the A-7. The Super Hornet is a no-go for the US market, just not good enough compared to Air Force stuff. A common program still makes sense IMO, big budgets or not. An interesting point in the current JSF program is that it is supposed to be as much a Century Deal as the F-16, and an ever-strong NATO is a good frame for that.As always, thanks for the info. A replacement for the B-2 is low priority enough I'd say because strat bombers aren't that much used in the first place, and the B-2 is able to hold the line well enough until 2020.
The Sea Apache is interesting, and it hits a sore point on my USMC to-do list: which attack helo would the Corps go for, given a choice? I heard they were quite interested in the Apache, so a navalized version could be interesting, if technically feasible. That would only be a sea-based AH of course, not the full-fledged multitask chopper depicted in your document (not exactly the scope of the game).Thanks, I hadn't spotted that one yet. I was aware of Soviet COIN fighter projects, but I was keeping them mostly for export in insurgency-prone or low-budget countries (think Sudan, Yemen, Angola, Vietnam). I'll patch up at least one of them for the next release, which will find its way in the Soviet OOB, as always, if room allows. I've already come up with dedicated icons for the Su-25 replacement (Il-41 Flintlock for now, if anyone can find something better...), which will do for CAS missions in most cases:
http://imajr.com/th/sturmovik3_series_93338.PNG

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Yeah, I've found this to be the best way to approach these things. That was exactly the direction I've taken in my projects (and this was how Laurent had it in his unfinished work too). There are usually enough spotter "vehicles" for the FO Aircraft class, but I still wanted to include these in as well. If you add in the OA-10A/B, then I'd suggest also thinking about adding in the OA-37B.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

You might want to replace the "50mm M411" in future releases with the:

45mm ARES XM295.

It fired XM978 APFSDS-T, and XM979 HEI-T rounds, and was actually part of the US Army's COMVAT program for future light vehicle armament.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Plasma,

Any campaigns planned with this OOB? I'd like to try one as the US. You had helped with a 1953 campaign once - deploying Soviet Airborne forces for one of the battles. I remember it being quite fun.

AB

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Mark, what about the quick-swap 35/50mm autocannon as NATO standard? I have read about integration tests on Bradleys already more than ten years ago, and many real-life IFVs should be able to take it.
OTOH both calibers (and probably a 45mm ARES) aren't capable of much against armored vehicles, which is why I have added a version of the Mech Scout vehicle armed with the 75mm ARES. Do you have anything similar with better penetration results I could use on AFVs?You bet! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
Of course I want to include scenarios and campaigns in the mod! I'll just wait for the OOBs to be in a final enough form so I don't have to update every scenario for every new release. As I said above, I want to overhaul my US OOB for the next release, and include a first version of the USMC.
First on line now is some overseas campaign, probably featuring French expeditionary forces against Libya (that's what they are here for in the first place), USMC or Rangers are close seconds. Some other peripheral-conflict campaign using light US forces would be nice, possibly in the Baltic area. I think I can get some modders to give a hand on the French campaign (and probably one about Hungary vs USSR or something), so feel free to PM me for more details if you want to contribute a US-based campaign.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Did some number punching..

NOTE: data for the 35mm/50mm may not be accurate; did not have at least one penetration parameter to help calibrate the table.

25mm APDS-T M791 (aka Present day non DU 25mm Ammo on Bradley Bushmaster)

16.36 x 75mm sabot (like a minature bullet)

133 gram sabot at 1,345 m/sec; muzzle energy of 0.12 Megajoules

75mm @ 0 meters
66mm @ 500 meters
58mm @ 1000 meters
44mm @ 2000 meters
32mm @ 3000 meters

-------------

German 35mm APFSDS-T (aka Marder 2 Cannon)

6.36 x 190mm sabot (long and thin dart)

295 gram sabot at 1,400 m/sec; Muzzle energy of 0.29 MJ

118mm @ 0 meters
109mm @ 500 meters
101mm @ 1000 meters
85mm @ 2000 meters
70mm @ 3000 meters

----------

German 50mm APFSDS-T (aka Marder 2 Cannon partially telescoped)

10 x 214mm Sabot (long and thin dart)

440 gram sabot at 1,600 m/sec; Muzzle energy of 0.56 MJ

198mm @ 0 meters
180mm @ 500 meters
164mm @ 1000 meters
132mm @ 2000 meters
104mm @ 3000 meters

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Hey great mod!!


