Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

I find many errors about soviet artillery in game:
1) soviet anti-tank gun MT-12R not have right data. This gun have radar FC system. For game vision would be 75 (no less), so gun radar have range more then 3500 veters (for game more then 70), all data for fire acces from computer FC system in automatic mode, accurancy fire from radar FC more then accurancy from visual FC. Radar FC was 50 (for game). Data abot this gun in russian: http://npostrela.com/index.php?optio...d=86&Itemid=61
2) need insert in game smoke with cancelled view and visual and thermal, so this smokes was for radar anti-tank gun MT-12R. (For this gins smoke discharger near 10 this smoke)
3) US tank M1A2 need lower armor rate from HEAT less then HEAT piercing russian RPG-29. Link for destroy M1A2 in Iraq from RPG-29 in front hull: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-5RW...layer_embedded
Destroy M1A2 in Iraq from RPG-29 in front turret: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJUiT...eature=related
In all case US tanks was destroyed.
4) So US have Abrams wit gun 2013 year Russia also need for new tank in long perspective: I find new russian tank with 7 cats: http://media.aplus.by/2007/03/04/tank_t95_foto.html
And data from wiki: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2-95
(For game): crew 2 people, speed more then 75km/h, 1 152mm gun with 42 shells. New SABOT near in 2 time more piercing then SABOT for 125mm gun. For gun made SABOT, HE and HEAT shells. 1 30mm AA gun instead soviet 12,7mm MG on top turret (not place yet in foto). 1 7,62mm coaxial MG in turret. CIWS - 4, VIRSS - 2, stabiliser - 6, radar FC - 50, radar vision - 75. Armor(heat) - front hull - 110 (150), front turrer 130 (180), side hull - 40 (70), side turret - 42 (80), rear hull - 20 (30), rear turret - 25 (35), top - 130 (180)(if you can see in foto tank top is tank front turret armor list). ERA armor is relikt (A8) in front hull and turret and side hull and turret. About radar rangefinder - unknow what calculate for game.
5) soviet anti-tank gun 2A45M have less FC, then MT-12 what have FC is 15 (not version for radar FC). I think, that need rise FC russain 125mm anti-tank gun for 15 (no less), so new russian FC can not bad then soviet FC what was made early.
6) in game is abscent total soviet 100mm AA gun with radar FC what was in army from 1946 year: http://hist.rloc.ru/lobanov/6_05.htm
7) in game is abscent total soviet 130mm AA gun: http://mega.km.ru/weaponry/encyclop....picNumber=1665
This AA gun was shuting against anti-Iraq planes and Tomahawk in 1991 year for example.
8) In game is abscent total soviet 37mm AA gun "61-K": http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/61-%D0%9A
9) In game is abscent total soviet ZSU "ZSU-37": http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%A1%D0%A3-37
10) After WWII in soviet army was brigade with 305mm howitzer "obr 1915 year". This brigade was loss it's gun in lare 1954 year, so 305mm howitzer was from 1946 to 1954 years.
11) in game is abscent total russian radar Fara for radar FC heavy MG, grenade launchers. Fara have range 5 km (or 100 hex for game). Foto AGS-17 with radar FC from radar FARA: http://images.yandex.ru/yandsearch?p...jpg&rpt=simage
Foto people observation radar "Fara-1" and radar FC "Fara" for 12,7mm heavy MG in link: http://milkavkaz.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=77847

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Just to address some points:
3) Hard to judge anything from these videos, for example the first one looks more like the left track was hit, and definitely there is no way to judge post-penetration effects - but there seems to be no fire. It might have been a mission kill, in case of penetration the driver would prolly have a bad bad day. But you can easily have this result in SP by combining "bonus penetration" and damage to vehicle - in fact in SP it would be likely to result in total kill.
4) Re. T-95, to my knowledge it did not exceed the same stadium as Black Eagle turret - IOW mockup. Atleast so far.
6+7) Heavy AA guns are not and will not be there, as they work different than light AAA and there's no way how to make them fire long-range barrages.
10) 305mm howitzer is a niche weapon and there is only so much space, esp. in Russian OOB, so choose which weapon to delete. And given that deleting any weapon might well mess up scenarios, Not Gonna Happen.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Sorry, my english not good:
1) M1A2 after hit in front hull smoking from turret
M1A2 after hit in turret not kill people with RPG-29. You can see where people stay. If M1A2 not destroy so people was killing.
2) about new tank - see foto please...
Tank with working turret. Testing tank with 6 cats, not 7 cats.
3) about russian OOB - I hope, that autors made OOB more then 999 units.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

