CV90 variants

[RogueSnake79]

Well, I'm not going to stand by and allow people here to accept that this "idea" that any cv90 is somehow even in the same league as the Bradley.

The Bradley has the TOW, they don't. It's that simple. They have better cannons, but none are true tank killers.

The TOW is a one shot, one kill weapon. Especially the TOW2B. It can reliably kill ANY tank in SB with the first hit. In fact, the TOW2B can kill tanks more reliably than the Main armament of most of the tanks in SB.

That just puts the Brad in a league of its own. It is the most versatile vehicle in the sim. Some CV90's have better protection, all have better cannons. But like I said, that missile is a big F'n deal.

Maybe one day we will get that CV90 with the BILL2. Then you would have an argument. And sure, even now, their are times and places that one of these 90's would have an advantage(anywhere you can't fire a TOW) But overall, its the Brad #1

[sabot_ready]

CV90's don't break their main armament when moving faster than a breeze :sonic:

[DrDevice]

CV90's don't break their main armament when moving faster than a breeze :sonic:

Neither do Brads with trained crews.

[ARM505]

But, you have to admit, when a tank's got it's muzzle on you, that TOW seems to fly mighty slooooooow! Honestly, I've seen rabbits run faster!

At least you can poke your launcher up above a hill easily and still be laughing.

[DrDevice]

Certainly one of the negatives when engaging tanks w/ ATGMs is their seemingly hyper-awareness of the incoming missile. Ssnake has commented that IRL, it's a heck of a lot harder to detect an in-flight missile. If you don't detect the launch signature, you are hosed!

[Hedgehog]

What about the CV90 with an ATGM Squad in the boot?

(OK takes a little longer to setup but the effect is the same.)

[Gibsonm]

What about the CV90 with an ATGM Squad in the boot?

(OK takes a little longer to setup but the effect is the same.)

If that's in response to:

Now if we had a vehicle, where you could use the ATGM mounted OR dissmounted, this would be very flexible esp. against tanks. I wonder what this IFV could be ;-)

AFAIK AT-4/5 equipped BMP-1/2 series carry ATGM mounts for dismount use as default. But I guess people won't rank it anywhere near "the best" IFV for various reasons... (and rightly so, these are too old for that glorious title)

Not IFV per se but M113 TOW and M113 Dragon also have firing mounts for dismounts IIRC (not modeled in SB though)

The problem is the "team in the boot" gives you the "dismounted" option but not the "mounted". Or are you hoping the team can fire off the ground mount while in the vehicle?

[Marko]

Have any of you Guy,s tried using hello missile teams. i have been experimenting with this for The last few hours.

With fairly positive results..I think this could add a hole new dimension to some of my user Created Missions.i was even able to to unload my teams in a drop zone and use BMD-2,s

To transport them to target. IE, to represent a airborne assault.

If anybody has done this. What were your conclusions.

[DrDevice]

To continue the non-CV90 tangent for just a bit:

Helo, no helo...it's still just a dismount missile team. In fact, cruising around in a loud, fragile, arguably easier-to-detect vehicle in order to place an ATGM team is worse than 3 guys with a TOW in a jeep, IMO. With the jeep, your first warning is the lead tank dying, and you wonder just WTF the shot came from. With the helo...you wonder why a transport helo dropped below LOS and then reappeared, and start to wonder about the area.

Airborne assaults as you describe don't happen by the single vehicle. They are at least battalion-level events, if not division. Sure, helicopters can transport crew-served weapons that make the light infantry dangerous to tanks. But that's hardly a "good" solution to an armored attack.

Helos also don't transport BMD-2s. Those are dropped from rather large planes.

The idea of airborne ops and vertical envelopment is cool, but it's also not "small" by any real world standard.

Not to ruin your mission fun: play how you like! Drop anything you want from a helo, and use their extraordinary mobility to change how the game plays.

[Grenny]

Well; im thinking around that for MP games.

We could use a kind of AT-reserve force. So ATGM team that can be moved fast by helicoper IOT create blocking positions or flank guards. Idealy the choppers would have to fly in before any enemy tanks/IFV can spot the deployment.

