SK-105 probs

[DRG]

I'm STILL WAITING to discover WHICH of the many versions of this unit was the subject of the original post.......

Don

[Siddhi]

The Kurassier available from '93 onward has sabot rounds with an APCR of 56. Could that be what you're referring to

Probablly not, sadly I have NO idea how the APCR is calculated (does that mean 560mm penetration?)and anyway it is probablly an error. The SK-105 Kurassier of the Austrian Army 1984 used the SABOT I talked about beforehand - the OFL-105-G1 with 550mm penetration at 1,700m - from 1981 onwards. From 1985 we developed the NP-105 SABOT which is even deadlier, can do up to 700mm, however it was NOT introduced in Austria (although it would have been used in a "long war" scenario). In 2004 a "Tandem-SABOT" was developed that reportedly allows up to 1,000mm penetration, but also not introduced as of yet

Looks like starting up an old debate all over again...
I'm all in favor of autoloaders per se (and also of intricately modelling technical tidbits ), but I kind of concur to the point that in the scale of the game, autoloader or not make no difference.

I understand this logic, taking the average makes sense. OTOH 12 rounds in ONE MINUTE is as far as I know a reccord, and much higher then conventional 105mm RoF. Reloading is a pain with the thing, you need to exit the turrent and reload the autoloader manually once the additional 5 "turrent-basket" rounds are used (i.e. 17 rounds)

You're right, Marek, that's how it should e used. As it lacks a stabilizer and - before 1998 -also had very primitive sights (except for laser rangefinder, but otherwise... like WW2), it's quite suicidal to do any other thing with it but delay. Its semi-auto-loader, however, gives it an awesome firepower in an ambush situation - a platoon would easily be able to stop a company-sized or larger force, then withdraw, re-deploy and play the game again. A well-trained crew would be able to use the ROF AND hit something as well.

the "ambush" (actually hit-and-run) tactic is correct for OVERWHELMING armoured attacks and in a restricted terrain delay scenario - for a platoon vs. tank company pairing each tanks was only expected to fire 3 rounds and retire to next phase line (the kurassier is VERY fast). however the accuracy and RoF means that only ONE such retreat would be necassary (and only as it was imperative to keep casulties to a minimum in this type of engagmenet only). OTOH in other scenarios they would function exactly like every other tank - was dug in and expected to fight from their positon. The armour was sufficent to protect against medium arty, the ca. 40% smaller size then a Leopard it's main protection against direct fire. Because of its accuracy over most enemies in the 1980s and the lack of armour perferred tactic was actually "long-distance" (for us over 1,200m) engagments, which minimized the chance of counter-fire and casulties.

A RoF of 12 rounds per second is easily achievably if the engagement-arc is IIRC below 50 degrees - and there are enough targets. In manuvers that I have knowledge of a platoon of the Kurassier regularly anhiliated M60A3 compnaies on line abrest attack without any casulties in a single engagmenet.

Not completly correct about the sites or stabilsation btw, although the ballistic computer and TI was added only in 1993 the stabilisation system in place beforehand was very good as were the optics, passive IR and XSW-30-U 950 /white light searchlight. 95% first-round-hit at 1,700m.

Btw the actual loadout should be 43 rounds (without loaded round): 10 HEAT, 10 HE, 20 SABOT, 3 SMOKE

Also a M2 12.7mm was added on the commander's hatch as an AA weapon, unfortunatly the accuracy in the game (slot 3) when I use it is much too high, nearly the same as the main gun

So the APCR of 56 in 1993 is equal to 550mm penetration? IF so then this should be adjusted for 1981, as for the other SABOTs i listed above I would include them (for Austria) as in war situation we would definetly use them instead of exporting them.

[Mobhack]

the AMX turret cannot be done in game code - no way to have high ROF and then someone have to go out and move rounds from the hull to the mag (assuming your enemy will let you! ). So a general overall rate is used, as if it was a normal turret. (Otherwise it could "machine gun" all the ammo in the casettes plus the hull storage in continuous fire).