Here's a few icons you may be interested in...

These first two are not mine, and I honestly forgot where I found them (and apologize in advance to the creator for not being able to credit him). They are the X-45 & X-47 UACVs:

[image]http://sgt-gunn-winspmbt-files.googlegroups.com/web/ucav%20x-45.bmp?gda=g6NKiz4AAAA1dz3VkrTvSNB1wtwhnC9iG9KMtHO Ee6V-9SLi-VgI2GG1qiJ7UbTIup-M2XPURDRqxJkcxR-ntqSv0dt0wLBx[/image]

[image]http://sgt-gunn-winspmbt-files.googlegroups.com/web/ucav%20x-47.bmp?gda=NLG4wz4AAAA1dz3VkrTvSNB1wtwhnC9iG9KMtHO Ee6V-9SLi-VgI2GG1qiJ7UbTIup-M2XPURDRifwZolaR308kMa1eLThQe[/image]

The next two are remote "pedestal turrets" for the M1 Abrams. The pedestal turret idea appears in the excellent book Air-Mech-Strike: Asymmetric Maneuver Warfare for the 21st Century. A three man crew rides in the hull. The pedestal turret has an auto loading gun (120mm or 140mm), had limited barrel overhang due to the rearward position of the turret and has two side "hard points" for mission based weapon pods that could carry stingers, 2.75" hydra rockets or GAU-19/A .50 cal gun pods for example. The gun has much greater elevation capability (89 deg) than a normal M1 allowing for matter engagement capability in urban areas and the ability to fire indirect - especially with gun launched smart munitions. The hull is equipped with two remote weapon systems on either side of the hill (M240s) for local defense. The turret is also much lighter, allowing for greater mobility, less fuel consumption, and the ability of two M1s to be carried on a C-5/C-17 instead of one.


[image]http://sgt-gunn-winspmbt-files.googlegroups.com/web/M1A3_H_Wood.bmp?gda=grojiEAAAAA1dz3VkrTvSNB1wtwhnC 9iYVW9x8nu308e9FBxODVKamG1qiJ7UbTIup-M2XPURDTlsQCZY5Z_ahYEHllY6CYx[/image]

[image]http://sgt-gunn-winspmbt-files.googlegroups.com/web/M1A3_H_Desert.bmp?gda=5Kdb_kIAAAA1dz3VkrTvSNB1wtwh nC9iYVW9x8nu308e9FBxODVKamG1qiJ7UbTIup-M2XPURDTOlEm1vwZY3O7dFXJCs74Qru7wfS3eXA8K_2l3MhQcT g[/image]

[image]http://sgt-gunn-winspmbt-files.googlegroups.com/web/M1A3_T_Wood.bmp?gda=n6EXHEAAAAA1dz3VkrTvSNB1wtwhnC 9iYVW9x8nu308e9FBxODVKamG1qiJ7UbTIup-M2XPURDQsSZoDgwymUWnAcz-l3XFY[/image]

[image]http://sgt-gunn-winspmbt-files.googlegroups.com/web/M1A3_T_Desert.bmp?gda=VxuTXUIAAAA1dz3VkrTvSNB1wtwh nC9iYVW9x8nu308e9FBxODVKamG1qiJ7UbTIup-M2XPURDT8G2ksw8Fw32G4jObCgGdWru7wfS3eXA8K_2l3MhQcT g[/image]



Adrian

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Hmmm...for some reason the images didn't show up. >:(

Well if you cut and paste those links into your browser, they'll show up. Anyone care to explain how to get images to show in the forum?

Thanks!

Adrian

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Thanks for the icons!

I think I can get a use out of the UCAVs, they are realy good.
I'm going to redo my Block-III tank icon series anyhow, and they should end up conceptually similar to the pedestal Abrams here. The upgraded Abrams I'm using remains visually much closer to the original.

IDK if you checked it out, but I think I'm still using your M-8 AGS icons, by the way.

I have no idea why your images don't show up, I have tried to trick the addresses up, to no avail.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

I don't want to insult your intelligence, but did you leave the "[image]" part out of the address?

