Jump to content

3Star

Members
  • Posts

    1,415
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 3Star

  1. The FLIR is a SEP enhancement, and the x50 is actually a digital enhancement, not a zoom. It's not on the regular M1A2. I'm unsure about the dual-axis mirror, that may be on a regular A2 but it's effectively another FCS to model. NTM
  2. That is correct, don't forget that the computer does not apply that estimate. It works out exactly what the lead is, be it one mil or seven. And the reticle should not jump off the target. I'm impressed that you remember the values off the top of your head, mind, but they're being inappropriately applied when it comes to normal mode gunnery. The current manual does not bother with a manual lead calculation. It just instructs the gunner to work off those initial lead values and adjust accordingly. They probably figured it was quicker to fire two shots than trying to do maths. NTM
  3. 240s came in an Estate variant.
  4. Where are you getting that silliness from? (Not least, M1A1 can't fire HEP, that's a 105mm round). Second, think about it for a second. The lead cannot be a constant. If you're firing a HEAT round at a target moving at 5mph left to right, you only need a little bit of lead. If you're firing a HEAT round at a target moving 40mph left to right, you need quite a lot of lead. You are correct that sabot will need less lead than HEAT which would need less lead than HEP (on a 105 tank), but the numbers are not fixed. Now, in the case of lead calculation failure (i.e. the computer no longer works), and you have gone to Emergency Mode gunnery, 2.5mil for Sabot/MPAT and 5mil for HEAT are listed in the manual as suggested initial lead factors for the gunner to aim off, but they are obviously just estimates in the hope that they're appropriate and the gunner needs to adjust his point of aim by observing the impact. NTM
  5. I doubt that would save ESim from suit, if that's the reason. It is very definitely a Volvo 240, the vehicle is distinctive enough that Volvo would have grounds to say 'our image is being used without our permission'. NTM
  6. Cuddly Tank. The Panzerkrumpwagen Mk1. He was known as 'The Babe Magnet' at work. NTM
  7. A common 'new gunner' mistake, even on the real tank, is to chase the reticle around. Example: If you were correctly tracking the target, the reticle will not have moved off centre mass after having lased. Your statement is correct for the SABCA FCS as found on the Leo1AS (And a few others of the era, eg IFCS on Chieftain), but not correct for the M1A1. What happens when you lase in the A1 is the turret 'jumps' to lead the target. Before you lase, with the reticle in the centre fixed position, the turret and gun are pointing at the same place as the reticle. When lead is calculated and applied, let's say for a target going right-to-left, the gun has to be aiming to the left of the target so that the round and target meet. i.e. lead. To do this, the turret has to traverse left a fraction, which also will result in your entire field of view moving left, because Abram's gunsight mirrors do not have a traverse function: They are fixed to the turret. However, the reticle projector is mounted on a gimbal which can traverse independently to the turret. This allows the 'point of calculation' to remain the same, even though when looking through the field of vision which is fixed to the turret, it appears to have jumped to the right. If the calculated lead is correct, not only will the reticle jump to the right in your field of vision, so will everything else including the target. There should be no need to move the reticle onto the target. Let's say, for the sake of example, you were underspeeding when you lased. This would result in insufficient lead being calculated, and the reticle (and target) would jump too little to the right. After a fraction of a second, the reticle would be behind the target (remember, you weren't traversing fast enough, so the computer thinks the target is slower than it really is), so you increase traverse rate to compensate and bring the reticle back onto target. Remember that the computer is still calculating lead all the time, and the sudden increase in traverse rate tells the computer that the target has just sped up. So it increases lead to compensate as well. If you then fire as soon as the target is back under the reticle, your round will fall to the left (ahead) of the target, and you will miss. The reticle flying around is the visual representation of the constantly-updated fire control solution. Depending on how far off-centre it is, that shows you how much lead the gun is currently applying. The correct process is that if, after you lase, you find that the reticle is not still centre mass, to accept that you've screwed up, dump lead (Press P), and try again. NTM
  8. I thought that was a Lada joke? What do you call a Lada on top of a hill? A miracle. NTM
  9. Well, he's sortof right. At least one brigade went over the border with 105mm M1s (A Tanknetter was in it), but they would have been IPs, not the very early M1s without a bustle rack such as the one modelled in SB. According to GAO, 1,904 of the tanks were M1A1s and 120 were M1. More M1s had been initially deployed, but most units exchanged them for A1s by the time the shooting started. So realistically, only 5% of Desert Storm scenarios should incorporate the 105mm M1. NTM
  10. M1117 is the ASV. Most vehicles have the 40mm/.50 cal manned turret, most of the rest have pintle mounts. RWS is possible (And is, I believe, a different type_ and has been done, but it is not the default. NTM
  11. The corrugated shed on tracks was a WWII design. The picture is a Chieftain. Difficult to find photos of them in combat. Drawing was best I could find NTM
  12. As for best looking, sorry, Chieftain is the clear winner. It just screams "Tank" NTM
  13. He's quite right, though. You lose so many senses in a tank simulator that your 'intuition' of what's going on where, or where you are in relation to anyone else, is completely out the window. It's already an artificial hampering. Even with the ability in simulators like CCTT for the TC to stick his head out the hatch and look around 360 degrees, it takes about half an hour for a platoon to organise itself and get the exercise going. I wouldn't want to think about "Three, go ahead raise and lower your gun tube so I can find you..." trying to be done at night. NTM
  14. Well, it would certainly be interesting... NTM
  15. Eland 90 Eland 20 Eland 60 Rooikat Olifant Ratel 20 Ratel 90 G-6 Casspir Buffel Curses.. that's only 10. NTM
  16. Should be the rifle, the smoothbore never entered service and has been cancelled. NTM
  17. Meanwhile, my graphics card is fainting... NTM
  18. I believe the Squadron blog is on wildhorsesquadron.blogspot.com. We're packing up to leave, we'll be back in civilisation by 30th March, and I'll be back on SB after that at some point. Not sure about Archangel. NTM
  19. 3Star