There are no autoloaders in SP 1/2/3 based code, anyway.

Number of smoke rounds is not relevant as smoke is not a database ammo item (ie editable in Mobhack) - but a random number of rounds added to some classes by the internal game engine on creation a unit. (Which is why it is editable in the scenario editor as the unit is by then created from the template info).

Cheers
Andy

[Siddhi]

As I said already, I understand the game engine limitations. I might however make a scenario where the 17 rounds are the only ammo and a much higher ROF, just for kicks. Dumb question, but a turn is 30 seconds, right?

The enemy has nothing to say if they cannot see you

Don't understand about the smoke rounds, I am referring to 105mm smoke rounds, primarily used to spot targets for arty observers.

Now what about my question regarding APCR of 56 meaning what?

btw given that the "usual suspects" are all here i would appreciate help to my problem posted Post#http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=489854&page=0&view=collap sed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

[Mobhack]

If you want to know the game basics, please refer to the Game Guide, introduction section (the first paragraph of text in the GG).

A sabot (AKA APCR) rating of 56 is 56cm penetration at the muzzle. SP games deal in centimetres. Details of the technical stuff can be found in the Mobhack help file. Penetration formulae cannot be published due to the original agreement with SSI, however.

As to your other post - perhaps someone with an interest in scenario design may answer that at some time. But your scenario should be OK, barring any major re-jigging of the OOBS in question. You may have to use scenhack (if a CD owner) or delete and repurchase some things if that happened. Best to make a backup, on the off chance.

Cheers
Andy

[Siddhi]

cheers Andy, hope that the SABOT changes I mentioned can be made in a future release.

[Mobhack]

Please see the sticky post at the top of the forum about OOB error reporting/and or change request procedure.

This thread has become one of these involved, on and on ones, where there may be info in there but extracted in dribs and drabs. The thread here started before we published the standard - but needs to be put to bed & replaced with a proper format change request.

We need the error report laid out in that standardised format. You can already see several examples of folks reporting using this form. We also need some acceptable reference that backs up the report, and can be checked/verified.

Cheers
Andy

[Shan]

O/T and quite irrelevant for the game but anyway: Have you ever taken place on the gunner's seat of an early 'K', Siddhi? O/T and quite irrelevant for the game but anyway: Have you ever taken place on the gunner's seat of an early 'K', Siddhi? (You'd have to be quite short + slim to fit in ;-))

Siddhi said:
A RoF of 12 rounds per second is easily achievably if the engagement-arc is IIRC below 50 degrees - and there are enough targets. In manuvers that I have knowledge of a platoon of the Kurassier regularly anhiliated M60A3 compnaies on line abrest attack without any casulties in a single engagmenet.

I can confirm that - M60 crews usually stopped making the common jokes about their "smaller brothers" as the Kuerassier was called on the radio AFTER maneuvers. This, however, requires well-trained crews, and it takes a long time to get that good.

Siddhi said:
Not completly correct about the sites or stabilsation btw, although the ballistic computer and TI was added only in 1993 the stabilisation system in place beforehand was very good as were the optics, passive IR and XSW-30-U 950 /white light searchlight. 95% first-round-hit at 1,700m.

A stabilizer on a Kuerassier? Sure? AFAIK even the A2 upgrade (which, btw, was introduced only as part of the infamous Mech-Paket only from 1998 onwards, definitely not 1993) never included a stabilizer (which stabilizes the gun along 2 axis on the move... only to avoid misunderstandings), only a fire control computer and true night fighting capability (TI) were fitted. A stabilizer would not be of much use anyway if you're defending. One of the main weaknesses of the 'K', however, was its hydraulic turret transmission which sometimes worked, sometimes caught fire, and very often didn't work, and that one was not changed. Another weakness - the hydraulic steering system - also quite unreliable due to high pressures - it's not fun to fin out you cannot steer any more when you're driving at full speed...