1) I see rather much dust kicked up by the explosion billowing all over the place, does not seem like smoke to me. Not returning fire might have something to do with a) assessing damage (if there was any - as I said, if it penetrated, driver was most likely injured - either him, or someone else in the path of the jet), b) vicinity of civvies in the field of fire, c) not seeing where to return fire.
2) Did not lok at pics at first, my bad - the vehicle on pics is not T-95, but Black Eagle demonstrator - as was lately revealed, a mockup (not that hard to make it rotate) - without gun (with only mockup 125mm or 135mm), without armor etc. Just a sales stunt that failed - T-90 gets customers, nobody was willing to pay the development of this beast.
3) The problem lies not only with unit slots, but also with weapon slots.

Of course the solution is simple - try making your own OOB11 ;) It's not that hard, if you do not try to rearrange it completely, with moving units and formations :) It is true that you can possibly reduce say number of 100mm and 125mm guns to gain some space, but only at cost of messing up scenarios.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Well, I hope, that I made it...

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

I don't see any smoke coming from the turret hatches once the dust and explosion smoke are cleared, nor there is any picture of the aftermath to show what happened to that vehicle.
For all that we know it it may not even have immobilized it. There is simply not enough info to make a call and given it is propaganda the proverbial pinch of salts need to apply.

There has been a fair amount of debate about the radar unit on the MT-12 being little more than an all weather radar rangefinder or being actually useful for target acquisition as well. If the source is correct then it is a capable and likely cost effective system, though I would suspect that target classification would leave something to be desired compared to a thermal sight.


As a policy heavy antiaircraft guns like the above are not present in the game as anti-air units. The only ones available, such as 85mm KS-12 in some OOBs, are classed as antitank guns.
This because in the anti-air mode they would be used to shoot at level bombers, which are used very sparingly in the game.
If you check the the others OOB you will see the various 90mm, 3.7 Inch QF etc. aren't available either.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

About MT-12R - it's site developers gun radar. And about classification - not need. Smoking forward gun smoke with not see visual and thermal and fire through smoke in all targets what was find.
About 100mm and 130mm AA guns - I understand.
About M1A2 - I not hope see anyone other. All like western propaganda and refuse facts... as usually.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

What facts are being refused? The videos are totally inconclusive, not facts, the only thing you may tell for sure is that Abrams is being hit by RPG-29 (and even then that is sure only in the first video, the other might be well by popular method of filming a guy "aiming" a RPG somewhere safe and then cutting and pasting the hit sequence). Unless you manage to link the incident on tape with US casaulties, it's inconclusive re. destruction or not.
I can recall for example one much-touted video of Stryker being blown up spectacularily, in a massive bang and cloud of smoke and dirt... And then finding out the vehicle in question in fact suffered only superficial burns and was able to ride on (which of course was not seen on the insurgent vide claiming "destruction") and lots of similar cases (let's for example have look at how many times was Cajone Eh - the Abams that remained in Baghdad after the first Thunder Run - filmed and reported as "yet another destroyed US tank"). Besides take a look at statistics from Lebanon, 2006 - only IIRC 10% of penetrating hits on Merkavas produced a casaulty, large casaulties among tankers were mostly commanders and loaders being hit by splinters when fighting out of hatches. So the mere fact there is a hit on the video means nothing more than that there is a hit - unless clear signs of damage can be shown. Think of it as of WWII rules for acknowledging kills for fighter pilots.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Video just quite sufficient. But here there are no proofs something for those who is not capable to accept them. For such any proofs will be insufficient. It is passed and time and again. And concerning Lebanon. In the Russian segment of a network there are foto Merkava 4 turret (for example) amazed in a forehead the Cornet. And thus destroyed. And in game know that the Cornet 4 does not punch a forehead of a tower of Merkava. As well as Mekava 4b. But I here did not stammer at it at all because a forum western and here practically any facts against western wunderwaffe will be recognised by insufficient. Therefore rework OOB 11 and all.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

