Jump to content

Maj.Hans

Members
  • Content Count

    1,517
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Maj.Hans

  1. No, I understand and I agree. My point was that greenpeace types whine about US use of DU Sabots but don't seem to know or care about Russian DU HEAT rounds. To me the DU penetrator rod is one thing, you primarily use it on heavy armor where you really need it, and it won't blow up and send the metal splattering everywhere if you miss. DU lined HEAT rounds seem just kinda..........I really don't know what to say. Yhea, I'm familiar with the BM29, its the BM26 I don't understand. I would assume that BM26 would come BEFORE BM29, and if it came after, that at least it would penetrate better...Is BM26 some kind of rebuild or rework of an older round? Add tungsten to existing steel rods?
  2. Lieste - Thats what I was thinking, I guess I just figured that we would have evolved fuse design somewhat. I suppose the good news...Sorta...Is that the high arc would mean that at long range you'd almost be dropping your shots on top of the target......If you hit it. Colossus - Good points again. My concern is not that the North Korean generals think they can win a fight (At least on their own). I'd be worried that: 1) One short little man named Kim thinks he can win. And 2) China getting involved. As for DU munitions...Tungsten is bad for you too. Both are toxic heavy metals. DU has a bad rap for two reasons, first that unlike Tungsten it's been used in massive quantity, and second that it is slightly radioactive. As for Russian rounds, at least according to the tables in SB Gold, they seem...Well...Weird... BM29 outperforms the next year's BM26, which is a year later despite a lower number? WTF... BM42 out penetrates BM32 at 0 range, but BM32 is superior at longer range... At least NATO rounds are fairly linear! Bigger number = Better penetration. Though DM13 and 13A1 are just plain weird...Can't penetrate T-72's from point blank...You're better off lobbing DM12 at them...
  3. http://www.amazon.com/USB-Cup-Mug-Warmer-4-port/dp/B000E84QMQ Do I really need to say anything...?
  4. Well I think the T-64 is a sure bet "No." I thought those were never exported anyway. lol...Ninja tank...Even *IF* they have it, my money is still on the S.Koreans totally thrashing them. I don't have ProPE so I can't test the ammunition you mentioned, but I always figured that the M900's would be good enough at medium and close range against most Russian armor. I wonder if we'll see an upgraded M900 variant, or maybe even IPM1's back in service, now that we're fielding the 105mm again on the Stryker...I'd like to see the IPM1 in SB someday too... While I'm ranting on ammo, theres something I don't understand. APFSDS penetrators are 'arrow'dynamic. 125mm HE/FRAG rounds have an aerodynamic shape. but I don't understand why NATO HEAT rounds and Russian HEAT rounds look like a soup can with a spike? Wouldn't they fly a bit better if you streamlined them...?
  5. Okay, interesting. I never really thought of the T-72 as being particularly well armored though? Really my thought was that the K5 ERA blocks added on them would be the big problem rather than the thickness or effectiveness of it's standard armor? That or maybe I've seen so much pop-top footage that my view of them is a little skewed... Agreed about the ammunition, but there have been some advancements, haven't there? Like M711, Pronit, etc. Oddly enough, I hear that the Russian BM-42M round can't fit in the T-72's autoloader. Seems that some of their HEAT rounds penetrate more anyway. Now, heres something I don't understand about ammunition... The M829 series DU rounds (Which CNN knows only as the 'Silver Bullet') is "Oh my god!" evil because its made of Uranium. But nobody whines about Soviet/Russian BM-29 or BM-32 DU rounds, or better yet, BK-21? :rolleyes:
  6. So that leads me to a few questions... 1) Is the armor on the T-72 really that good, or is this a KONTAKT-5 related issue? 2) Is the M900 good enough to be effective against T-72 tanks? KONTAKT-5 covered tanks? 3) Are the Non-DU rounds really that much worse then the DU rounds? and 4) Do the K1A1's use imported ammo like DM33/53/etc or KE-W/A1 types or does S. Korea have the resources to produce their own? Really I don't know a whole lot about the K1/K1A1 but, really, the K1 seems more than a match for North Korean junk...
