Sweden: 84mm Carl Gustav recoilless fire control system

dmnt · #1 February 10th, 2016, 11:06 AM

Sweden accepted an took into active use Aimpoint FCS12 fire control system for Grg m/48.

http://www.ammoland.com/2013/01/aimp...#axzz3zmEiUv28

"The FCS12 incorporates an eye safe 1550nm laser range finder, as well as sensors that measure aiming angle and environmental conditions to provide the operator a range-adjusted point of aim on measured targets."

Starting from 1/2013 there should be IMO another AT-Inf Grg team - rare perhaps - with a laser range finder and maybe a point or two in fire control unless it make them too powerful.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/unite...elligence.html

Apparently some of them have also been shipped to the US Army, but I have no information of them fielding it.

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/s...ontrol-system/

DRG · #2 February 10th, 2016, 03:37 PM

I've got an idea......why don't YOU build a unit into your OOB's and test it and after you do let me know what you discover about the overall effectiveness after adding a LRF to a weapon with a range of 9 ( other than it will drive the cost to about double )

dmnt · #3 February 10th, 2016, 04:48 PM

Will do. I suppose that means it'll be close to zero even at long ranges?

(15 mins later)

Made a quick test, LRF alone doesn't seem to be doing anything at these ranges (and real life use against stationary targets or above target exploding shells don't get into game mechanics). Therefore we can move this thread to trash can.

DRG · #4 February 10th, 2016, 05:29 PM

I was going to delete it but thought it might be useful for anyone else making a suggestion like that........ TEST your idea BEFORE suggesting something like this. I knew how this would turn out but me just saying it won't work isn't as effective as you learning the answer on your own

Suhiir · #5 February 10th, 2016, 08:16 PM

Half the "fun" of playing with the OOBs is finding out what the in-game effects of various changes are.

Sometimes you get a huge increase in cost and little else. Others you get an insignificant increase in effect at a large cost increase. And far to often there's no practical way implement something due to game code limitations.

Mobhack · #6 February 11th, 2016, 09:42 AM

A laser is overkill at such short ranges.

The only thing a laser has as an advantage is that it is 2 shots ranging rather than 3 to maximum. But at such short ranges, its likely to be ranged in with 1 shot anyway.

The laser would also only be useful for the inf-AT teams, since giving it to a section equipped with Charlie G would then give all the riflemen lasers too.

The best practical variable to play with therefore for such would be the ACC variable of the weapon itself. It seems to be 6, with a range of 9. Whack it up to say 12, and then see if that makes a noticeable change in testing over a decent number of test shots as a first attempt.

IronDuke99 · #7 February 11th, 2016, 10:18 AM

Ah the Charley G well known, and generally disliked, by most British infantry soldiers in the early 1980's. More senior ranks liked to tell you how firing one was like getting a Cricket bat in the face (They exaggerated as soldiers always will) Meanwhile it has become more popular and, no doubt much welcome, lighter and with less bits sticking out to injure one...

Generally a platoon weapon in my day, although occasionally issued at a section level, I seldom saw any idea in the British Army that it should have been used from a flank, rather than as a one, or maybe two shot 'Victoria Cross' weapon used in front of a position that would not actually stop a vast number of Warsaw Pact tanks running over you...