antaress73

As i've just read, thermals are homemade now. And the Chinese may be of help for components .

tRussian thermals are that bad in your opinion ? Looking at footage of TV shows made inside the armata and kurganets which were showing detailed footage of the CRTs , they seemed good enough . I havent used thermals since 2003 (Canadian LAV-3/Coyote ) to be honest.

1.5 millions TOTAL . check on the internet . Army, air force and Navy. And combat troops are a small number of the total. The US Army could maybe deploy à few brigades amounting to a big division in Ukraine . Anything more and they risk getting there when the war is over .

At-14 will get through gun mantlet, middle of front lower Hull , driver,s hatch , turret ring, and front upper Hull (this one if fired from an elevated position or with the Abrams going down a hill) most of the time. You get maybe a 15-20% chance of a kill using an At-14 or Kryzanthema frontally against the Abrams at the same elevation. That's not negligible and firing in salvos is effective even frontally. You were probably extremely unlucky. I lost and killed plenty of Abrams with frontal Kornet shots.

The Russians are fine when well played . Their infantry will still be better than what we see in-game in 2017. I'm not looking to beef-up the Russians . I'm looking at realism and nice toys to play with. Ohh and by the way xxmushmanxx, the US military budget is not 3.8 trillions but more like 800 billions . the size is far from being more than the 5 next armies combined. Active US forces is 1.5 millions , Russia 800 000, china 2.3 millions.

Russian infantry in 2017 will likely be fully equipped with Ratnik. Especially units taking part in a with NATO in Ukraine. They should all have day scopes and improved accuracy and penetration rounds in the game. Their body armor should be very good and at night they should have at least night vision goggles and quite a few thermals. Right now, Russian infantry in-game is pretty much depicted as it was in real-life in early 2015. And dont give me the economic difficulties reasoning. The only thing that wasnt slashed in the 2016 budget is military spending. Modernisation of the armed forces is considered sacred. If anything, economic difficulties will bring more contract soldiers in. For the first time , there were more candidates (as many as 8 per opening) than available openings in the military academies which have been totally revamped. They could pick the best. Word is out that living conditions in the Army are now very good.

BMP should support infantry assaults against US infantry previously softened up by arty or mortars. And way back they should be to mitigate the occasional hero launching an at-4 at long-range despite small arms fire , aytocannon, 100mm rounds exploding all around him.

ah and yes .. Drones .. . the orlan-10 has à laser designator. Take out the Bradleys with it. . two crack Orlan with crack air controllers and veteran arty batteries should precision KO quite a few brads instead of risking BMPs or will make à kill ratii of 2-1 for the brads acceptable for dealing with the renainibg brads if there is some. Or use tanks

Sublime: dont worry about sounding rude. As far as doctrine, bmps are made to support the infantry and carry them around, not to be used as lighti-tanks in Russian doctrine. Using support assets like aviation (fixed-wing and rotary) artilery ( including précision guided) and tanks to remove threats to the infantry (punch à hole for it) in à speedy manne and using shockr with lots of snoke (now multispectral ) is doctrine. Nothing spécial and esoteric about it :D

I've just read a Russian general severely criticized the bmp-3 calling it a " coffin" in 2010. Btw , Russia bought "several hundreds" of these BMP-3M Dragun while waiting for the kurganets: http://m.sputniknews.com/russia/20150917/1027144651/afp-features-expo.html That baby should be in the game instead of the BMP-2M in the next module or Russian ORBAT expansion pack. It seems more spacious and safe with the engine in front , rear ramp, unmanned turret with thermal caméra and target tracker, panoramic sight for the commander

Bmp-2 has the same armor as BMP-,3 no ? And is the BMP-3 going Nuclear most of the time when penetrated and taking out nearby armored vehicules realistic ? I think they would design ammo less susceptible to explosions. Does it have such à réputation in real life or Battlefront just extrapolated ?

In tests . I've killed M1A2 Abrams with BTR-82A in games Agaibst the AI too. But much more difficult to achieve against a human. You will see more kills of T-Xx with the Bradley 's autocannon than BMP/BTR kills of Abrams . question of sensors and Laser warning reaction time too. BTW, With an off the shelf laser warning receiver , is the Abrams and brad's instant smoke disapearing act realistic ?

i didnt say the BMP is as good as the Brad in the game and I did mention that even when the BMP is hammering à Brad there s a risk of losing or mutual destruction . You have to be skilled to use them effectively or apply sound doctrine .

Russian thirty is very good against bradleys as long as the first few rounds disable the Bradley enough to avoid "revenge before we die" return fire when getting the drop frontally because sometimes even a short burst from a Bradley on the process of being ventilated can kill your BMP and save the Bradley or bring about a mutual kill. But its not only the Bradley. I've lost two Bradleys in the same turn where they got the drop on a BMP-3 ... Were hammering it with 25mm and at the last second before the BMP goes Nuclear it fires a stabber ATGM ( it was at less than 200 meters) and kills my Brad. Very Russian like.

Are you sure about this ? I thought only the M and BMP-3 had it.

problem is the 30mm cannon AP ammo on the vanilla BMP-2 doesn't penetrate the Bradley. BMP-2M and 3 does. I've killed a great many brads with BMPs. But yeah, tanks are much better. Brads are vulnerable to direct fire too , especially AT-13, rpg-7s vr , btr-82A and BMP-2M/ 3 autocannon fron any aspect.

I was not talking about getting the tech specifics of the round but more about knowing that it was tested against Relikt. I agree they are not as efficient in stealing tech as they used to bebutbthry still rely much on human intelligence. . I didnt know the specifics of how heavy ERA works and that going heavier and slower would defeat it. Doesn't that reduce the round's capability against normal armor ? It seems that segmenting the round is efficient too.

So basically they tested it against Relikt or something built according to Relikt specifications obtained thanks to the almighty dollar and found effective. The Russians probably know that you know, they have almighty dollars too and a rich history of using HUMINT and could have changed Relikt in such a way that would invalidate the test's results. But they never saw war with the US as a real possibility until very recently so they probably didnt think it was necessary. The US too btw, they wanted something to beat Relikt just in case Russia started selling it widely to targeted client-state considered hostile by the US.

What does it say ? The Russian text ?

HNII "Stali" know. he was talking about M829A4 , M829A3 is actual round in service. A2 is in reserve status I guess.

They do have the latest sabot and HEAT rounds in the game, svinets-2 APFDS is the very latest that the autoloader can accomodate . It can penetrate 730-750mm RHA at 2000 meters and maybe 800mm + at close range. The other new rounds are for the new autoloader in the armata and are longer. They do not fit the autoloader in the T-90.

No not only driver's hatch.. That I can understand , weak spot . But impacts and penetrations on upper Hull where there is clearly relikt , by SKIF and at-13 .

T-90AM with Relikt gets penetrated. Everytime by SKIF (800mm) and AT-13 on upper front Hull .. Upper front hull hit decals are described as superstructure upper Hull (driver's hatch ?) so maybe its à bug. Even using 540-570mm agaibst CE energy numbers, both these missiles should not punch through upper Hull front because of Relikt.

exactly what I'm saying but more succinctly and effectively

I didnt say that... A kornet or AT-13 would still punch through. But not an RPG or direct-attack javelin or AT-7 . You are implying things I didnt say. If its that weak, no wonder they are looking at the Armata like one of the wonders of the world. Which it is not.