Leaderboard

I always wanted to have a more gunner controller like input device. Having spend some time on the "real" simulator again over the past 2 years, I now decided it's time to something done. For the moment I have finished my POC phase and am on the way of building the first prototype. So from the Hardware side im using: torsion spring loaded mechanism that I ripped out of a sim racing steering wheel for X rotation (left right) torsion or dual spring mechanim on a shaft for Y rotation (up down) for a maybe future V2 version already sourcing parts to replace the spring mechanism DC motors, basically a constant force feedback version Android 10" tablet gyrosensor for the positioning, and touchscreen for button and keyboard inputs Not decided yet might add some real physical buttons to the handles, but would require the device to be wired On the software side: Freepie apk for Android to send gyro sensor data to the PC (the way any racing game on a mobile works, rotate device for steering, tilt for acceleration) Opentrack with freepie input and vjoy output to receive the sensor data and translate to axis movement of the vJoy virtual device SpaceDesk Server Client to convert the Android device into a secondary PC monitor Helios (mainly used in flight sim to build virtual cockpits on touch devices) to be run on the tablet and providing virtual buttons and switches. Physical buttons might be added during prototyping Joystick Gremlin to map everything together onto a single virtual HID device that is then used in SB as controller The POC testing with my phone as gyro sensor went better as expected. It feels just more natural and even without dialing in response curves fits my liking more than the joystick and/or gamepads that I have tested/used so far. Will post more progress once mor of the 3D printing is done

...overwhelming chances are, it's not because we don't want to. 95% of all incoming emails are being answered within 24 hours, the majority within 6 hours. Most people contacting us - either directly by email, or by using our contact form sheet, supply only a single email address (more on that later). While the vast majority of email addresses supplied this way to us are correct, there's still a non-zero chance for a typo. We may be able to spot and correct such errors if they are in the second half of the address, e.g. @uotlook.com or @gnail.com - but whether you're tankmaster771 or tankmister717 we have little chance of guessing right. Then there's spam filters. Corporate email addresses like to filter our messages because there's "games" in our name, others find the license ticket codes highly suspicious (only cyber criminals encrypt, there are no legitimate cases!). Whatever the cause, sometimes our replies and license tickets will be found in there. If you don't check there and rather assume the worst, chances are that our subsequent apologies get swallowed by the very same filter. An all-time classic is the full mailbox. You don't receive your ticket - because the mailbox is full. You ask, where's my ticket, and never receive our reply - because the mailbox is full. You send us an angry letter demanding a refund and still don't get a reply? Maybe, just maybe, the mailbox is full. Who knows what other messages you missed, recently? You will never know. This is why we think that it's a good idea to send us one alternative email address. We're not collecting such data because we want to trade with them. There simply needs to be an alternative communications channel so that we can actually get in contact with each other. Yes, there are cases where we need a bit longer to reply. Someone might be sick, or traveling, or answering your question is unusually complex. Give us a day or two, then nudge us with a gentle reminder. Don't wait months. Try to supply us with additional info, like the date of a purchase or other relevant information.

As some players reported, T-80U and T-64B have UNLIMITED and extremely fast reload. We would very grateful if you people could fix this problem. Thank you. 466f66d4ae676a8f.mp4

No. There will be a final 4.3 update this year (summer...autumn-ish), and, probably, a major upgrade next year. Whether that will bear the number 4.4 or something else, I don't know yet. We try to maintain the established three-year cycle 2013 (3.0) 2016 (4.0) 2019 (4.1) 2022 (4.3)

Gunner Sabot Tank!

APFSDS rounds in SB Pro have a cut-off range of maybe 10, 15km or so. We track only rounds with explosive content to their impact point since it's far more likely that they will cause noticeable damage. An APFSDS rounds, after dozens of kilometers in the air, would still be quite dangerous to un- or lightly armored units. But it endangers only things that are directly in the way of the trajectory. The chance of damage is not zero, which is why we still have range safety regulations in actual army life - but it requires computational resources that we'd rather spend on other simulation tasks.

Yes I am, it happens on many scenarios (including distributed scenarios on here) then we tested what was going on. I`m suspecing that some specific tank such asT-80U fires unlimited amount of missiles if it loaded and fired once. Here is improvised testing scenario for the issue we talk about. T1.sce

Yes, I'll do the COing

Here ya go, Bradley fans:

Pretty much a trade off. M1 family, turret remains facing the frontal arc (mostly) but not fast. Leo 2s, turret traverses off but faster. Ideally for both you pull back into dead ground if you can, before you start the process.

Time acceleration can indeed cause trouble if the frame rate isn't high enough - which depends on the computer, and the scenario, of course. While forests do help with reducing the likelihood of getting spotted (by a lot), once that a unit is spotted, it will get immediately identified and from that moment on has very little chance of escaping observation again. This is less than ideal, but to change this mechanism we need a new software architecture (which is in development). The good news, version 4.4+ will do something about infantry getting spotted at longer ranges.

