Welcome to Steelbeasts.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ChrisWerb

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 07/06/1965

Personal Information

  • Location
    Orkney, Scotland, UK.
  • Interests
    Military, aviation, history, scuba, kayaking.
  • Occupation
    Web designer.
  1. Would also need to model. 0.50 RMG used as weapon vs houses etc. as described in Simon Dunstan's "Centurion" I read that the RPG-2/B-40 was actually more effective vs M113 etc. due to its having a less efficient heat warhead that blew a much bigger hole in the vehicle's relatively thin aluminium armour and caused much greater behind around effects.
  2. In the instant action scenario, are you credited with kills of vehicles that do not appear on the map? I mean those that are caused by ICM behind a wood or speculative fire into a treeline that results in secondary explosions etc.?
  3. I would like to see crews bailing out of vehicles that are hit, as appropriate. Sombre perhaps, but it would add realism.
  4. Thank you Trackpin. I think the Russians hanging on to amphibious capability is twofold. 1. They have lots of old generation amphibious IFVs and APCs. 2. They will potentially train and operate in huge relatively undeveloped areas with rivers that have not been canalised and generally lend themselves more to crossing. However, I don't think the T-15 Armata IFV is amphibious and most (all?) HAPC's/HIFV's lack this capability - if so, going forward, tank formations will not have amphibious IFVs. The Kurganets 25 is amphibious, but I suspect only in its baseline configuration and not with the armour package that you see it wearing in most of the videos out there - interestingly the one video I found of it on Youtube swimming had the vehicle itself blanked out with censor boxes. The Bumerang appears to be amphibious in all configurations. So wheeled motor rifle formations or battlegroups will still have a wheeled APC/IFV element capable of river crossing. I do feel wheeled vehicles are the most problematic in terms of angle of bank, bottom substrate etc. however.
  5. Hi Trackpin Sure, you can rapidly remodel this side of the river, assuming it's not under enemy surveillance or covered by direct fire weapons. So you get across the river with some of your older M113 APCs and some mortar carriers with a significantly reduced ammo loadout. You have left your tanks behind - they are not amphibious and deep fording takes preparation and is problematic if you discount Soviet "How we concreted the Elbe" propaganda videos Your IFVs have been left behind too, unless they're Russian or Chinese of those nifty Korean ones with the inflatable sponsons. At the end of the day amphibious capability is a tradeoff against other things - and particularly armour protection because things that are heavier than the water they displace tend to sink and things without boat shaped hulls tend not to fare well hydrodynamically No Western Army that I am aware of still thinks it worthwhile. You also have no resupply except helicopters which may be problematic due to enemy AD systems or aircraft. Rather than make your armour (dubiously) amphibious, why not invest the money in more assault river crossing capability so you can get everything across rapidly? The transmission windup thing with FV6xx vehicles was annoying, but the thing I could never understand was why they never fitted them with cross axle diff locks. You could have all three axles have one wheel spinning and get stuck. Odd!
  6. Are you sure the M1064A3 is amphibious? There has been a trend to remove amphibious capability from vehicles for many years now - for the British Army this happened in the 70s. I can't see the point of a 120mm mortar carrier being amphibious if the IFVs and tanks it is supporting are not. Also could it carry anything like its normal ammo load and still be amphibious? As to the utility of amphibious capability, it really depends where in the world you are and how well you have reconoitered in advance. Many rivers have swampy banks with reed beds, or have mature trees along them or canalised vertical banks (to prevent flooding and facilitate use by watercraft) and vertical banks are not uncommon in nature. You are not going to want to go charging into a deep, lowland river in Western Europe. There is also the question of what you will do once you get to the other side as, in the UK and US armies, amphibious resupply vehicles were done away with decades ago. Here are some pictures of the Weser to illustrate my point.
  7. Mark, you also left out the shoulder fired MANPADs. We actually purchased something like 156 Self propelled starstreak systems to cover a force that was susbstantially smaller than we had in place in the Cold War. In 1991, hastily upgraded Tracked Rapier (added TI) from 12 and 16 AD Regiments covered movement of armoured units which is what they were designed to do.
