• Announcements

    • Battlefront.com

      Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips   12/27/2016

      Hi all! Now that Upgrade 4 is out and about in large quantities we have now discovered a few SNAFUs that happen out in the scary, real world that is home computing.  Fortunately the rate of problems is extremely small and so far most are easily worked around.  We've identified a few issues that have similar causes which we have clear instructions for work arounds here they are: 1.  CMRT Windows customers need to re-license their original key.  This is a result of improvements to the licensing system which CMBN, CMBS, and CMFB are already using.  To do this launch CMRT with the Upgrade and the first time enter your Engine 4 key.  Exit and then use the "Activate New Products" shortcut in your CMRT folder, then enter your Engine 3 license key.  That should do the trick. 2.  CMRT and CMBN MacOS customers have a similar situation as #2, however the "Activate New Products" is inside the Documents folder in their respective CM folders.  For CMBN you have to go through the process described above for each of your license keys.  There is no special order to follow. 3.  For CMBS and CMFB customers, you need to use the Activate New Products shortcut and enter your Upgrade 4 key.  If you launch the game and see a screen that says "LICENSE FAILURE: Base Game 4.0 is required." that is an indication you haven't yet gone through that procedure.  Provided you had a properly functioning copy before installing the Upgrade, that should be all you need to do.  If in the future you have to install from scratch on a new system you'll need to do the same procedure for both your original license key and your Upgrade 4.0 key. 4.  There's always a weird one and here it is.  A few Windows users are not getting "Activate New Products" shortcuts created during installation.  Apparently anti-virus software is preventing the installer from doing its job.  This might not be a problem right now, but it will prove to be an issue at some point in the future.  The solution is to create your own shortcut using the following steps: Disable your anti-virus software before you do anything. Go to your Desktop, right click on the Desktop itself, select NEW->SHORTCUT, use BROWSE to locate the CM EXE that you are trying to fix. The location is then written out. After it type in a single space and then paste this:


      Click NEXT and give your new Shortcut a name (doesn't matter what). Confirm that and you're done. Double click on the new Shortcut and you should be prompted to license whatever it is you need to license. At this time we have not identified any issues that have not been worked around.  Let's hope it stays that way Steve


