Corrected UK OOB

[DRG]

Yes, and the Vickers has a higher accuracy and it also has a longer range so although the end result is a "5" HEK for both guns they do not have the exact same effect in the game. It's just one number they have in common. All the numbers work together it's not all just about one of them

Don

[Listy]

I know, just bringing up something that seemed Like it could have been a mistake.

EDIT: Heared back from about the Armour, It's still restricted. I'd guess if we treated it like the stuff from the CR1 it wouldn't be too far out.

[DRG]

Listy said:
EDIT: Heared back from about the Armour, It's still restricted. I'd guess if we treated it like the stuff from the CR1 it wouldn't be too far out.

We are treating is as if it were Chobham front and side and the upgrade numbers are similar to the numbers that upgraded the Chally 1 to a +. We debated the ERA idea and looked at the photos and kept coming back to Chobham although there is a very real possiblity ERA *may* have been tried in tests at some point we just don't know and as you say it's restricted infomation ( I wouldn't tell anyone what my tank could do or couldn't do either that's why many of these "debates" about armour and armour penetration are conjecture on everyones part, usually tainted by nationalism.). The blocks on the front are similar to ERA blocks but also different . It may be they were designed to be put in place when in an "active enviroment" with simple tools so they are blocks that slide together. There is also the possiblity they were made this way to look like ERA to fool people ( easily done )or a third possiblity is they are Chobham than could be replaced by ERA if required and that's why they are the same size and shape as ERA

The tank will be in the patch with a CS version as well and a new Icon for European and Desert conditions with our best guess as to how the armour package works in the "real". world.

Don

[Listy]

Got it!

http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/n...-04/030460.pdf

Page 19, on that PDF.
Page 25 has some stuff on Infantry mods.

Enhanced armour protection

In October 2002, the Department approved a separate Urgent
Operational Requirement to fit a new generation of appliqué to 137 Challenger 2 tanks, of which 116 vehicles were
deployed to theatre. The total cost of this package was £8.8 million.

So looks like the EAP is better than the stuff on CR1..

[DRG]

Listy said:
Got it!


So looks like the EAP is better than the stuff on CR1..

So they say.... ( I would.... wouldn't you?) I suppose Chobham has been improved in the last 14 years.

However, those side hull packs sure do look like the old ones .

I'll take this all into consideration

Don

[Listy]

http://www.soldiermagazine.com/mag/update2.htm

has the infomation about Watchkeeper haveing Radar.

And on the Lannies with light armour and a hole in the roof so two blokes can provide cover, you asked for pics:

http://www.defenceimagedatabase.mod....E832CED9DE7A88
http://www.defenceimagedatabase.mod....E832CED9DE7A88
(Appolgies for the Huge URL's...)

I had it as a turreted lanny with Armour 1 all round and a pair of SA80's as weapons. I alos reduced it to a carry capcity of 4 (Two blokes sticking their heads out the top, 4 inside).

Thermal imaging:
http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/cs/pw_spy.htm
Should an option of Support sections (Containing the HQ section) be Given Vision 40?

(BTW: you can tell me to stop pestering you, I realise I might have been annoying over the UK OOB... I won't take offence.)

[Mobhack]

Hmm - "landies" was what we called land rovers, not "lannies" !

Cheers
Andy