If you mean the second pic on following link, you might notice, that the armor took the hit as designed and the Merkava soldiers on. If you mean some other picture, it would be nice if you posted a link.
http://defense-update.com/analysis/lebanon_war_3.htm

EDIT: Anyway, the entire discussion is off topic, so if you want to continue, it might be a good idea to a) start a separate topic or b) sendme a PM. I am always interested in new information and possibilities for well-reasoned discussion.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

http://www.waronline.org/IDF/Article...ar/acv-losses/

And US and Israel tanks losses with reasons: http://krasmana.org/post26618.html

In 1 picture M1A2 destroy by 12,7mm HMG. Anyone can destroy M1A2 in game from 12,7mm MG?

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

How can you consider as more trustworthy a video that doesn't show anything but smoke as proof that the RPG 29 can destroy a M1A2 when it hits it on its front armour?
The tank was damaged a bit, but knocked out? Where do you see that? I have also yet to see smoke coming out of the tank. Where is the proof you see because I can't see anything there to support your conclusions.

Seeing those two videos proves nothing because they show nothing but the explosion from the hit and some minor damage at best.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

As you understand it's real war video, and after launch RPG-29 operator can not made detail video tank and made video what was with crew. Grenade RPG-29 explosion inside tank and for camera all what you can see - you can see. For you may be 1 answer - see where was people with RPG-29 and after lauch grenade tank silence. Before turret is training. If you can see video, so tank not fire against Iraq partisans with RPG-29. As you understand in sich range in front tank nothing was live after unaccesful attack.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

A lot of the supposed kills by insurgents wielding a wide array of weapons in Iraq were mobility kills, with the vehicles later knocked out (usually by air strikes) to prevent capture of sensitive equipment. A lot of the catastrophic damage can be attributed to this and not the initial attacks.

I wouldn't be any more willing to believe a Georgian with a .50 caliber machine gun had taken out a T-62 if presented with the type of evidence provided here.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Sorry, my english not good and I not understand about Georgia and T-62.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

And more - M1A2 destroy by Malutka from BMP-1. Hole you can see near gun.
http://phorum.bratishka.ru/viewtopic.php?t=8258

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

But what you say about smoke from the barrel does not stand! There is no such thing! If it isn't in the video, then how do you know it was there unless it was you who fired the RPG!

The M1A2 does look damaged, but only lightly near the armor over its left track. I do not believe the rpg killed that M1A2.
The second M1A2 looks like it was hit on the back, but again apart from the explosion we do not get to see the actual damage done to the tank. How do we know it was knocked out? Why would I (or you) believe some random anti american post about this?

You are falling into the same trap you accuse people here of falling into. You immediately accuse people here of believing USA propaganda and of blindly supporting USA, but you do the exact same thing for the other side. That is not better!

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Not got time to look at the evidence but a few things
You said RPG 29 should be able to defeat Abrahms from the front, guess what in game it can though need a bit of luck. Fail or damage more likely result so its about right. RPG 28 now thats a kill most likely on a hull hit.
As a note not one of these guys answering is American so theres no patriotism here just best guess based on the reliable info available as the whole game is.
The other thing you pointed out was Merkerva Mk4 & ATGMs which I played a lot recently & on the odd occasion you will get a surprise mobility kill so thats not far off either.
You cant seriously think the game is slanted to the West Abrahms or T-90A in game I would say the Russian tank has better battlefield survivability by quite a margin, no soft belly & very good ERA pack on top of the armour

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

What you can see there re. Merk IV are mostly repeated pics of a Merk that shrugged off hit to left turret front and of a Merk that was destroyed by a large explosive device underneath. Oh, and one Merk that lost its gun to a freak hit.