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

I liked this mod, I think it has really great potential. All those new icons, pics and soviet OOB changes are really nice! =)
I've noticed one little bug - T-62 icon is really messed up.

And a few balancing thoughts about soviets, will formulate them later.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Quick update:

Latest DL link looks dead more or less, here's a RapidShare one for now.

Working on RC.0.5 for now, focusing on "peripheral theaters", hopefully I'll manage to get some campaigns in. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Do you have a unit list PlasmaKrab ?

Re: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

First, a question: I've been mobhacking quite a bit, but I've only used existing icons. What I haven't figured out yet (and this is probably just my hacking (in-)experience showing...), is how to include some of the new icons out there. For instance, I would really like to steal some of your Cold War 2020 icons for my private MOBhack - for instance the T-95 icon. Can someone help me out here..?

I also have a tiny question/suggestion: Isn't it true that the Russians seem to be going for a 152 mm, not a 135, when experimenting with new tank armament? Is this something to consider for a new version?

Thanks in advance,
Spike

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Just another question/comment... You have fitted the Tu-160 with a decent load of 1000 lb bombs. Pounds? Russian bombs are metrical, are they not? There are 250 kgs, 500 kgs, 1000 kgs and even 1500 kg laser guided munitions.

Also, the Tu-160 is the largest bomber in the world and it carries - at least according to the sources I've read - a heavier bomb load than anything else on the planet. 32 1000 lb bombs equals roughly 15 000 kgs, quite a bit, but still less than what the Tu-22M carries. Is this a mistake, or is it really the case?

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Hi Spike, and thanks for the interest.

Regarding icon importing and exporting, better refer to these two threads where things have been dicussed and explained at length:

http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/thr...o=&fpart=1
http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/thr...o=&fpart=1

Russian 1000lb bombs corrected to FAB-500. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif I let that one slip as it is standard-default weapon linked to Greater Purposes like ammo explosions.

Now regarding bomb loadouts, that's an interesting point. As you mention, the Tu-160 apparently has the largest theoretical payload of all strat bombers in service. Now bear in mind that 1) there are other factors limiting the number of bombs carried IRL like bomb bay room and 2) there may be game-linked balance issues that mean bomb loadouts have been regarded as too large at some earlier point.
If you look closely, you'll notice that the Vietnam-era US B-52s have been given about 2/3 of the bombs they are able to carry, according to Greg Goebel's account.
Thing is, I can't find data on bomb bay layout in the Tu-160 (or earlier Tupolev bombers btw), so I don't know how many of which bombs you can fit in. Given the high-speed/low-observable profile of the aircraft, I'd tend to shun the underwing bomb racks for the standard variant.

Re. the T-95 and its gun, I know about the 152mm gun, but I have kept the 135mm as first intel suggested waaay back, on account of it being more compatible with previous Soviet tank design, mainly in tank size, ammo storage room and autoloader design. In other words, in a T-80-like hull like that of the early low-profile T-95, you could hardly stow 25 152mm rounds, and even then, they would be so short that you'd lose most of what you gained on APDS penetration. IMHO a much more radical tank design would be needed to accommodate a 152, and by the time I have such designs available, I have already switched to high-efficiency ETC 85mm.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

"Thing is, I can't find data on bomb bay layout in the Tu-160 (or earlier Tupolev bombers btw), so I don't know how many of which bombs you can fit in."

I do not have much time at the moment, so you will have to wait for further details and sources. But as far as I remember the only weapons that can be carried in the standard version are Kh-55/Kh-15. No conventional bombs or stuff like that. The modernization which is being carried out should enable enable various conventional bombs to be fitted.
But the non modernized planes are specialized missile carriers with no free fall bombs capabilities.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Hi!

Thanks for the reply, I'll look into the icon issue later today, if I get the time.

Regarding the Tu-160 issue, for my own hack, I have simply taken the Tu-22M layout from the original version and added a few bombs - 8 1000 kg bombs per slot instead of 6. I haven't filled it to the suggested max capacity from some sources, but I still thought it made sense that the largest Russian bomber carried the largest load.

