Jump to content
Bil Hardenberger

CM Black Sea – BETA Battle Report - Russian Side

Recommended Posts

Nice image you found there, DMS. The M1 is a monster. It could probably crush a renault ft-17 (a french WW-1 tank) by driving over it

Edited by agusto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice image you found there, DMS. The M1 is a monster. It could probably crush a renault ft-17 (a french WW-1 tank) by driving over it

It does a hell of a number on an old minivan!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until this AAR, and the vids from ChrisN, I didn't know that modern AFV's automatically react to "being lazed". (Smoke deploys and turret turns to threat.)

 

I thought about that and came up with a silly question that maybe isn't so silly at all:

 

What if every infantryman on the battlefield had a laserpointer (like those that some kids use to blind civil pilots with), and GI's would point it at an approaching enemy AFV from different directions, wouldn't that scare the living daylights out of the crew, because of all the automated alarms? And confuse and delay them?

 

That might give you just a few seconds longer to live..   Or am I missing something? 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's a nice thought Seedorf,

 

I have seen and used several of those pointers and I can tell you some things about them. First of all, when compared to the laser system mounted on a vehicle or a military grade infantry equipment, the common civilian lasers lack in terms of stability and shock absorbtion, this means that at any given distance the common civilian laser won't be easy to be pointed directly on a target for long time. Second, the civilian laser has not the same power of military grade ones, so I doubt they will be as efficient at longer ranges.

 

Although an experiment would be interesting to be seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We talked about this on another thread (Can't remember which one).

 

The biggest problem, even if the smaller lasers were capable of activating the automatic reaction, is that those infantrymen would be dead within seconds. Modern systems can analyse the laser and track it back to a few degrees. Or, to put it in simpler words,it would be suicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has come up in another thread. Yor average civilian laser is not at all like military grade and the systems can differentiate laser type by frequency. Could you create a system to fool them and create an uncomfortable situation, yes. Could you do it with off the shelf stuff you screw with our cat with, no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that image of the T-72 versus the M1A2 is striking. At 46 tons, with the difference in size, yeah the T-72 or T-90 seems pretty well armored.

True, but what other factors does it possibly influence? Specifically the crew. Fatigue has got to be a huge issue. Just reading articles on the thunder run into Baghdad makes me appreciate just how exhausting managing an AFV is. I would expect the Russian tanks are going to have significantly worse characteristics over the Abrams. Crew fatigue means dead tankers when that first spot is all important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but what other factors does it possibly influence? Specifically the crew. Fatigue has got to be a huge issue. Just reading articles on the thunder run into Baghdad makes me appreciate just how exhausting managing an AFV is. I would expect the Russian tanks are going to have significantly worse characteristics over the Abrams. Crew fatigue means dead tankers when that first spot is all important.

 

I would imagine crew fatigue is not modeled in CM, unless you make them dismount and run around, then get back in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i've been in a T-72.. pretty awful and cramped.. wouldnt fight in one for anything but look at videos of the inside of theT-90A and T-90AM (with a separate bustle for ammo and CRT and touchscreens all over the place which is easier on the mind and for situational awareness and air conditioning) and it's much  much better!

 

You can have a nice look here, yeah they like to boast but who doesnt, the beginning is actually overcompensation and shows more about their lack of confidence than anything else ;) 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeMVApuN2gE

Edited by antaress73

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

that image of the T-72 versus the M1A2 is striking. At 46 tons, with the difference in size, yeah the T-72 or T-90 seems pretty well armored.

 

Still depends on the armor array composition.  Also when you have a much more compact vehicle it generally means that any penetration will result in crew/critical system losses, while on a larger tank it may be a capital P problem, but not a kill problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still depends on the armor array composition.  Also when you have a much more compact vehicle it generally means that any penetration will result in crew/critical system losses, while on a larger tank it may be a capital P problem, but not a kill problem.

 

I agree that fragments and gases have less room to maneuver and miss you or critical components if the tank is penetrated. The T-72 was east german and even with all sensitive components and instruments removed, it was awfully cramped and my first thought was: I wouldnt like to be in that tank if its penetrated. Not a very confident attitude and bad for morale when going into combat. Being injured and burning to death while screaming my lungs out in pain inside a small furnace is not my ideal kind of death. I must say that I'm claustrophobic and that certainly doesnt help. 

Edited by antaress73

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that fragments and gases have less room to maneuver and miss you or critical components if the tank is penetrated. The T-72 was east german and even with all sensitive components and instruments removed, it was awfully cramped and my first thought was: I wouldnt like to be in that tank if its penetrated. Not a very confident attitude and bad for morale when going into combat. Being injured and burning to death while screaming my lungs out in pain inside a small furnace is not my ideal kind of death.

I think that has been the tankers' lot since World War 2. If your tank is to become your coffin, its size, quality of internal fittings or looks don't really matter, other than making harder to easier to recover your melted remains.

Edited by BletchleyGeek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally, time for my obligatory useful post!  :lol:

 

Laser warning receivers apparently work versus bandwiths of the laser hitting em.  This causes some neat/unintended effects. For instance, lets use the Arena system as an example.

 

Anyone remember the Greek trials for tanks back in... 2006 I think?  The Shtora system on the Russian tank was 100% mitigated by the LRF on the M1A2.  It didnt detected it whatsoever.  At first, this looked like it was due to the system being outright non-functional, but when you look at it it makes sense.

 

The M1A2 has a carbon-dioxide laser rangefinder.  

 

The Shtora was never meant to function versus carbon-dioxide lasers.  It was meant to operate versus the absolute most common (at the time) laser,  Yttrium Aluminum  Garnet lasers.

 

So much like the constant tweaking of ECM system ranges to counter specific threats, laser rangefinders and defensive systems that register laser hits need to operate under a range of frequencies at which.the likely targeter is going to use.  The Arena and later assumedly dont have this issue :)

Edited by Nerdwing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Miquel, nope not over yet. I'm waiting for Scott again.

 

Good. Now onwards to victory(*)!

 

:D

 

(*) The North Korean spin doctors attached to your command can do magic.

Edited by BletchleyGeek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bil,

I think you are simply the victim of a scenario that has a serious force imbalance.  You are not fighting at just a disadvantage, you are facing overwhelming opposition.

 

Personally as someone who has loved your many beta battles, it would have been far more enjoyable to watch you from a position similar to C3K after you wiped out his tanks in Market Garden.  Watching the interplay between you two as he engaged in nearly wreaklous heroics which actually succeeded in thwarting you which was reminescent of the 1st Airborne amazing resistance to the German counterattack.

 

See saw battles are so much more enjoyable.

 

I truly appreciate all the effort that you put into making these battles so enjoyable to follow (and make us all want to buy the game).  Whatever the outcome, there is no shame in losing against a stacked deck.

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...