At least two pics of that set in first post are actually Cojone Eh, that Abrams I was talking about as repeatedly photographed.
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtop...9831&start=270
Immobilised by a hit in the engine compartment, then towed a bit by other Abrams, but that was too slow so abandoned and set on fire by its crew. Subsequently bombed and Mavericked by the USAF.
If you look carefully, others pics are often same vehicle from different views as well, for example the Abrams under overpass.

Tried searching for "12,7" to no avail in all links. I would be sceptical - now if we were talking 30mm APFSDS (which the Iraqis did not have), there might be something as 25mm APFSDS was able to kill a T-72 from flanks and the armor (without protective skirts) is similar.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

You need translate text from russian. Describe destroy write in russian.
And about M1A2 - armore side is 30 mm armore list after skirt and all. 30mm AP shells from BMP-2 can penetrate Abrams 30 mm lists from 500 meters, and SABOT 30-mm shells can penetrate Abrams 30 mm lists from 2000 meters. T-72 (Ural) - first T-72 have side armore is 70 mm armore list and in Iraq no one T-72 not destroy by Bredly from 25-mm gun in hull side or turret side.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Yes, except for the little detail that the side skirts on the Abrams are actually the main armor, being about 60mm thick according to most estimates, and made of composite armor in the most critical areas, as it can be clearly observed in the following picture (note the multiple layers in the damaged armor).

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/3531/efp2picjy4.jpg

On the other hand T-72 side skirts are only rubber with just enough steel for stiffening and maybe the odd ERA brick if/when/where present.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

You had suggested that there was a bias based on nationality. I was saying that if the nationalities were different, but the evidence was the same, I would still not believe the scenario to be true.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Look at the top of the To&e section. Do you see the thread titled "Error reporting procedure " ?? Read it please because any further reports from you that do not follow that procedure will simply be ignored. Do you see an " MT-12R" gun in the OOB's ?? No you do not because it's written up as 100mm MT12R AT because of game naming restrictions . I have what amounts to 87 printed pages of "errors" real or imagined to deal with for the next patch. If you cannot be bothered telling me the actual unit name and number I don't see a point in my wasting my time guessing so any further reports done in the way you did this one will just be ignored .

If you are interested in how another Russian PROPERTY reported errors, even though his English is no better than yours take a look here http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=38643 then consider that this was just the weapons list , there was a units list as well that we spent a considerable amount of time reviewing and making corrections to the Russian OOB for the last release before assuming the game has the "western Bias" as you so clearly assume it does .

Also. I have as little ( NONE ) patience for the people complaining we haven't made everything produced in Russia some kind of wonder weapon as I do with the opposite types who want us to downgrade everything Russian to junk. We have always strived to be fair given ANY real info is classified by both sides


Point 2 Smoke is smoke in the game. The "smoke" you get with VIRSS is not smoke in a game sense. It's just a graphic to show the code is processing the info that there will be additional calculations to the to-hit code because a VIRSS event was recorded. You may have noticed VIRSS in game has no effect on any shots except the one that triggered it's release because it's not real "smoke" in game terms. There is no plans to tear apart the smoke code and risk spin off effects

Point 3 regarding the PRG-29 has already been dealt with my others. The stats in game for both it and the armour of the M1A2 will stay as is. As has been noted given the correct conditions an RPG-29 will penetrate an Abrams in the game just not every time you fire one

Point 4.. DO NOT use Wikipedia as a "source" the information found on wikipedia can sometimes be as questionable as those "documented" Abrams kills, GENERALLY any " future" weapons systems I ignore until it actually makes and appearance because over the past couple of years we've wasted a considerable amount of time pulling things out that were put in years ago that were "supposed " to be issued to the troops but ended up cancelled then we end up with a OOB that needs things taken out which just wastes our time. The M1A2 SEP Abrams with the 120mm M256 13 gun was added last patch as a what if for the people whining we had put in North Korea, Russia, China, etc future weapons systems and didn't the US. That was primarily because of things like the Chiorny Oriol were in the Russian OOB ( that is now gone and about as "real" as that T-95 tank on the wiki link ) what I should do it pull out the Abrams using that gun until someone proves it's been issued... NOT add more crap that I'll end up pulling out of the OOB in a couple of years

Point 5. There is no "2A45M" gun in the OOB by that name. When you provide the correct in game name and unit / weapon number as per the error reporting procedure I will look into it

Point 6 and 7 Have you seen ANY Heavy AA in the game ?? NO you haven't and it's not going in the Russian or any other OOB.