The 152 mm thingy is quite interesting, because afaik, this is where the Russians are be heading sometime in the future, and the sources I've seen, seem to suggest an ammo storage of about 40 for the T-95 (and even for the upgraded T-80...). It sounds weird, so the obvious conclusion must be considering/developing a larger ammo storage. This again suggests a larger design or less armour, which is not the case... For my hack, I've made the T-95 slightly larger (size 5) and given it approx 40 rounds. Probably all wrong, but it is a functioning compromise (I've also given upgraded NATO tanks a 140 mm gun with a similar layout).

I've also noticed that some of your later Russian ATGMs have not been designated as DC or TA. Is this an oversight, or is it deliberate?

Great hack anyway, keep up the good work!

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Thanks for the info, Marcello. That the original version of the Tu-160 cannot carry anything else than nuke cruise missiles make sense, as that was the case with most cold-war era strat bombers.
That the modernization allowing it to carry conventional ordnance happens only these days at a slow pace (I guess) is one of the things the Cold War mod is precisely meant to correct. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif From this day my bomber Blackjacks happen only from 1995 onwards.

Re. 152mm, we shall see if the Russians are heading anywhere like this in the real world. AFAIK no country has actually got anything beyond the 120/125 standard in service, despite numerous design efforts (Leopard-2KWS3, Leclerc, K2, Merkava-Mk4...) so the need isn't that appalling, and real-life Russians have enough work catching up on APFSDS technology and maybe transitioning to one-piece ammo (qv Black Eagle) before doing anything silly.
Talking about ammo loadout, I realize I have been a bit on the generous size with my T-95s.
AFAIK the original projects for the 140mm gun called for a two-piece round taking the room of 1.5 120mm round, meaning around 30 rounds for converted Western tanks. That's without including lengthened storage that would be obvious on autoloading tanks and should raise the ammo count to ~36.

You'll have to tell me more about these ATGMs, Spike, because I don't see where the issue is.

Keeping up the good work, R.C.0.5 due next week...

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

"Re. 152mm, we shall see if the Russians are heading anywhere like this in the real world. AFAIK no country has actually got anything beyond the 120/125 standard in service, despite numerous design efforts (Leopard-2KWS3, Leclerc, K2, Merkava-Mk4...) so the need isn't that appalling, and real-life Russians have enough work catching up on APFSDS technology and maybe transitioning to one-piece ammo (qv Black Eagle) before doing anything silly."

I have to disagree to a certain extent. No country has gone from 120/125 to 140/152 because of the post cold war circumstances. You don't need a 140mm to deal with some arab T-72M1. 152mm guns on the other hand were not fielded because they were unaffordable under the economic conditions prevalent. If, on the other hand, one is assuming an ongoing Cold War and a healthier eastern economy things get very different. The 125mm are in trouble against western third generation MBTs, while the 120mm may be insufficient against the soviet fourth generation monsters. Whether the 135mm or the 152mm are chosen may come down to MIC politics.
Although the soviets were originally heading to a dead end regarding APFSDS design, items like the BM-46 show that they have learned quickly and do not have all that to catch up.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

As far as my sources show, the BM-46 was still a couple of yards behind contemporary 120mm rounds, but let's not start this debate again. What I meant was that without even having taken the pains of developing and fielding a 135/152mm gun, the Russian engineers could work up the gap and match current western ammo or armor designs (whichever they think of as the target), e.g. by transitioning to bustle autoloader and one-piece ammo with long-rod penetrators. Like they look like doing on the Black Eagle concepts.
Such a solution would be leagues cheaper and could be more easily retrofitted on older tanks, e.g. T-84 Oplot, T-55AGM... There's plenty of life left in the 125mm design, so I don't see the transition as urgent.

And that reflection was regarding real-world only. As far as I'm concerned, I have transitioned the Soviet tanks to 135mm from the late 90s (T-95A) as a direct answer to the first western 140mm tanks (M1A3, Leo2A8...), which is a direct answer to the predicted armor levels of the T-95 generation. Also, this 135mm (chosen over the 152mm as an easier technical solution for transitional designs, as explained above) remains in 1st-class units only for about 10 years, while other theaters get new 125mm rounds able to deal with anything they'd encounter in Central Asia or on the Chinese border.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

"As far as my sources show, the BM-46 was still a couple of yards behind contemporary 120mm rounds, but let's not start this debate again."