And now to the optics of the earlier version: The daytime optics were not far from WW2, say what you want but fact is: except that you had a laser rangefinder which would get you a good range, the gunner still had to enter the range manually by adjusting his optics... and about night fighting: IMHO the passive system was completely useless - dirvers could see more on their image intensifier night sight than commanders and would often spot the "enemies" that the commander could hear, but not see... and as soon as you'd turn on the IR searchlight , everyone with an IR sight or better would know where you are.

True, the WP armies didn't have much better night-fighting capabilities but seriously... 1700m at night with 95%? Sounds a bit like manufacturer's data... under ideal conditions - maybe. But in real life and not-ideal weather conditions - impossible.

So - overall, if I'd play a cold war scenario on the defending side, I'd still prefer Kuerassier over the M-60, since it has greater RoF and mobility - but it has to be said that this is a poor man's weapon, often called a movable A/T gun with a splinter jacket...

[Siddhi]

O/T and quite irrelevant for the game but anyway: Have you ever taken place on the gunner's seat of an early 'K', Siddhi? O/T and quite irrelevant for the game but anyway: Have you ever taken place on the gunner's seat of an early 'K', Siddhi? (You'd have to be quite short + slim to fit in ;-))

actually i did - first time when i was 14 , it was small then too! i remember getting a site in my kiddneys... but i think most tanks tend to be a little cramped, especially "light" ones. und bei dir?

I can confirm that - M60 crews usually stopped making the common jokes about their "smaller brothers" as the Kuerassier was called on the radio AFTER maneuvers. This, however, requires well-trained crews, and it takes a long time to get that good.

agree - a major i worked with recently and former K commander said the main problem was the amount of dust kicked up by the backblast if you did not watch your vegetation setting - if it was a dry field under your muzzle then a couple of rapid-fire round and no wind would make a better smoke screen then anything man-made, both bad and good.

Shan said:
A stabilizer on a Kuerassier? Sure? AFAIK even the A2 upgrade (which, btw, was introduced only as part of the infamous Mech-Paket only from 1998 onwards, definitely not 1993) never included a stabilizer (which stabilizes the gun along 2 axis on the move... only to avoid misunderstandings), only a fire control computer and true night fighting capability (TI) were fitted. A stabilizer would not be of much use anyway if you're defending.

stand corrected on the "mech paket".
The A2 has the french-made CH6/6 stabilsation system, there was another one beforehand which designation i don't know.

i would say a stabilizer is vital for rapid-fire, also in defense, otherwise the recoil takes too long to absorb via the autmotive components alone.

Shan said:
One of the main weaknesses of the 'K', however, was its hydraulic turret transmission which sometimes worked, sometimes caught fire, and very often didn't work, and that one was not changed. Another weakness - the hydraulic steering system - also quite unreliable due to high pressures - it's not fun to fin out you cannot steer any more when you're driving at full speed...

true - now how did you know that! - supposedly all of it however has been changed latest with A2 model.

Shan said:IMHO the passive system was completely useless - dirvers could see more on their image intensifier night sight than commanders and would often spot the "enemies" that the commander could hear, but not see... and as soon as you'd turn on the IR searchlight , everyone with an IR sight or better would know where you are.

in early K the drivers, gunner and commander all have the same passive sites - with all the known limitations. the range i gave was NOT for night fighting. also the searchlight is mainly used as a designation tool, it was "flashed" by a desingated spotter at the main enemy elements. the passive sites is sufficent for close-in night fighting (<600m), and unlike TI ,is not "whited out" by flares.

Shan said:So - overall, if I'd play a cold war scenario on the defending side, I'd still prefer Kuerassier over the M-60, since it has greater RoF and mobility - but it has to be said that this is a poor man's weapon, often called a movable A/T gun with a splinter jacket...

ok - who are you -i'm calling hütteldorf- meldung!!