    Smoke

    Closest I can think of is to go to F5, and very quickly draw a 'retreat' order. They'll all maintain formation, pop smoke, and reverse. As they're reversing, you can refine or cancel the movement order. NTM
  20. I'm not actually convinced of the merit of this one. There is no difference in the processing time if Squadron 91 (FO) comes on the radio with a fire mission request, or if Red 2 (A staff sergeant tank commander) comes on the radio. The real advantage to having an FO around is that they are more up to speed with unusual requests so that the fire mission can be more appropriate to the target (eg sheaf, shift-from-known-point, special munitions requirements, etc). In terms of simply telling guns "put HE/ICM/Smoke/whatever at this grid", there is no difference in either accuracy or speed, at least in the US. NTM
  21. And just for the historical record, one must also recall the Christie-type vehicles such as the BT-5 which did have powered roadwheels, so that they could run without tracks. NTM
  22. Apologies if I've missed this somewhere, but searching never did come up with a definitive answer. The spent casings bag, what button does one press to empty the thing out? Given the time differences, I assume there's one button for 'reload ammo' and one for 'empty bag', I'd hate to spend ten minutes emptying the bag when I just wanted to add thirty rounds to the belt. I don't want to wait until the bag gets to 130 if I think I've a quiet few minutes. NTM
  23. I played around with them at last year's armour conference. It was fascinating, if you looked down at the carpet, you could see footsteps fading after people walked on it. Very light, pretty reasonable, and I'm pretty sure there was no cooldown time. Of course, though tankers are down on the issuance list, it's quite normal for the gunner on a HMMWV to have a thermal these days. (PAS-13, for example) NTM
  24. Unless they're thermal or fusion NVGs. Bear in mind that not all NVGs are image intensfiers. The US Army has had helmet-mounted thermals in the system for a few years, though tankers are pretty far down the issuance list. The latest purchase is the PVQ-20, which combines both a thermal imager and an image intensifier into one picture. Best of both worlds. Currently being fielded to SF, 10th Mountain and aviators, unfortunately tankers are definitely low on the fielding list. NTM
  25. Is not the word 'reservoir' used in the tank's maintenance manual? Just because something isn't often used doesn't mean it's in any way not the most accurate term. NTM
×
×
  • Create New...