Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Has anyone confirmed that Arena is actually useful against TOW-2B? I'm pretty skeptical.
  2. Your post touches on some important things. As nice as CMBS is for ground combat the current way CAS is done is very unrealistic, there was a big discussion on this a while ago. Apaches in CMBS tend to operate as if it were a COIN environment, they circle and shoot. As far as I can tell what they should be doing is flying on the friendly side of the FLOT while terrain masking and firing Hellfires from behind terrain or using popup attacks, this makes much more sense to me. The mast mounted Ka band radar would be used to find targets (moving targets would be very obvious using such a system). The AGM-114L is fire and forget since it has a MMW radar and can be fired in either LOBL or LOAL modes which means that it can either be fired behind terrain using the mast mounted radar or in a popup attack using the IR sight. Since the AGM-114L has an 8 km range it would outrange MANPADS. The Tunguska has almost no capability to search for air targets while it's radar is off. The mast mounted radars on Apaches are equipped with radar frequency interferometers which would mean that in almost all cases the Apache would detect and locate the Tunguska before the Tunguska located the Apache. Apaches equipped with the Ground Fire Acquisition system would detect missiles launches and ground fire and alert the crew to which direction the fire came from allowing them to bring their sensors onto the area. Apaches also have DIRCM and flares which spoof and seduce MANPADS. Pretty much the same stuff applies to fixed wing aircraft, except they can fly at an altitude that makes them immune to short range air defenses and in pretty much every case the fixed wing would attack from a stand off distance outside the range of MANPANDS and SHORADS. I know that the story handwaves this away by saying a strong S-300 presence prevents high altitude flight but that isn't really realistic either since you wouldn't have much CAS available when SEAD still has to be done and after a few weeks most of the S-300 batteries would be destroyed.
  3. IR laser can be used to blind the seekers of IR missiles, the intensity at the seeker doesn't even have to be particualrly high. When you combine a DIRCM laser with the F-35's RCS reductions you get an aircraft that is very difficult to target. Fighter mounted lasers that can actually destroy things at a useful range are still a while off.
  4. There might be a bug with this but I haven't tested enough to confirm. For example on a hull down T-90AM one of my M1s kept shooting right over the top or hitting the remote weapons system (I'm talking like 12+ shots here). What I'm thinking was happening is that the top bound of the tank was assumed to be the top of the T-90S remote weapon system while the bottom was assumed to be the turret ring (hull down so thats the lowest part that could be seen). The M1 was aiming vertically in between these to points which means air ball.
  5. Weird, I got the impression it was reasonably liked as an aircraft, maybe not as a program.
  6. I won't give a physics lecture but "all-weather" does not mean immune to the effects of atmospheric conditions.
  7. Maybe I'm wrong but the US soldiers in CMBS seem more likely to cower and less likely to return fire than they did CMSF. I don't know which behavior is more realistic.
  8. Since modern radars makes good use of Doppler shift to reject clutter what makes you think the A-10 has a good chance of staying undetected. I could be wrong but the proliferation of high off bore sights/missiles has made maneuverability less important.
  9. For an EMP weapon to successfully destroy military electronics it must have a fast rise time, create a large E field at a significant range, and be the correct frequency to couple through the front or back end of a device. Not even nuclear EMP satisfies all these conditions well. This explains why EMP weapons are not in widespread use and I don't see them as an emerging threat either (at least to US military electronics).
  10. You can instruct your units to position them themselves in areas that have good sight lines or you can instruct them to use more cover/concealment. Of course this level of micromanagement isn't entirely realistic but we have to realize that there are limits to the AI and the player must be able to control some things.
  11. I think SOPs would go a long way in solving this problem (and others).
  12. Must....... Not...... Post...... On...... Topic...... aarrrggghhhhhhh. Pantsir and Tunguska cost 15 million USD+ and are only available in limited numbers, if wikipedia is to be believed Russian less than 300 Pantsirs and Tunguskas total. The systems have very small radars which means the engagement distance vs PGMs and HARM is small (~10 km or so, maybe even less against weapons like JSOW and JASSM), they can only engage something like 2 targets simultaneously. These two facts mean they can be saturated pretty easily. Lets be real, Carlo lost his mind sometime in 2002. His work was pretty good before that (go read his original AIM-120 article), now he descends into incoherent rants where Su-35s somehow detect F-35s at 100 km and shoot them with R-77s. But since this is Carlo they are probably fantasy ramjet R-77s that have finally made the small and insignificant leap from being a scribble on a napkin to being a fully operational weapon. Seriously did anyone see those simulations they had up on youtube, it's too bad they took them down because that was some funny stuff, the Su-35s had like a 10:1 exchange rate against F-35s. Pretty sure they even presented that stuff to the Australian government. Riddle me this, how many sorties did the F-117 fly before one was shot down? Every time the F-117 shootdown is brought up I think of the internet stories I have read about the brilliant Serbian captain who modified his X-band SA-3 FCR to work in the L-band or something. It inspired my to modify my CBR 600 to be a submarine. Really hard seems like a bit of an exaggeration, at least when it comes to fighters and AEW&C vs NOE aircraft. The numbers seem to be on the side of popular opinion. panzersaurkrautwerfer already posted the numbers but lets recap, USAF has 32 E-3s and the USN has 52 E-2Cs plus some number of E-2Ds. This is without counting the AEW&C aircraft of other nations. How long do you expect those jammers to survive, Russian airspace will be significantly more porous in 2017 than in 1987 due to US's use of stealth technology which means those expensive jammers are going to be shot down or blown up. No doubt an E-3 can be jammed, but anything can be jammed, the tactical usefulness of this depends on the details. Speaking of Russian AEW&C, how will the Russians protect their AEW&C from super cruising F-22s? By the time they realize what is happening the AIM-120s would have hit and F-22s will be hauling ass in the opposite direction. What are the MCRs for the Russian birds under high sortie conditions? I would be very surprised if they were higher than NATO's. Don't turn this into an F-35 thread, we don't need any backseat engineers coming on here to show us how much smarter they are than the boys at Lockmart. It's pretty clear that NATO has massive advantage in training, equipment, and numbers. How many modern aircraft are in the VVS? Original MiG-29s and Su-27s with their 1970s at best electronics don't count as modern. That Kopp article is a nice mix of extremely basic statistics, super sketchy assumptions, and fanboy fantasy numbers. If the statistics on the R-27's combat performance in the Ethiopian Eritrean war are true than its a pretty crap missile. From what I understand India is unhappy with the R-77. Is the R-77 deployed in any sort of significant numbers by the VVS? Back off topic Did anyone here play on the United Operations ARMA2 ACE server, had some good times there. It is too bad they switched to ARMA3 since there is no ACE mod for that. Red vs Red scenarios were so much fun.
  13. Correct, had a brainfart and totally forgot the GPS coordinates were not know ahead of time (like a strike against a fixed target).
  14. One has to wonder why excals can't be used in ECM environments in CMBS then?
  15. I think this is something Battlefront needs to address. ADA vs Helicopter needs a defiant "re balancing" in order to be realistic, AH-64s specifically are way way too vulnerable. Adding the option to make fast jets immune to ADA during scenario creation is also sorely needed.
  • Create New...