Just FYI... The question was asked, when does "round 2" (spring) part of the campaign start? It will begin on the April 26th TGIF (four TGIF's from now). So prepare yourself. If you didn't participate last time and want to, then you can - although the teams might need to be balanced. If you participated last time and don't want to this time, that is fine too. The only rule is that if you started on one side they you must remain on that side, unless we have to re-balance the numbers on each side. More info will follow as we get closer.

It's not so much about regulation having one ammo door open at one time, its that you physically cannot have both ammo doors open at the same time. When one door opens, it slides over and covers the opening of the other side. First, you have to prepare the TC's stored ammo, which is only a manually opened door -- its not opened by hydraulic power nor electrical motor. This full process is (from memory)... a. Remove the TC's "curtain" which is a curtain behind him that is in front of that door, which has pockets and pouches, that you use to store "stuff" like maps and manuals. The curtain clips off but then has to be moved out of the way, covering up other things (like the TC's control panel) in the process. b. Then you have to un-stow a prybar-like handle that is used to manually pry open the TC's ammo door. This handle is attached to the wall, between both ammo doors. It slides and then swivels out, like some kind of crowbar that is attached to the wall. c. Then you have to pry open the door with this handle, which isn't the easiest thing to do - it can take a minute or so. d. Then you have to use your fingers to grip a detent on the door, and manually slide the TC's blast-door (which is pretty thick and heavy, maybe ~ 1" thick) over to block the ready side. e. Then you have to extract ONE round into the crew compartment from the TC's stored ammo side. f. Then you have to manually slide the TC's ammo door back shut, all the way shut, so that the ready ammo door can open. g. Then you have to hydraulically open the ready ammo door (as you normally would). h. Then you have to store the round that you currently have in the crew compartment, and let the ready door close. ...all the while you have to try to avoid chopping off anyone's fingers in the process. Then you repeat the process back at "d" above, for each and EVERY single round. (There is probably some YouTube video showing the process, maybe.) So why not just pull out more than one round at a time? No. The rounds are bulky, and it is dangerous to be handing more than one round in the turret while everyone is opening and closing doors manually, and so on. Plus, yes, regulations are in place for this part of the process, and for good reason, for the same reason that you do not "lap load". The process wasn't designed to be quick, but then again, that is the trade-off of having the ready AND stowed ammo protected in the ammo bunkers. Rest assured, if the time was wrong it would have been changed in 25 years -- it's realistic. It was timed a long time ago, to be an average crew.

Me and Wiggie for C1. But im a "maybe" as we are getting close to birth for my kid.

a particular angle might create the impression of a net draped over the vehicle say when viewed more or less perpendicular from the side or the top aspect, but the illusion becomes apparent when joining surfaces are viewed say from a shallow 20 degree angle- eg. the net doesnt appear to hang from the gun tube viewed from a side angle, or in a similar way if both the turret side and turret top are viewable at the same and the net is supposed to continue from one to the other- then it looks painted on, it creates a very 2D effect painted on 2D surfaces where it joins and transitions, it tends to look like a painted camo pattern baked into the skin rather than a net draped over it; it is relatively simple to photoshop a net mapped onto the skin, but in my experience, even photorealistic details of a net does not escape the problem that it looks unnatural viewed from certain perspectives. you may have seen very convincing urban street art painted into sidewalks or onto walls by graffiti artists giving the impression of depth when viewed straight on, such as a realistic looking swimming pool painted onto the pavement, but the illusion collapses once you begin to view it at acute angles ( in a similar way older graphics rendering techniques which mapped satellite images of cities and towns and installations onto the terrain produced a nice effect with distance and altitude, less so closer to ground level)

I've spent some time on this with him. 1. He initially installed it on the wrong drive so instead of "uninstalling" he deleted the folders (this is when I became involved). 2. Attempting to uninstall via the "Settings" failed, as it was no longer listed. 3. When he subsequently attempts to "install", we now get a message about a copy of Steel Beasts already being installed. 4. If you hit "OK", it goes and installs map packages, Codemeter, etc. but not the central software. That's when I suggested posting here as I didn't want to start trashing his Registry.

Sooo... 5.0?

You know that you can get a kit with all switches & electronics plus 3D print files for the handles from AFV Sim, right?

Unfortunately the internet is a poor medium for communicating a joke.

Yes and I kicked it and I put new batteries in it.

I do not understand this fixation. NZ in 1940 had a population of what about 1.5 million people. It had no automotive industry. Almost all of its motor vehicles and defence equipment came from the UK - on the other side of the planet. The UK wasn't in a position to gift NZ anything either given most of their AFVs were on the other side of the channel from their crews. Someone in NZ gave it a go to build something that might help defend their country and all people do is put sh*t on them.

I suspect that this is a case where we "invent" a dismount unit that's actually the vehicle commander, so in that sense we're technically not dealing with a duplicate ID. That said, V5 is all about getting rid of these hacks and organize things properly rather than squeezing functions from the last bit available in unit status bytes.

Please send an email to @Ssnake. This situation cannot be handled here, on web board, as I suspect. Mail address is his user name here @ avatar picture .com

OK great. I renamed the title of the thread for future reference.