[Gibsonm]

Idealy the choppers would have to fly in before any enemy tanks/IFV can spot the deployment.

Well you'd need that so they could hump their gear from the LZ to the firing point and be setup before the enemy arrived in any case.

[Marko]

To continue the non-CV90 tangent for just a bit:

Helo, no helo...it's still just a dismount missile team. In fact, cruising around in a loud, fragile, arguably easier-to-detect vehicle in order to place an ATGM team is worse than 3 guys with a TOW in a jeep, IMO. With the jeep, your first warning is the lead tank dying, and you wonder just WTF the shot came from. With the helo...you wonder why a transport helo dropped below LOS and then reappeared, and start to wonder about the area.

Airborne assaults as you describe don't happen by the single vehicle. They are at least battalion-level events, if not division. Sure, helicopters can transport crew-served weapons that make the light infantry dangerous to tanks. But that's hardly a "good" solution to an armored attack.

Helos also don't transport BMD-2s. Those are dropped from rather large planes.

The idea of airborne ops and vertical envelopment is cool, but it's also not "small" by any real world standard.

Not to ruin your mission fun: play how you like! Drop anything you want from a helo, and use their extraordinary mobility to change how the game plays.

As a heavy lift capacity is not currently modeled i am using the BMD, Its air deploy-able.Also Part of former soviet unions plan of attack was to use para troops and spetsnaz to capture Bridges and important targets such as airfields nuke sites.Yes they did also have the Ability for large scale deployment, They once managed to deploy ten thousand VDU troops in less Then a hour from what i read this really unnerved NATO commanders at the time.

[rump]

Well you'd need that so they could hump their gear from the LZ to the firing point and be setup before the enemy arrived in any case.

Sneaking up an already present enemy with an ATGM team is indeed very difficult. Deploying smoke helps (the teams have their own smoke grenades).

- Rump

[Gibsonm]

Sneaking up an already present enemy with an ATGM team is indeed very difficult. Deploying smoke helps (the teams have their own smoke grenades).

- Rump

Well if the enemy is already there, I think the "sneaking up" bit might be compromised by the helo arriving at the LZ.

[Companion]

Helos also don't transport BMD-2s. Those are dropped from rather large planes.

Well, helos can... big ones such as "Halo" at least.

Though whether using big fat juicy transport helos in heliborne assault mission is realistic/feasible is another matter...

[Marko]

Sneaking up an already present enemy with an ATGM team is indeed very difficult. Deploying smoke helps (the teams have their own smoke grenades).

- Rump

I also found that for a attack to be effective you had to place your LZ quite a distance.

Away from your target area. and deploy your troops on foot or place vehicles to transport Them. This is time consuming and requires a lot of management to work properly.

But its a lot of fun.i know some Guy,s will say just place a vehicle a spawn a missile team in Deployment zone.I say to each his own.ha

[rump]

Well if the enemy is already there, I think the "sneaking up" bit might be compromised by the helo arriving at the LZ.

No, no. I turn the volume down before approaching... :sonic:

But seriously, It's quite fun (although, as said, a lot of micro management). I didn't try it with a helo though, but with a Boxer, against a dug in enemy. Trying this against a manoeuvring enemy is of course a whole other problem.

- Rump

[Marko]

No, no. I turn the volume down before approaching... :sonic:

But seriously, It's quite fun (although, as said, a lot of micro management). I didn't try it with a helo though, but with a Boxer, against a dug in enemy. Trying this against a manoeuvring enemy is of course a whole other problem.

- Rump

Hi Rump.

You should try it using the Chinook. it can carry up to six missile teams.

I also placed ops teams to spot the advancing armour.

Used in conjunction with artillery and Gunship attacks. You can really blunt an old style soviet head On attack.its great fun.

Edited February 3, 2012 by Marko

[Trekker]

Ofcourse i would choose the 9040, the gun as amazing and contrary to what some of you have said it hits what you want to hit. IRL that is.

The B1 and C version of the CV9040 has a awsome fire control system, the use of 3P has lenghten the lifespann some years. 40mm is extremly useful in urban arean and ofcourse to level a compound. After some years serving on the strf90 beast i wouldn't trade it for anyother IFV. Im not biased.