  8. I think whether a tank battalion had organic AD is a bit moot considering that battlegroups would have been created with AD assets devolved into them. For the UK this would, at various times, have included Blowpipe (MCLOS), Javelin (SACLOS), Javelin S-15/Starburst (Laser Beam rider) and Starstreak (Laser beam rider) and Tracked Rapier (SACLOS with TI from 1991) and Stormer mounted Starstreak.
  9. Hi Ssnake. I have now managed to block and stop the enemy four times. The most kills I have ever achieved in doing so is 76. The blockage always takes effect between 61 and 76 vehicles. Additional artillery put down behind the blockage does not appear to cause more secondary explosions/fires/kills. Most recent attempt resulted in 62 kills.
  10. 99% of my play has been playing the Instant Action scenario over and over. It is my version of the card game solitaire and I find it very soothing - very little to think about but stopping the enemy and I can forget my cares. I think the game is worth $125 for that alone. Most of the time I play the M1A2SEP as it enables me to rack up kill ratios far in excess of those I achieve in anything else. I have experimented a lot and what I find works best so far is to have 2 tubes fire 2 rounds per minute of ICM onto a 50x400 metre template along the road and behind the trees for 12 minutes. That is enough to kill some enemy vehicles, but not make them all stop, so more come into the trap. It also saves precious ICM for later use. What then happens is that one or two vehicles are set on fire by the ICM where you can just see them through the trees. I take that as my cue to fire through the trees, lasing the trees and aiming up a little. If I am lucky I also catch other enemy vehicles and create a blockage with ever more dead enemy vehicles creating more and more obstacles when killed. Last night, for the first time, I created an obstacle so effective that it stopped all further enemy vehicles from passing through - I then mopped up the few on my side of the obstacle for a total of 67 kills (this is my second highest total - I have killed 71 twice in the past before being killed). Now what I don't understand is what happened to the other 93 enemy vehicles? I kept putting DPICM down on the far side of the blockage, but did not get any secondary explosions or smoke columns. Are there conditions under which they stop spawning? I quit the game at 50 minutes whilst my tank was still alive and saved the AAR. I had taken a screen cap of the map screen. I had lost several crew members including the gunner and my left and right tracks, but the vehicle's weapon systems were fully operational. So I survived, but did not complete the scenario having stalemated myself.
  11. For the $125, for the time I have spent trying to figure it out, the Instant Action Scenario, played with the M1A2 alone would be worth the money. Given that the scenario is just a glimpse of what's possible with the sim, that easily makes it easily my best value game/sim purchase ever. To know it piggybacks massively off various countries defence budgets/taxes and would have to sell for A LOT more if it was purely for the civilian gamer/sim player market is just the icing on the cake. PS: After endless experimentation, my best so far is still only 71 kills. It's brilliant practice for artillery use and reversionary direct fire modes.
  12. The bottom line is that there are few votes to be had in defence and recent manifestos have hardly mentioned the subject (other than some parties telling us what else they would get rid of if elected). I simply don't understand the crazy force structure decisions, the reasons behind getting rid of capabilities (which is often done with no apparent debate or announcement - Shielder mine system and COBRA radar for example) or some of our equipment purchases. I also don't get how we can expect the defence of the Baltic states to be confined to that immediate region. If it did kick off and there was no gentlemens' agreement in place, then we have essentially no capability to defend the UK from attack. A few Russian cruise missiles could shut down our power grid, transportation system, air traffic control etc. and hit structures critical to our economy like the London Stock Exchange, Bank of England etc. Just knowing their subs had put to sea would cut us off from key resources carried by civilian companies as merchant ships would head for the nearest port and stay there. To be honest, just the power grid strikes would be enough. No one in their right mind here would willingly suffer the massive dislocation that would cause for countries few could point to on the map. The last time we went to war to come to the aid of an Eastern European country, we ended up on the same side as one of its invaders and it remained occupied for over 50 years.
  13. Thank you Hedgehog.
  14. Noob question incoming. I am on 4.006. Do I need to completely uninstall 4.006 to install 4.010 or is it just a patch?
  15. The Sherman they recovered at Slapton Sands turned out to have some big conger eels in it which came as a bit of a shock to the divers involved in its recovery.