  7. Well at least in SB Gold... If you are TC-Gunning with a live gunner, he will set the FCS to match your loaded rounds. To deactivate lead, release and immediately re-engage TC override. In this mode, essentially, it's like you're actually holding the palm switch. If you are TC-Gunning because your gunner bit the big one, I think dynamic lead is always on. The work around is to set your battle sight range to 0000 and use it to fault out your FCS and thus remove the lead. Lead will return when you lase next. Also, SB Gold here... I kind of like the floating reticle in the M1 as it seems more forgiving to tracking errors than the Leopard2's. Or perhaps it has something to do with the way I have to hold the lead switch and maybe it's just not as comfortable for me? Either way, I use various methods. It seems that at longer ranges I prefer to use a Lase-Track-Lase-Blaze method. Range the target, track to be sure, lase to update, and fire. With the targets closer, say 1500m or closer, I use the Lase-and-Blaze method. Honestly I don't try to hurry up the shot. I have a "One Two" count, sorta, theres maybe 1/2 to a 1 second pause after the lase to be sure I'm set and tracking, then fire. I can't recall ever actually switching the first/last return mode...Seems I always just adjust my lase point rather than flip switches. No problems with that method yet...
  8. Funny you mention the role of estimating ranges in rejecting phony solutions... I know two guys who I talked into buying SB Gold some time back as a change of pace from IL-2 Sturmovik, before PPE was out... I'm having the damnedest time getting them first to understand how to work the normal mode fire control, and second how to recognize obviously false ranges... "Uh, it says he's twenty yards away, so is that why I missed?" "......Yes...Why did you shoot then?" "Because I have to shoot it after I laser it?" "......Get out of the tank." I won't even begin to tell you what its like when the FCS starts to take hits...
  9. Hmm, Interesting. I have to admit, I wonder why the choice was made to upgrade the K1 to the 120mm? I mean...Look...South Korea's most likely enemy is going to be North Korea, yhea? OK, now North Korea doesn't exactly have a ton of super-modern tanks. Now, when you consider that perhaps the South Korean tankers might just be a little bit, Mmmm, smaller in stature? Than their Western European and North American counterparts... Wouldn't it be more advantageous to stick with a faster loading gun, thats more than enough for the job, and can bring more rounds to the fight? Unless...Theres a concern about China getting involved with some newer equipment?
  10. I think you'd better stick with height and not try width...That could get a little dicey if the target was non cylindrical... IIRC the brackets in the GPS/TIS can be used to range on a Mil dot type scale but I don't really understand how.
  11. Some quick internet research says that ~35 T-80U's were transfered to S. Korea in exchange for the nullification of some debts. Also they do seem to be operating 70 BMP-3's but I'm not sure why for those. Their main MBT as far as I know is the K1 and K1A1. Those are the M1 Abrams looking things you saw. The K1 has a 105mm main gun, the K1A1 has a 120mm. Oddly enough I heard that the K1's don't have thermal sights and that both types are limited in their ammo load. They're due to be (partially?) replaced with a new tank mounting an L55 style main gun. Not sure at all about the other APC's.
  12. Outontheop - I know and have talked to an M2 TC. He spent some time around Stryker units and was dissapointed with their off-road performance and armor. He also pointed out that there was some armor available, both various non reactive and reactive armor, to bring the 113's up to modern spec. Kinda like what the Israelis are doing or did with some of them. To be fair, while there are people out there bitching that the Stryker is totally useless and blah blah blah, I can see it being used for recce missions and perhaps in some support roles. Just not as a fleet wide replacement for other IFV's. That and maybe I'm just unfairly biased because it looks like a BTR-80...Which can usually be found burning on the battlefield surrounded by bodies, yhea?
  13. CV-90/120? Yhea okay why the hell not. Looks interesting. BMP-2? Sure, but sooner the BMP-1 than the BMP-3. M901 ITV...Agreed 1000%!! The M8 is not the same as the Stingray, but I would like to see the Stingray in here someday. As for the striker...Please...No...We should be using M113's instead of that bloated POS...
  14. Can't recall if this is in SB:PPE or not, but I'm sure I'll find out once I get a copy...But... 1) "Overhead cover" position for M1 TC. IIRC I've seen vids of him moving up and down in his seat but only with the hatch open or closed. 2) An option to change how the gunner will respond to the TC engaging targets with the .50 Cal. Maybe I want the gunner to "Fire and Adjust" while I'm working something over with my MG...
  15. Perhaps crews that get a little worked up about taking fire then...The old SB1 crew sometimes sounds like they're eternally on a training run, especially the German TC...
  16. days till Jack Bauer's retirement > Days till we get a better TV show
  17. lol, no I mean I haven't heard it in the game yet, though I know it exists in the file. I'd like to see some pissed crews introduced. "Identified!" "Kill the f***er!" Or maybe... "Fire!" "On the way!" *Boom!* "Suck it commie!"
  18. lol hedge, haven't heard that line yet..
  19. Well SSnake maybe I'm over-reacting but this just seems like the kinda thing thats going to lead into random explosions for other reasons. "Your loader has fumbled the shell. You die!"
  20. Why do we need a new tank? I don't see anything wrong with the one we have now. I do see some issues with TUSK...Mainly that all the crap on the turret makes it a damn big target to spot in tank on tank combat. I wonder if a better option than the remote weapons system would have been to replace the A1 style cupola with one that was fully motorized and perhaps at least partially stabilized. Ohhh, and how about a second set of grenade launchers loaded with HE/FRAG...
  21. Hhehehe...I can't wait...Its a damn fine book! ARRSE? Heh, gota love that name. British food is scary but the sense of humor is priceless. "Manuel, go and get me a hammer." "You want to see my hamster? " "No, not your hamster. How could I knock a nail in with a hamster? Well...I could try..." Officially On Topic: Tanks, in order of preference: M60A3 (And ERA variants) IPM1 M1A2 SEP T-72 T-64 T-80 Marder 1A3 BMP-1 Also the Merkava Mk.2 and 3, and the Chieftain and Challenger 1/2 perhaps, but we lack the set of supporting vehicles like Israeli modded 113's and Warriors and etc at this time so they would be of little use, they're out of area too so to speak.
  22. Personally I would be very very very very P'd-off if I were playing through an hour long scenario and was suddenly blown up or knocked out of commission because of some random-chance super-fookup going on while I tried to get a Sabot loaded before creeping through some trees... I would rather not have speculative explosions... Look, SB punishes you for doing stupid things, but you don't always die. Drive along a road like you're out for an afternoon stroll and you make an easy target. It can be a bad idea, but we don't give you a 10% chance of blowing up because you're doing something stupid. So lets say that a normal reload takes 10 seconds. Swapping rounds then might take 30 seconds if everything goes right. One in ten times its stuck, and you randomly take an extra 30 to 60 seconds as the loader gets the gun armed again. One in twenty times the stub comes off and your loader takes an extra 15-30 seconds putting it all back together. You then have the choice of firing it off and loading as normal, or hanging onto it to use it later, maybe you didn't want to switch away from Sabot that badly anyway. One in fifty times, you have the 'really bad effect'. The case breaks open, maybe the powder spills, maybe the bag contains it, we don't care. The effect of this is that your loader takes now an additional 60-90 seconds to throw the damaged round out of the turret and clean up any spillage. So, worst case scenario, you are unable to fire the main gun for a full two minutes while the crew is screwing around. And for those full two minutes lets assume that there is, in fact, exposed explosives in the turret. So if you get hit, and it's a penetrating or spalling hit, THEN your fancy M1 goes up like a T-72. But at least theres a cause for the effect.
  23. I think I'm going to have a heart attack. I think this book is a serious candidate for some PDFing...I bet somebody has already done it but the trouble is finding it. DAMN! I'm tearing through book shelves right now, hoping that somehow it feel in the back...I'd have better luck finding a HEAT round laying back there I bet.
  24. Wow...Heavy book! Heh, kidding...No idea what that is in dollars, sorry... I thought it was pretty good, and I might have to spring for a new copy...After SB Pro PE. Even if I never figured out how "Inkester" (Our favorite fingerless loader, ja?...Ouch.) was supposed to be pronounced and would have preferred not to see both tank crews get slaughtered... Since its essentially impossible to find, if I do manage to get another copy, or uncover my old one, I'll consider scanning it as a PDF... PS: "Offered for US$ 185.00 by: Bong Bong Books" - SON OF A F***ING B****!
  25. Ouch...Can I vote NO on the random chance of catastrophe? Let me suggest this instead...Rather than a random chance of instant scenario ending and player angering kaboom, implement a few cause/effect things...For example: Loader breaking routine, gently pulling the round from the gun: Triple the time of a normal reload to swap rounds. Compartment penetrated while screwing around with rounds: Chance of T-72 style turret popping explosion. Cartridge case damaged: Further increase in loading time, loss of the round, round is tossed overboard. Stub base detaches while pulling the round from the gun: Increase in time, the round is either tossed overboard to remove the hazard or the components are crammed back in and the round must be fired to dispose of it.
×
×
  • Create New...