Point 8. FINALLY something worthwhile. When you can tell me it's out of service date in the Russian Army I will enter it

Point 9 . 75 were made and it was retired from service soon after series production was stopped in 1948. Why waste what few spots are left in that OOB on that ? If you want to play with it it's in spww2 unit slot 100

Point 10. There is NO information regarding a 305mm obr 1915 howitzer on the internet except your post and something in Czech that's been deleted

Point 11. 5 KM range ?? Really ?? http://warfare.ru/?catid=251&linkid=...-Warning-Radar says 4 km but that's for large objects and gives the following example

Detection range of man/car/helicopter/vessel, km 2 / 4 /4 / 4

any unit in the game with normal 40 vision could be said to be using one of those as 40 will pick up men moving at the eqivalant of 2 Km. As well, many of these radars are used for artillery spotting and are already represented in the game as well. As for MG and AGL use I will put that on the list to look into. It's one thing to say they CAN be used ... that doesn't mean they actually are ised by troops in the field. Prove to me they are issued in quantity to MG and AGL units and I will ensure they get into the OOB. Then we'll review if any other nation deserves 40 vision AGL's and HMG's


FINALLY......

The comment about a 12,7mm HMG taking out a Abrams is, to me, total fantasy, and the fact you repeated it as fact causes me to question any claim you may have to objectivity as this only proves you'll believe just about anything .

Don

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

In Soviet Russia HMG crew kill tank! :D

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/un...propaganda.jpg
Yakov Smirnoff:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakov_S...ssian_reversal

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

The only way I can think of a bullet destroying a M1A2 tank is if...it is piggy backing an AT rocket, or if the bullet manages to enter the main gun right at the moment it is firing and for some reason it creates an explosion that makes all the C4 that is on top of the tank go boom. (that was a joke)

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

For DRG:

I not the pedant that the nobility all about that as is correct and with commas to do a writing of a post with game errors. Further, your prejudiced relation and that you not in a condition to read the laid out sources even through transfer Google shows that to you well-known the specified lacks of game, but you prefer not to correct them that spiteful Russian have not obtained the authentic data. In other words prefer to support the western myth about the western weapon as вундерваффе. Reading your posts I it saw many times. I at all do not read википедию because it is the American project on which there is no trustworthy information. And this time has by way of exception addressed only because there have merged the expected data of the tank. The person to which also has merged it is possible to trust. I do not know, how many they there will hold on, while their moderators not "will lead to a kind convenient for the West". About 2А45М I spoke nothing - it is not necessary for me such to attribute. Heavy зениток in game I did not see and only have offered them. Having learnt the answer that they are not present, I did not begin to add them in processed Russian ООБ. Which I will not spread here because to you it can become bad with heart if you see it. About destroyed from 12,7-mm of a machine gun of Abrams is anywhere in a network and under the laid out reference is not only its description, but also a photo. It is clear that it is unpleasant to you, but a life as a rule unpleasant. And many facts do not correspond to someone's expectations. Therefore esteem a source. It will be better. On 305-mm to howitzers - I assumed, what if I have forgotten to insert a link you can find it because this business of 10 seconds if be able to use Google and have a head. Here the reference: http://scucin-avia.narod.ru/dalnij/p...br-history.htm In the documentation on game it is specified that 40 is thermal, and the Fara is a radar. Therefore at least 50 hexes that mean 2,5 km in a reality.

In the form of a result - I have written about game errors simply to learn the relation of developers to a reality. At you it negative also admits only a case when the reality confirms quality of the western weapon. On it also I will finish.

And link (you himself can not find sich total): http://www.rusarmy.com/forum/topic513.html

As 1 Iraq Mi-24 destroy near 38 US vehicles and 1 US helicopter. But YOU need to be reserved to tablets for heart:)

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

The irony is that you do exactly what you accuse the developers of doing.