The reason we didn't put a missile on it (except the cv9056) was that our btn's were designed to combine cv90's and strv121(122) on a small scene. Where the cv90's were, so were the tanks. And at the time we designed the cv90 the 40mm was enough to kill most tanks in most attitudes.

Since then tanks has evovled, but the use of the cv90 has become less armor focused and more soft-target focus, making a "missile-upgrade" not cost-worthy. In Afghanistan 4-5 40mm 3P does the same work as a TOW, fighting armour isn't one of our tasks anymore :cul:

[Marko]

Ofcourse i would choose the 9040, the gun as amazing and contrary to what some of you have said it hits what you want to hit. IRL that is.

The B1 and C version of the CV9040 has a awsome fire control system, the use of 3P has lenghten the lifespann some years. 40mm is extremly useful in urban arean and ofcourse to level a compound. After some years serving on the strf90 beast i wouldn't trade it for anyother IFV. Im not biased.

The reason we didn't put a missile on it (except the cv9056) was that our btn's were designed to combine cv90's and strv121(122) on a small scene. Where the cv90's were, so were the tanks. And at the time we designed the cv90 the 40mm was enough to kill most tanks in most attitudes.

Since then tanks has evovled, but the use of the cv90 has become less armor focused and more soft-target focus, making a "missile-upgrade" not cost-worthy. In Afghanistan 4-5 40mm 3P does the same work as a TOW, fighting armour isn't one of our tasks anymore :cul:

Hi trekker.

When i picked the Bradley it was a decision, based on what i thought was to best IFV in SB Not the real world.i personally like the cv90.And now i have discovered you can assign ATGM teams to IFV,s i am going to have rethink and replay the scenarios i designed to test My theory.

[Hedgehog]

The problem is the "team in the boot" gives you the "dismounted" option but not the "mounted". Or are you hoping the team can fire off the ground mount while in the vehicle?

I was going with what is currently modelled in SB

[Brun]

I would choose the 90/40C over the Bradley any day. Better armour and Gun lower profile, and better fCS IMO. The addition of a tow on the Bradley does not move it up on my list. Maybe one out of every 200 shots I take with a bradley will be a tow. To long to set up, to slow for the tow to get on target. Many times when I launch a tow I Get spotted waiting for the slow tow to get there and have to let the it crash short so I can move to safety.

I'd say about 80-90% of the time a Bradley launches a tow it will not live very long after. I supose IRL enemy tanks cannot spot tows so quickly and untill that changes fireing a tow at a tank is like playing russian roulette with 5 bullets loaded in a six shooter. I would rather hit that tank with a few 40mm rounds mess Him up a bit then scoot.

[dejawolf]

I would choose the 90/40C over the Bradley any day. Better armour and Gun lower profile, and better fCS IMO. The addition of a tow on the Bradley does not move it up on my list. Maybe one out of every 200 shots I take with a bradley will be a tow. To long to set up, to slow for the tow to get on target. Many times when I launch a tow I Get spotted waiting for the slow tow to get there and have to let the it crash short so I can move to safety.

I'd say about 80-90% of the time a Bradley launches a tow it will not live very long after. I supose IRL enemy tanks cannot spot tows so quickly and untill that changes fireing a tow at a tank is like playing russian roulette with 5 bullets loaded in a six shooter. I would rather hit that tank with a few 40mm rounds mess Him up a bit then scoot.

TOW shots needs to be taken at max range. thats when they are most lethal.

at 3750m, the TOW has close to 100% hit chance, while tank rounds has around 1 in 3 chance of a hit or less. the TOW-2B is even nastier. even if a tank is hull down behind a hill, it will still kill the tank. and you can do other things as well, such as if you spot a pair of antennas behind a berm, and you know its an enemy position, you can fire, and hit that vehicle behind the berm.

[Hedgehog]

So, the best vehicle is a CV9040C with a TOW 2B team in the boot?

[Marko]

So, the best vehicle is a CV9040C with a TOW 2B team in the boot?

Or the Pizarro with a missile team.you can also load the Bradley with javelin missile teams and AGL teams match that with The fire power of the Brad especially in defense its a potent weapon system

Edited February 6, 2012 by Marko