Jump to content
kgb613

Real Life M1A1 TC, how do they do ?

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Maj.Hans said:

@ Ssnake - Any chance of seeing an M1 with the SCWS in Pro PE?

Yeah, I want to see M1A1 FEP or M1A1 SA. It will permit to use the M1A1 on modern/contemporary mission. In fact a M1A1 with better TIS and with a SCWS. Can be nice to see the MCD too, but probably asking some work to implement it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Maj.Hans said:

@ Ssnake - Any chance of seeing an M1 with the SCWS in Pro PE?

 

There's always "a chance". To materialize as an actual opportunity however we need to have the free time for developers (or a contract with a user of these vehicles) and access to one such vehicle, or access to suitably detailed documentation (manuals, photos, videos). I'm not going to ring the doorbell of the US Army unless I can see a gap in our internal development plan, and even when I do they still need to agree to a photo session with a foreign national in their motorpool (I once got chased by the military police in Ft. Knox, fortunately we could clear up that misunderstanding). As long as we don't have US units as customers the US Army may be reluctant to grant unconditional access. So, it doesn't just depend on eSim, is all I'm saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, kgb613 said:

Yeah, I want to see M1A1 FEP or M1A1 SA. It will permit to use the M1A1 on modern/contemporary mission. In fact a M1A1 with better TIS and with a SCWS. Can be nice to see the MCD too, but probably asking some work to implement it.

 

Just use the SEP and disable the CITV as a "proxy" for the M1A1 AIM SA. We do.

 

It's "close enough" for our training needs.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

(I once got chased by the military police in Ft. Knox, fortunately we could clear up that misunderstanding)

 

Some people see an Ssnake in the grass, and just can't help themselves...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Assassin 7 said:

Not really, the M1A1 SA and the FEP are completely different from the SEP on the inside. As far as the FCS, the SEP’s FCS is more advanced than the SA and the FEP. The FLIR system is different for all of these as tanks far as software versions. The SCWS  is not part of the Main FCS of the SA and the FEP. It is a separate system integrated only to the sighting systems and FBCB2 system. The Tc cannot perform a designate or enter range into the FCS systems. He can only monitor from the SCWS. 

 

Yes, as I said sights are the same in terms of hardware. And I didn't said SCWS is part of FCS on current M1A1SA and M1A1FEP. However USMC plans to upgrade their M1A1FEP's, including AIDATS system, that might integrate SCWS with FCS to create a hunter killer system. Another upgrade for USMC M1A1FEP tanks is also new armor package, perhaps the same or derived one from M1A2SEPv3, as far as I could dig out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Damian90 said:

 

Yes, as I said sights are the same in terms of hardware. 

In terms of hardware they are very far from being the same,  same applies to the rest of FCS. Just my personal observation.

Edited by Jartsev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Jartsev said:

In terms of hardware they are very far from being the same,  same applies to the rest of FCS. Just my personal observation.

And you are correct, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FCS Hardware in the SEP is completely different than the SA and the FEP’s. The SEP communication and functionality is completely different internally. But the BIOC is the same and the TRU user interface is the same. A SA TRU would not mount into a SEP’s GPS and a SEP’s TRU would not mount into a SA’s GPS. One TRU sight glass is round and the other is square due to the different GPS design’s. The FCS does monitor the Power Management of these but that’s it. The TRU’s has it own built in test (BIT).

Edited by Assassin 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2017 at 3:37 PM, Maj.Hans said:

 

You were supposed to take that with a healthy dose of salt since there was lots of sarcasm involved! ;)

 

If I were going to be a stickler for realism, I would never drive the T-72, or ever use the buttoned up view for the TC or gunner, since I'm something like two or three feet too tall to fit inside a vehicle designed for 5'2" tall midget-men.  :P

 

 

This guy i knew from my a summer job like 1.5 - 2 years ago when i was still in college, Was a polish guy.  Said He during his time as a Draftee  served as  T72 Driver, in the late 80s just as the Solidarity movement was in full swing and taking control from the communists. Told me how then then how the Army and his unit was re positioned East against the USSr Border.

 

The man was broad shouldered and at least 6 feet tall. ( just shy of my height; 6-1). Dunno he somehow fit inside T72 drivers position ( which is normally buttoned up)

Edited by Kev2go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This comes down to how you plan on TCing your tank. Guys who grew up on the A1 tend to be outside the hatch with the binoes and such, and let the gunner scan. A2 guys, and especially SEP guys tend to be inside the turret far more. This is especially true on command tanks when the TC is down with his BFT or JCR, and even if he was up, the freakin CROW on the turret top blocks most forward vision.

 

In a real tank (vs SB) you spend far more time doing non-gunnery TC tasks, and inter-tank C2 stuff. I know I very rarely was on the gunsights, and would only grab the turret to slew the gunner into a position where he could rapidly acquire and engage, while I was busy scanning for other stuff, or doing maneuver C2 tasks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Archangel said:

This comes down to how you plan on TCing your tank. Guys who grew up on the A1 tend to be outside the hatch with the binoes and such, and let the gunner scan. A2 guys, and especially SEP guys tend to be inside the turret far more. This is especially true on command tanks when the TC is down with his BFT or JCR, and even if he was up, the freakin CROW on the turret top blocks most forward vision.

 

In a real tank (vs SB) you spend far more time doing non-gunnery TC tasks, and inter-tank C2 stuff. I know I very rarely was on the gunsights, and would only grab the turret to slew the gunner into a position where he could rapidly acquire and engage, while I was busy scanning for other stuff, or doing maneuver C2 tasks. 

 

I definitely super-resent the unwillingness of the ProPE team to let me give the gunner an order to "SHOOT IT!" from the F5 map view.

 

Yes, Ssnake, I KNOW this isn't the doctrinal correct way to do it.  But in a scenario where I'm a company commander, I often times find myself too busy planning for other units and calling artillery to be actively engaged with my gunner.

 

I understand that commonly CO's and XO's would get the most competent gunner, and that his gunner and loader would operate independently with the gunner becoming the tank commander at times, telling the driver to move up a bit, move back, loader load HEAT, loader load Sabot, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Maj.Hans said:

I definitely super-resent the unwillingness of the ProPE team to let me give the gunner an order to "SHOOT IT!" from the F5 map view.

 

To be honest, this is the first time that I consciously register a request for such a feature. I am not categorically against such a change, but I would probably limit it to CO/XO vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roger. Its only going to be a senior leader who would require that. Not sure about the PE AI, but in old SB, the AI would engage on its own

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Archangel said:

Roger. Its only going to be a senior leader who would require that. Not sure about the PE AI, but in old SB, the AI would engage on its own

This was basically the reply I got from Gib and a few others (Ssnake included) back when I brought this up back in...2008 or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may have come up a long time ago in the past.

 

If we're going to limit it to CO and XO vehicles that would be fine. 

Maybe also the lead vehicle of a platoon so that the lead vehicle of 1/A, 2/A, 3/A etc can do it as well?

 

Basically what I'm asking for is that while we're in the map view, to be able to issue the "Fire and adjust" command.  Ideally, the AI gunner would know that because I am in the map view, he should decide if he needs to fire the main gun, the coax, or a missile on his own.  He should tell the loader to "Fire, Fire HEAT" or "Fire, Fire Sabot" himself until such time as I leave the map view.

 

 

Furthermore for tanks with a dead commander in multiplayer especially, it would be nice if the gunner seat guy had a way to tell the loader what ammo to load...

Edited by Maj.Hans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×