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

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.

You forgot step 6, a slab of C4.

Might I suggest...

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'm sorry ... dry humor ... I was TOTALLY kidding! Total joke.

Best bet: release it to the world and people can have fun with it while you work with it. The maps I have released clearly have room for improvement - but better a good map today than perfect map years from now ... maybe.

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.

Case, hopefully, solved. Fellow software developers: Don't run Steel Beasts while your debugger is open. The CodeMeter runtime doesn't like that, and will lock the CodeMeter container in use. But if it has happened: Send me a CmDUST log file and a license request file, and I'll unlock your CM stick again (until you test my patience doing the same mistake over and over, at which point I'll assume malicious intent, or trolling).

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

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

I would expect the Luchs driver (and reverse driver) to have an image intensifier vision block facing forward (reverse), each. Now bug #12278.

Hello SB family. I hope this finds you well. I recently got into the armor model kit hobby and I was wondering if anyone else in here are also builders. I wouldn't mind seeing your work and hearing your suggestions! A fellow baseball dad has the common interest in armor and is actually a very experienced builder. He gifted me a Tamiya Mk1 Merkava which I am in the process of building. It's slow-going since free time is limited but it's been a lot of fun. Build time may be limited but I couldn't help ordering a bunch of kits for the future. Here's my stash (all 1:35): Tamiya Merkava Academy M966 Humvee TOW Tamiya M1A1 Abrams Academy M2 Bradley Tamiya T-72M1 Revell BMP-2 Skif T-64A Zvezda BMP-1 Hobby Boss Leopard 2A4 Tamiya Marder 1A2 Tamiya Challenger 1 Mk3 Academy MCV-80 I also have my eye on the Academy IDF Achzarit (early) to continue the late 80s MBT/IFV theme. Will probably get a BRDM-2, SpPz Luchs2, and USMC vehicles.

Hitting a mine:

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.

No, but www.afvsim.com should.

Also , artillery making craters in mission. Though I think that's out till v5.

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

I love them, Id have an RC one of one if I could. Yes, it ticks the box for comedy value, but as a mobile pillbox, it was arguably not any worse than a Vickers light tank or some of the tankettes we were building in the 1930's. Even the Panzer 1 was little more than a mobile machine gun post. Besides, the developers of Gunner Heat PC have already put one in as an easter egg, so there is no reason to be shy anymore.

Sir, have you tried switching it off and on again? 😉

I read it that way, but there's always some people who won't get it, and misunderstandings here can have severe consequences. So I wanted to make it unambiguously clear that my professional advice is to stay away from materials marked as classified (let alone posting them online for the most retarded reason possible, winning an internet argument).

I leave that call to others. All I know is that I need to report security breaches that I see for "friendly nations" (e.g. M1 armour layout, CR2 Dorchester details, ....) , otherwise I'm in breach myself. This reporting involves a multi page PDF to complete and then a nice chat with our ICT security team. So speaking personally, I'd be very happy if people stopped.

While we are on a role with Ver 5 "things" ... Can we add some additional granularity to unit name (or maybe display their unit IDs)? I have a unit called "XO Spec" unfortunately the dismount is also XO Spec: As a result trying to use the logic choice: becomes problematic as they are listed twice and it seems even the smallest turn of the mouse wheel (or click) moves you from the 1st "XO Spec" to the 2nd one. As a result I'm never certain as to which one I've selected until I test it and almost inevitably find that I made the wrong choice. The call sign template doesn't seem to provide any obvious way to distinguish the vehicle from the people: Can we add an additional description to the Call Sign template, or perhaps can we be shown the "unit ID" since as I understand it these are unique, with the vehicle and the passengers having different / unique Unit IDs?

mission editor placed "craters" Like an IED going off but not in the action phase.

THAT ... Is impressive !

my new toy from santank claus

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.

Anyone interested in the M47 manual?

That is correct. Only the TC can enter battlesight range into the FCS in the M1. In the Leo2s, the gunner can do it. (Well, the M1 gunner can enter battlesight range using the manual range function in the FCS, but that kinda defeats the point with battlesight engagements.)

Yeah, that confirms what I was saying. Which is unfortunate. Too much to ask for in an update?

spurring further discussion?