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About cbennett88

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  1. @John Kettler I DO have a friend with one of these! Does that count??
  2. @John Kettler Thanks John! It's not often that my hunches are right. You don't think they saw my previous post and decided to adopt my idea?!?? LOL
  3. True...AESA is more difficult to track. It's the basis for most of the newest 4th gen fighter A/C. But...that also means it costs much more...so we will see less of systems on fewer Russian tanks. Unlike explosive armor, which has been for the most parts universally adopted on all their MBTs.
  4. @panzersaurkrautwerfer No doubt! Never said they were good at retaining the lessons! Lol. Just said that they have fought enough of them to know that urban combat is still going to happen! @kinophile You are very likely correct! My knowledge of Ossetia and Ukraine fighting is limited. I simply used Google & wikipedia to search "urban siege battles"...then followed it up with a brief reading of those two. My overall main point was that more than the US, Russia has a long history of urban fighting that might justify having a specialized weapon for just that type of battle.
  5. If the Russians are known for anything, it is for clinging tightly to the lessons learned from their battles & history. Urban warfare is a cornerstone to their military heritage. Odessa, Sevastopol, Leningrad, Stalingrad...then Grozny(3 times)...battle of Tskhinvali(Ossetia)...Battle of Ilovaisk(Ukraine) The current listing of the Russian Army has 12 Armies(NOT divisions) in 4 districts. That would give them what...1 TOS-1 per Army?? Hardly realistic... Given that this was fielded in the late 80's into 90's, their military wasn't feeling the budget squeeze they do now. So...isn't it far more likely they discovered an issue in the design and operation of the weapon that caused them not to build more?
  6. Great minds think alike... "John...What do you think about this idea? What if (IRL) the better equipped militaries of the world considered issuing each tank something like one of those small roto-copter drones that are all the rage with the public nowdays? They have them that can "follow" you automatically. They are very cheap...almost disposable even. To have the commander be able to see the area surrounding his tank...to see what's on the other side of the hill...etc"
  7. @Vanir Ausf B I had started to read something recently on this...but then realized it still sounded like what we've been hearing for years about the US fielding APS...that they stubbornly refuse to "buy" proven Israeli systems, and instead just want to drag their feet and develop their own! "The Army is currently fast-tracking an effort to explore a number of different APS systems for the Abrams. General Dynamics Land Systems is, as part of the effort, using its own innovation to engineer an APS system which is not a “bolt-on” type of applique but something integrated more fully into the tank itself, company developers have told Scout Warrior." http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/story/1745414-army-starts-on-new-tank-after-abrams-2030s They are talking M1A2 SEP v4 to "start testing in 2021"...and that didn't sound like it would include APS till after! Do you have any good sources that say differently? I would LOVE to hear they are getting it sooner!
  8. Maybe...but if that were true, "half" the people posting on here would never say a word! I think I kept my questions within the realm of "available from open sources" and generic enough to not give away any technical secrets...
  9. @Combatintman Bahaha! I apologize if you took this as "urinating competition". Not at all. I appreciate your input. I read what you wrote...looked over the info on the link...and then gave what I thought was a well presented different opinion of the discussion. I even tried to provide data on what I found after researching the subject. I never said you were in any way wrong. I just feel differently than you do about "active systems vs passive systems". I do enjoy learning about any and all military technology from anyone who has experience in the related subject. I've made comments on this forum about various artillery matters...and then had "real cannon-cockers" (I was US infantry & Air Force) help me understand their field better. You've been in ISR for 32 years. Help me(and others reading this forum) understand how to overcome some of the difficulties I saw with battlefield radar. How do you discriminate military vehicles from civilian ones in say a semi-urban environment (example might be...watching a medium size town at night)? Do trees (forests of say Germany) hinder spotting? Do the operators of the radar worry about having artillery dropped on them (sorta like counter-battery fire) b/c they are transmitting?
  10. @Sgt.Squarehead Awesome pic of that ZSU-23-4 with slat armor! I'm guessing that behind it are heavier metal plates to stop small arms b/c the original armor was really thin. Thanks for finding it.
  11. Very good question! From some of what I have read on this forum(seem to be Ukrainians or Russian members/gamers) it seems like ZSU-24-4's are being used in theatre for only ground attack...but with the radar removed. I have no direct knowledge (and no better sources to quote). I would have to believe that, going on previous Russian habit of never "throwing away" any weapon that COULD be useful someday, they MUST have lots of these things sitting around their tank depots. Remember...the US Army did pretty much the same thing with the M42 Duster during the Vietnam war...and the M163{mainly the Israeli army) after...
  12. Combatintman... I don't doubt that battlefield radars have come a long way, but no matter what the brochure says...they still can't see past the first hill that blocks LOS(unless you get them airborne...which is a whole different matter). Same with urban environments. Not sure about trees. The Israelis have good luck with them because of the open spaces of their environment. In cases like the Golan heights, they have specifically held on to that terrain just so they could see farther into the approaches they expect their enemies to attack from. It is an ideal area for battlefield radar since you have the high ground. And...there is plenty of terrain in this game where it could be used(although most of our maps are too small to fully exploit what those radars can do). So "yes", these radars are great if... you a military that can afford them...and have troops trained to understand and operate them. They also require a significant power source. Most likely a vehicle based electrical supply. "Manportable batteries" would be unlikely to operate the radar at full power for longer than a few hours if that. I also researched at what frequency this radar operates at. It is the KU band. Here are limitations on that band... "Ku Band Difficulties When frequencies higher than 10 GHz are transmitted and received in a heavy rain fall area, a noticeable degradation occurs, due to the problems caused by and proportional to the amount of rain fall (commonly known as known as “rain fade”) A similar phenomena called “snow fade” (when snow accumulation significantly alters the dish’s focal point) can also occur during Winter Season. Also, the Ku band satellites typically require considerably more power to transmit than the C band satellites." My source...http://www.tech-faq.com/ku-band.html I still stand by the idea that a "passive receiver system" that detects APS is more practical for so many more reasons...
  13. Correct. They are listed as having about a dozen. It was actually listed as first being used by the Soviets in Afghanistan. The real question (IMO) is...why didn't they build more? Budget issues notwithstanding, it is not a grossly expensive system. No expensive FLIR or radars. Doesn't require a large crew to operate. Although it has been sold/given as trade to several countries, it doesn't seem to be something the Russian arms industry has had much success in selling. I find the fact that China never bought even one to test...and maybe "clone" to be interesting. They tend to buy "everything" unusual/new on the market to see if they should build their own.
  14. John Did you ever what happened to Mack (the former SEAL/host of that show)? He died of brain tumor at the very young age of 52 just a couple of months ago.
  15. The reason (IMHO) the Israelis aren't worried about their opponents tracking their APS Merkavas is... 1. Most of their expected enemies currently(Hamas, Hezbollah, etc) don't have the technology needed for this sort of RF tracking/jamming. 2. The short distances involved (mainly urban) don't give that much of an advantage. The Israelis aren't normally attacking from outside visual distance.