And in the game, a Mi-28 can destroy 38 US vehicles and 1 US helicopter, it depends on how YOU play. Have you ever played the game?

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Yes, I playing in game from time Steel Panthers in 1990 years... After it was Steel Panthers 2 and more.... Now I playing in WINSPMBT.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

High five!

http://www.h2dj.com/uclaradionews/fi...-high-five.jpg
Great Success!

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

I guess you really have no idea that this mangled translation is virtually unreadable but from what I can understand you are suggesting that we, as game developers, should accept without question anything , no matter how outrageous or far fetched, if it is delivered by a Russian and all Russian sources are 100 % true and accurate. It would be impossible for any Russian website to stretch the truth or even simply be wrong and whatever story accompanies a photo of a destroyed western tank is Gods own truth.

You don't even remember what you posted at the start of the thread. Obviously you need a reminder so here it is


<<<<<<<<<<<

I asked you what you were referring too and you don't bother to even try to co-operate but instead denied mentioning it. Continued behaviour like that will ensure your time on this forum will not last much longer. I can guess you are referring to the units in the game known as 125mm Sprut-B/m. The FC ratings were too low compared the older guns. That error was inadvertently overlooked during the last patch work and has now been investigated and corrected. I also asked you for information on the out of service date of the 37mm ZP obr 39 AA gun but get nothing useful to the game in return. This tells me you are more interested in getting attention and make speeches than providing useful information

Normally a remark like that will get you banned but I'm going to let it go and blame the translator. The search I did last night ( "305mm" " howitzer" "obr 1915 " ) revealed exactly what I said it did. Taking out "obr" reveals a bit more info but last evening I was rushed for time. In any event we will not be adding super heavy arty like this to winSPMBT so forget the idea you expressed on the SP Russia forum that this would lead to other super heavy arty being added to the game. The line is drawn for artillery at 250 mm

You even ask KraMax about the 203mm guns but they are all in the game

From this I know you are aware of Maxim Yegorov's ( KraMax ) and the info on corrections and errors he has contributed to the game and you should be aware, but don't seem to be, that a great many of the suggestions he passed on to us were implemented in the last patch so we hardly ignore any good information provide to us by your fellow Russians from SP Russia . Those changes caused a major problem with scenarios that was also corrected with the 4.5 patch so to even SUGGEST we don't listen to suggestions from Russians is pure nonsense but it would appear you have a very large chip on your shoulder

That said, between the obvious poor attitude you bring to this forum plus your willingness to believe just about anything like the 12,7mm MG story I would suggest any further suggestions you may have about the game be passed on to KraMax who can pass them on to me if there is any validity to them. KraMax understands how information should be passed on and you simply do not

As for the T-95, you should have listened to "Beast" when he told you "you have been misled". Even Wikipedia says "information on this tank is based on unverified data."

When and if it's proven it does exist and is being produced for the Russian army use we will add it to the game until then it's just another "what if "


Don

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

I did see a T-62 that was taken out by a USMC LAV-25 during the first Gulf War.
The T-62 was stationary and they drilled a hole in it using the 25mm sabot rounds. As I recall the guy said it took about 100 rounds to do it :D

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Must have been the elusive M1A2 Halftrack :)

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

I have often heard this 25mm vs T-62 accident (or a similar one) being touted as the "proof" that US armor piercing rounds capabilities are greater than estimated, that DU is uber etc.
Needless to say everyone was pretty vague about the details of the engagement :re:.
Nice to know it was cumulative damage against a static target requiring a disproportional expenditure of ammunition. Any AFV can be penetrated in this way by weapons it would normally be able to resist.

For an historical example see this King Tiger shot up at Kubinka

http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/9...athumbl037.jpg

In the field with it moving and shooting back achieving all those hits would be a bit tad more complicated...

