3Star

Well, that was silly of me. When I was testing it out, it turned out that one of my 'test' targets was at about 800m, which of course the computer sets to as battlesight when it rejects a range. I took it as an accurate return. So yes, it was just the wiki article was wrong.

I doubt I still have access to Bugzilla... This is how the range gating is modelled in SB, and I have confirmed by experiment. However, this is from the manual. (OK, from T-72A, but same difference) The gating prevents ranges -under- those distances from being accepted, not over. Which makes more sense, as you would want to filter out minor obstructions like trees, fences, etc between you and them. Also, what the devil is the button for the NSV-T optic? Alt-F3 just gives me the iron sights view.

The "M" was the suffix of the serial number on the non-SA AIMS tank I received in 2007. I don't know what it's doing on the SEPv3, but at the time, we were told it was for the new management system the tank had.

Hell, even without the memory and speech, I should look so good at 97.

1) They did not sell out. In fact, they weren't paid anything at all except expenses. They came along for, mainly, three reasons. a) It was an opportunity for them to reach a wider audience, and speak to more people than ordinarily read their books. b) They got to meet each other, a rare event. They spent most of the time comparing notes, and bettering their own knowledge is good for the tank community as a whole. c) They thought it might be... (gasp)... Fun! And it was, they all enjoyed themselves immensely. This was the philosophy when that meeting was set up, and also the "Inside the Hatch" videos. You will notice that almost nothing in either series of videos references the game. The subjects are purely the real tanks. The idea is to be informative and accurate firstly and foremostly. They are videos of interest to people who do not play the game, and may never wish to play the game. They engender more 'tank interest', and better yet, of a quality higher than you'll get on The Military Channel (Or wherever). And for WoT's purposes, they increase brand awareness. It's a win-win for WoT and tank enthusiasts both. Even if they did 'sell out' (as I said, they didn't, but let's say they did), what's the problem? They didn't advocate anything other than real-world history of the quality they are known for. You are letting your cynicism get the better of yourself.

For the record (and though the hijack is about over) ZSU-23-4M2 is a dedicated ground combat variant with the radar system removed and night vision added. Just saying.

In fairness, it was better than most. You don't see many of those documentaries these days interviewing the partipants. I had a manual M1 Abrams for a while. Not the fault of the designer, just the hydraulic system decided to turn into a lubrcation system for the gunner's lap. Or maybe it was the fault of the designer, it seemed to happen on more than one tank. NTM

Can't find anything which supports that. Not saying it never happened, it just seems hard to verify. NTM

OK. The CVR(T)s were initially built with Pilkington Optronics Raven Day/Night Sights. The day channel has x1 and x10 mag, the night channel (image intensifiers) are x1.6 and x5.8. The thermal imager upgrade is a little more complicated. A number of Scimitars had the Ravens replaced with SPIRE, by Thales. This saw service in Kosovo. It incorporates the Raytheon HIRE 1st Gen thermal imager, with an LRF and Thales FCS. The BGTI upgrade is currently being applied to both Scimitars and Warriors. Group 1 is the Warrior ICV and Scimitar CVR(T). It is a multi-capability upgrade which incorporates much of the SPIRS system developed from SPIRE. The primary difference between SPIRS and SPIRE is that the HIRE is replaced by a Thales Catherine FC 2nd Gen thermal imager. The SPIRS is incorporated into STAG-FC (Surveillance, Targeting, Acquisition and Gunnery - Fire Control) system, x8 mag. This also includes a CCD camera, which the commander can pull up on his display, and a relaxed-viewing CRT for the gunner's TOGS. That what you're looking for? NTM

I have the answer, but it's at home in my copy of Jane's Armour and Artillery Upgrades 2008-2009 (I saw it when I was flicking through). Give me a day. NTM

Bronze here. It's really given these days as an 'attaboy' for service more than anything else. I'm not convinced the Armor Association is particularly picky, after all, they need the money and advertising. NTM

I didn't even do that. But to the original point, I used permanent marker. Grease pens or water-soluble or whatnot gets problematic when it's raining. NTM

Been trying to update one of my scenarios to 2.538. The amphibious assaults keep failing, the riverbanks are far too steep below the waterline (they're fine above the water). Something in the map editor which can be used to highlight a riverbank and say 'Scaleable' would be very nice. If I've not missed something which already exists. NTM

As opposed to a gunner's sight which is all but stationary, whilst the tank seat you're in is being thrown up and down or spun around? Occupational hazard of tanking, just adds to the realism. NTM

What's the little one at the very end of the first pic? An AMX-10P 105mm? NTM