thewood Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 I thought I saw a post about gun-fired missiles having an issue in 4.019. Is that the case? I am trying to build a scenario with a T-55AM and its missiles all seem to miss short on long-range shots. Its firing the AT-10c. I did several searches and couldn't find the post. Just wanted to know so I can figure out what tanks to use and if I should remove missile ammo to avoid the issue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marko Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 (edited) Haven't noticed the bug But remember if the Tank firing is hit or losses its track because of terrain obstructions the missile will miss, Also crew experience can make a big difference to the gunners accuracy. Edited April 26, 2017 by Marko 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted April 26, 2017 Author Share Posted April 26, 2017 Yeah, I know that part of it. I am saying I thought I saw a bug post about issues with it after 4.019 came out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raploc Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 (edited) Just did a test , all missiles hit the target at 3000 meters. Do mean this post? The kudos go to Captain Colossus who did discover the bug. Edited April 26, 2017 by Raploc words 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted April 26, 2017 Author Share Posted April 26, 2017 I thought it was more recent. Will chalk it up to crappy gunnery. I could have swaorn I saw someone post and confirmation that missiles were plowing into the ground at 1700 meters. I must have been hammered when I was reading the forum. Thanks guys. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 (edited) Yes there was one indicating an issue with tank launched ATGMs in 4.019. It did say they would just hit the ground at approx 1700m and to avoid building scenarios with longer range ATGM engagements. It also said it had been addressed in the "upcoming" update. Of course can't find it now - I think it was posted by Dark, Retro or Grenny. Edited April 26, 2017 by Gibsonm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted April 26, 2017 Members Share Posted April 26, 2017 It will affect TWO missiles out of the whole arsenal: AT-11 Sniper/Svir AT-11b Sniper/Svir-M* All others are okay. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted April 27, 2017 Author Share Posted April 27, 2017 Of course as soon as you posted that, my next test run through had a 75% hit rate for the AT-10. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted April 27, 2017 Share Posted April 27, 2017 Well if the range was under 1700m it probably doesn't matter as its inside the range threshold for the problem. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted April 27, 2017 Author Share Posted April 27, 2017 It was beyond 1700. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted May 5, 2017 Author Share Posted May 5, 2017 As there are bugs that effect both the AT-11 and BRDM-2 AT (AT-3, AT-5, and AT-5), is there an estimated time when this update will address this bug. I am attempting to build out a scenario and am trying judge whether to remove the BRDM-2 AT. As is, its useless, but if the fix is near, I'll just finish the scenario and wait. If its far, I'll have to find something to substitute. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted May 6, 2017 Members Share Posted May 6, 2017 Not in May. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nike-Ajax Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 What about LAHAT in the simulation for both Leopards and M1a? - it can already be fired. Seems strange that no one in the west have bought them yet to counteract russian ditto 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejawolf Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 for the BRDM-2 AT, it's quite straightforward, but for the AT-11 on T-72B, there's some significant code hurdles. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 11:08 PM, Nike-Ajax said: What about LAHAT in the simulation for both Leopards and M1a? - it can already be fired. Seems strange that no one in the west have bought them yet to counteract russian ditto Semi-active laser homing, tend not to work well against targets who are often equiped with a laser warner... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nike-Ajax Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 (edited) Hi Grenny Valid point - except for at least one very important thing: The LAHAT´s were never ever meant to stand alone. The usefullness is specifically in engaging the opponent OUTSIDE their weapons effective engagement envelope, hence detection is only an interesting factor if it enables the prey to evade. And the very nature of semi-active homing counteracts the countermeasures to some degree. Also unless you have one shot kill-and-scoot, then both kinetic, HEAT and the british plastique rounds indicates the fires position. In other words then just as the Russians only placed 4 Gun-missiles in one tank, then this would only be a part of the tool box, with HEAT, Squash-head or SABOT doing the brunt of the work. Perhaps one or two rounds before switching to SABOT. It always occured to me to be a superficial and as usually condacending western attitude towards the russians to say that it was because they were too expensive that they only placed around 4 missiles in each capable tank. Rather to me it seems silly to put much more than that because the enemy will rather quickly be in engagement range. And you should displace after engaging the enemy anyway. ALSO the LAHAT means that you can effectively hit a helicopter. As for the laser designator then compared to the other kit on a MBT, then its a cheap, easy and COTS piece of equipment. And could EASILY be attached to the commanders sight - thus leaving the gunner free to attack the next target with HEAT, SABOT or COAX. In other words then this is just another tool in the toolbox. I always consider weapons as a tool and have never ever been religious about them. They have to work, be effective and do the job. The west did not buy the LAHAT because the politcians chose not to (yet) for economic reasons. In other words they wasted the money on other projects, a large proportion of which will never ever work. Not because the LAHAT did not work OR because it didnt add a usefull capability. Much like NOT adding a remote controlled weapon station. OR choosing inferior lightly armed and armored wheeled apc´s instead of tracked Infantry Combat Vehicles... Edited May 16, 2017 by Nike-Ajax 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.