I did not mean that the BM-46 was the bleeding edge of world APFSDS design. Merely that it shows that they are not hopelessy behind and do not have a massive amount of catch up to do. They may still have a few thing to learn but not everything.

"by transitioning to bustle autoloader and one-piece ammo with long-rod penetrators. Like they look like doing on the Black Eagle concepts."

A one piece ammo would be incompatible with the existing tanks, without what would amount to a substantially
expensive retrofitting. You might as well change caliber and be done with it. Then I am not sure about why long rod penetrator have anything to do with one piece ammo or separate charge.The british seem to have no issues with having separate charge and decent APFSDS. The limitation with the soviets tanks was the projectile lenght enabled by the autoloader design. There is a workaround which has been incorporated in the T-90/T-72BM.
I have not seen diagrams for the Black Eagle so I do not know what is supposed to be going inside it but there is a possibility that it was done just for flexibility (several weapon configurations were available for it).

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Why do we keep going on about this already? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
I agree that transitioning to 152mm can be an option for future tank design, time will tell. I agree that the Russian isn't 40 years behind in APFSDS performance, maybe 10 or 15 though, and that rebuilding older tanks with a bustle autoloader is no mean task.
I still consider that full-length rounds allow for heavier rounds with decent L/D ratio. AFAIK the British don't field anything with penetration ratios on the level of an M829E3 or DM-53. Now if you tell me they do, I'm ready to take the evidence into account.

I was just trying to point out that it would be on the whole easier, shorter and cheaper to develop new 125mm ammo for the current tanks and upgrades thereof, than developing a brand new 152mm-gun tank, as things stand these days in the real world. Both options are not mutually exclusive and wouldn't serve exactly the same purpose, but I guess the Russian military would have to make a choice. That was just to support the "maybe not 152mm for real right now" argument.

Now as far as regards the Cold War 2020 mod, I have selected the 135mm in full agreement with myself, for various reasons ranging from compatibility with transitional tank designs to easier to model physics through ammo loadout.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

"and that rebuilding older tanks with a bustle autoloader is no mean task."

You still have to cut the turret though. The autoloader modification on the T-90 or the T-72BM upgrade is rather less dramatic. And even if the newest APFSDS cannot be carried in non refitted tanks, HE, HEAT and propelling charges are still compatible, which would not be the case with a new monobloc ammo. The british are going to drop their main gun for NATO standard 120mm,so there is no reason to develop a M829A3 lookalike, but that is more for standardization and rifled vs smoothbore issues than any limitation of the separate charge. I have never found the separate charge to be described as a substantial limiting factor for APFSDS performance.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Re the new Russian ATGMs. As far as I can see, the next-generation versions (Sokol, Feniks etc) are all categorised as regular ATGMs, not as DC- or TA-ATGMs. Since the Russians are very much into double charge HEAT (and even triple charge, apparently...) systems, I was a bit puzzled that the next generation would use single charge charges. I'm not saying this is a big deal, I was merely a bit surprised:)

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

OK, I get the idea.
Look at it closely and you'll notice that these missiles have a basic AP penetration value, not HEAT. In other words, they are KE missiles...
No need for a tandem warhead then, right?
Look up the US CKEM and LOSAT, which work the same way.
I've tested this modelization of KEMs, and the PA value doesn't draw down with range, the resistance to basic ERA is rather good, and the AP values takes on the steel armor value of the target without problem.
Only issue I'm having is that since these missiles are class-13 standard ATGMs as you noted, and with rather lower penetration values than HEAT weapons, the cost is artificially low.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Use big HEAT value and for cost-calcullation swotch rounds to HEAT, then switch them back?

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Sure but which HEAT value do you take? I'll have to investigate it anyhow.

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

As big as you need to get the desired cost in calcullation http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif Clashed on the same problem with TOW-2B (esp. M3 CFV got ridiculously cheap), but trying out this approach had to wait till now http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Right... I thought it was a bit strange. When I've fiddled with KE missiles, I've given them a very high AP penetration instead. I guess you've tried this as well, and discarded the idea due to range issues. Or..?

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

Please disregard my last post, I'm obviuosly either thinking too much or not enough this morning...

Re: Fixed: New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)
 

That's why I prefer to post serious posts in the afternoon unless it's something really trivial http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif In the morning I'm unuseable for thinking http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif