Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About MAJ_Fubar

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Killeen, TX

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well, they both evolved from the same design criteria, so...
  2. AFAIK it's the year of issue based off of my own research for the wiki, so the latter.
  3. That's a UCOFT (Unit Conduct of Fire Trainer) enclosure. My question is if you (GI Joe) will try to use the original IR sensors at each sight to mange the various screens or try to reflex the sights to a single screen.
  4. If it's the really expensive stick I think it is he can adjust his response curves to minimize any deadzones, but will probably require different profiles for various vehicles. Personally, I've not noticed any issues with either my TM Cougar or Warthog when it comes to deadzones, but I'm not running an FFS or anything crazy like that.
  5. The "n" key is the generic magnification/zoom key for almost all views.
  6. All right, upon further testing the wooden bridge can be affected by HE arty, but such damage is caliber specific (152mm and up) and it can take quite a few rounds to cause damage (average 12-18 rounds to drop one section). Note that this was not the case prior to 4.163 (weeks ago when I did the bulk of my testing), so something changed there, but it works now. Unfortunately the ICM problem still persists.
  7. I used all available platforms including both on and off map arty, from MLRS down to 60mm mortars. In the interest of thoroughness I can rerun the HE tests tomorrow (Monday) once I get to my work laptop [it should be a slow day 😉].
  8. A continuation of this topic, prior to rev. 4.156 all bridges could be damaged during runtime by IEDs and airstrikes, and the wooden bridge (449) by IED, airstrike, HE arty strikes, and main gun HE/HEAT direct fire. Currently all bridges can be damaged by IEDs and ICM arty strikes; all except heavy bridges (ID 443, 444, 445, 446) can be damaged by airstrikes {this seems appropriate]; and the wooden bridge by IED, airstrike, ICM arty strikes, and main gun HE/HEAT direct fire. All bridges are immune to HE arty (including 449) and a 20x20m ICM strike (regardless of delivery platform) will always drop three spans. Although my methodology involved battery-six ICM strikes from six-tube batteries, smaller densities still resulted in bridge destruction (typically dropping the spans on the second volley) and linear strikes (20x100m or 20x200m) could drop an entire bridge. In conclusion, the big take away is that ICM is capable knackering every bridge in the sim and the wooden bridge no longer takes HE arty damage.
  9. I am actually working on updating the wiki for this, but 2x2000lb bombs should drop a single truss bridge section, while a single 2000lb bomb should suffice for the larger concrete segments.
  10. Corrected on the relevant wiki page.
  11. Roger that. I already have the data on IEDs, but arty strikes will take a couple more days. I'll roll the whole thing up and post it Saturday.
  12. Well I did some experimenting and I can confirm ICM being very effective against bridges, in fact too effective. Additionally I've discovered that the wooden bridge (ID 449) is impervious to HE artillery fire (but not main gun HEAT/HE, ICM, or IEDs). I'll continue to test with other bridges before posting in the support thread...
  13. Which I need to experiment with now that we can tailor IED size and possibly update...it never ends.
  14. Not really. Without access to the firing tables you don't know the round's super-elevation, standard deviation, time of flight, maximum ordinate, time of flight to maximum ordinate, angle of fall, or most importantly remaining velocity at a given distance. Sure, eSim could guess at those numbers, but that leads to inaccurate modeling which I thought we're trying to avoid here.
  15. I don't know, but I've done a lot of testing while working on the wiki articles for the T-14 and its kin and honestly, I don't see the issue. Sure, as modeled the the T-14 is tough, scary tough, but even with Afghanit it's flanks aren't any thicker than other tanks and it's turret is thin; it's easily de-fanged. I think everyone is butthurt because they can't rely on having a 3000m ballistic overmatch and actually have to use solid combined-arms tactics to defeat it (and all of the new Russian kit), especially in the defense. Personally I see it as a (re)learning experience.
  • Create New...