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Actually the described incident seems to be some GIs having fun wioth captured stuff, but 25mm DU (or 30mm APFSDS for that matter) seems to have enough potential to punch through side or rear hull of most tanks (as it can do in game) - given you're lucky enough to survive to get close enough ;) After all T-34 would be able to destroy Abrams, if it gets to flank or rear. Or M3 light or T-70 for that matter ;)

I should have mentioned that the T-62 was supposed to have been penetrated in frontal arc in those tales; that the side hull hull, rear etc. would be penetrated by an high performance autocannon round is not a controversial matter.
A glacis penetration by means of cumulative damage (as in the KT picture above) seems entirely feasible as well, but that requires a cooperative target...

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

OK, fine but the issue was 12.7 mm rounds not something with 8 times the penetrative ability

Don

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Do you know what part of the tank the picture features? I would also be interested to know what rounds caused the various sized holes. Nice picture :up:

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

It looks more like something cluster ammo would cause.

It's the front of a Tiger 2. The big hole is where the BMG used to be and I'm guessing it was 152mm AP that did that, maybe 122

Don

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

As Marcello said it was just an example of "could happen" given optimal conditions and lots of ammo.

I suppose you could do the same with 12.7mm AP rounds - eventually. Assume each round puts a 1mm divot in a tanks armor you could drill thru with a few hundred/thousand rounds!

Of course there are always folks fail to see the difference between possible and practical :rolleyes:

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Hull front, as noted.

152mm,122mm and 100mm, both AP and HE, and 85mm AP. US made 76mm was also fired but possibly only at the sides.

Not really. HEAT typically leaves small diameter holes.Besides given the angles involved it would be very problematic.

BTW source is:
http://www.battlefield.ru

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

I missed the whole "this is a WW2 tank" part.

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Post 33

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Don,

Maybe you shouldn't pull out this one too quickly:

The U.S. Army Weapon Systems Handbook 2010 mentions under "Future Tank Main Gun Ammunition" a new KE round tentatively named M829E4 (see page 108, warning huge PDF).
There and in this budget item justification, an Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase throughout 2010 is planned.
Various official documents schedule LRIP and deployment for 2014 (just google "120mm AKE" or M928E4).
Now we all know how these schedules turn out, and there is still no info about capabilities, but the current weapon #139 looks to me like it is broadly in the right ballpark.

I'll leave it in and push the introduction back to 2014.

What I am more than a LITTLE pissed off about is people who use something like this which was added BECAUSE of information like you provided to whine and complain that becasue we haven't added the latest armoured wet dream that exists only as a drawing ( maybe ) from wherever you care to use as an example this somehow "proves" we have a bias one way or the other and I have read the EXACT same pissy whining crap from BOTH sides of what used to be the "Iron curtain" about the game and they can all KMA. :soap:

None of that was, of course, directed at you Tangui

That said we are more and more reluctant to add unit's / weapons on speculation. Last release we ended up with a real mess to sort out as a number of "future weapons systems" that were put in in the US OOB years ago had to be removed becasue they died somewhere between the bright idea that someone had and the actual production.



Don

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Hey !
I, for one, am attempting very hard to avoid "wet dream" equipment. Not may fault the US Congress can't make up it's mind if it wants to fund a project (example the Osprey, they should of named it after a cat, the project had nine lives).
:happy: :re: :D

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Don't worry, that wasn't directed at you either.

Don

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Well you can do it Alexander's way and cut the Gordian Knot! No "future" systems. Patches from hereon to include existing systems only (to the best knowledge of the designers/contributors of the official OOBs). Would save precious OOB space too...
Then you could "enjoy" the onslaught of the "Where-are-the-future-systems?" hordes!
So, Don it really boils down to what kind of battle you want to fight! Revisiting included "future" systems from time to time, to check their validity or throw them out of the window altogether and have a "rant" surge!
Choose your battlefield!!!
Personally, I'd continue playing the game anyway...

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

I suggest removing ALL heavy/hi-tech formations from future OOBs and leaving only Somali/Mujahideen-style rebel and militia units.

Tell everyone that organized military forces won't survive The End Of The World As We Know It, which you expect is going to happen within at least a month from now. :D

Re: Questions about soviet artillery and other in game
 

Stop all OOBs at December, 2012 :)