I guess a bear? We have "bin chickens":

Gibsonm, The SWMBO, has decreed that the basement will be effectively referred to as the mancave and is now my domain. My wife has also stopped tracking my kit collection, so I am way past having to justify a new kit or sneaking it into the door. You can't go wrong with those Tamiya kits, static or rc. Andy Scrapper_511, My collection was built over a few years, especially during the time I was deployed to Iraq and other exotic destinations. Andy

I'm noticing either a problem or misunderstanding with the 'Enter Battlesight Range' TC function. The same thing happens on all the MBTs I've tried. I hit the key and the battlesight range 1200m is entered into the FCS, but the gunner always lases and generates a new range before firing. My understanding is that battlesight is a quick engagement with the gunner firing without lazing. I'm using the 'battlesight' key only and not issuing a separate 'fire' command. Something seems odd. What is the correct sequence? Anyone else? :c:

Fixed.

The balance of scenarios is constantly shifting. With every new version, AI routines get modified, armor and ammo parameters get reassessed - and things might no longer work as intended. The Mission Editor is part of the Steel Beasts Experience. We want people to use it, and modifying an existing scenario is a very good way to learn how to use the editor. Scenarios aren't monolithic miracles dropped from the heavens that must not be touched by mere mortals. They are more like play-doh sculptures that you can transmogrify into something new, possibly for the enjoyment of others. Preserve the credits, though.

Looks like the improved AI for helicopters works. The scenario probably was designed when the helicopters couldn't do what they can now. So, either you improve your gunnery to conserve ammo better, so you can shoot it down before you have to reload. Or stop shooting when you're down to a handful of rounds, then order your wingman to reload first. Or, edit the scenario and add some air defense assets. No shame in that.

Thank you for your alert, we'll get right to it. In future release notes, look for bug no. 12242. IFVs not firing on bunkers is "sort of normal" in the sense that they won't fire if they can't see the center of a unit, or if their ammunition is insufficient to shoot through the walls. That being said, we aren't happy with those bunkers, and will replace them with something better.

It was a brilliant and very well made scenario. I think everyone was challenged and entertained. We had a good plan, a good CO and good cooperation. A good Sunday it was

The Skif kit of the T64 isnt bad for its age. I have a couple somewhere, including one with the accurate armour turret to get rid of some of the imperfections. But it really didnt need it. If you are building the tracks, and are frustrated they dont have holes in all the tracks, i found a hole punch, followed with slowly drilling them out with a hand drill worked very well. T72M1 from tamiya is still very good. As is the Chally 1. Anyone got any recommendations on a decent T62? The only one ive ever built was the Tamiya one, which had massive issues.. Understandable perhaps, in that it dated from the early 70's. Get the skills together and when you can afford it, invest in an RC tank, of which there are a lot on the market. If you figure out the airbrushing, it pays dividends later.

No, but www.afvsim.com should.

And the long version:

https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2024/03/20/russia-may-unveil-t-100-tank-excelling-t-14-produced-from-t-80/ Not really new,but interesting none the less.

No, I'm afraid not. I don't visit there.

No, he was a NZ Govt Minister. If we are belittling people just because of their name, that's even worse.

Just because the bullsh*t factories put them in doesn't mean we have to. Didn't you Mum ever talk to you about not jumping off a bridge just because everyone else was?

Sometimes you're just unlucky...red soldiers get hit by a stinger missle that failed to hit and UAV and failed to selfdestrukt 😉

I still don't get it.

I could post a video of me scrolling through it if you like? It's pretty funny and cool.

If you knew anything about Finns and Swedes: No.

Just finished reading this one. Despite being written in 88 the debrief points probably read the same for many exercises happening today!! A really good read for anyone wanting an insight to Battle Group (uk term) or Task Force planning tactics and execution. i would make it compulsory reading for Pl (Tp), Coy (Sqn) leaders and HQ staffs! And all the support arms!! The importance of a strong and capable XO (BG 2IC / COS) comes through really strong emphasising the importance of G4 logistics, medical and maintenance. thoroughly recommended. A series of missions. Depends if the ground is accurate to the NTC maps? Someone more familiar with that terrain and terrain file will know better! what to read next?

Yes, these are hydraulic controls and are actually from a Marder, not a Leopard. We have a set in our 'Control Handle Museum' 😊 The same ebay seller has a set of control handles from a Leopard 1A5 https://www.ebay.com/itm/TANK-LEOPARD-COTROLLER-STICK-HANDLE-CONTROL-HYDRAULIC-BUNDESWEHR-BW-GERMAN-ARMY/173552667258?_trkparms=aid%3D333200%26algo%3DCOMP.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20190129125700%26meid%3D38f8128c774c45f390fcbf5266e578a8%26pid%3D100752%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D12%26sd%3D172976831998%26itm%3D173552667258&_trksid=p2047675.c100752.m1982 These are much easier to convert to a USB device for Steel Beasts as they use standard potentiometers and switches. We've converted a few of these ourselves.