HawkerT
-
Posts
160 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by HawkerT
-
-
ColdSober et al.
Take a deep breether guys and for god sake dont trust what the different retail shops says as release dates.
Here in Denmark I have two shops with these two dates 27.09.2002 and 16.10.2002. They are guessing just as much as we are. In fact they have a slight incitament to post an early date thus hoping to wheel in eager customers.
The only sources to look for are BFC and CDV
(Edited for typos)
[ September 15, 2002, 06:38 AM: Message edited by: HawkerT ]
-
Hi there CMBB'ers in spe.
CDV still says 20.09.2000 in Germany and
tba. in other contries
Click here and select english to be taken to this information
I guess it's a little (but just a little) anoying to be in the wrong market segment.
(continental hard core CMBO/CMBB fan wanting the same service as the Americans, and not some other country (read Germany) laws imposed upon oneself. Thus feeling a little bit like a second rate customer).
-
I hear you loud and clear.
Grapeshot=Cannister (for all intents and purposes).
I believe that cannister can be little steel pellets besides shrapnel and steel balls (my athletes had that for sure) as well.
(Edited because I cant spell for crap ... which reminds me - where is Helge these days? He had a hilarious sig that went something like this - "sbeling chequed wyth 'MICROSOFT SPELL CHECKER' vorgs grate")
[ September 12, 2002, 06:52 PM: Message edited by: HawkerT ]
-
Thanks for answering guys.
No it was definately not cannister !!! seen lots of those in "Yelnia Stare" though...
Liebchen, please elaborate on the term "grapeshot"
The distance from the 6 athletes to the 5 lumberjacks was some 75 meters.
(Edited because I'm Danish ... you stinker)
/HawkerT
[ September 12, 2002, 06:35 PM: Message edited by: HawkerT ]
-
Hi there you grognards you CMBB’s (Combat Mission Beautiful Bastards).
Last night for me was one of getting taught an old lesson.
I was trying to get a friend of mine hooked on CMBB, and thus played the tutorial as Axis against him as Rasputinists. I had downed one T34 and had all his infantry routing home and faced only one green T34 without Commander that had gotten close to my forest. It was there and then I got a little too cocky and thought “what the heck I’ll sprint a squad, using ‘follow vehicle’, after him and try routing him with just grenades - CMBO style”. Well, a case of good intent I guess, but none the less the dang Rodina bugger swings round his 76 and pokes it right at my dashing 6 man squad that gets to see what “Tunnel Vision” (riffled) is all about from some 25 meters out!
KaBOOOoooom … 6 men instantly gone to a better place + 5 dittos in the woods where the shell hit. You guessed it! ... he was shooting at my lumberjacks in the woods ... which mean that my 6 athletes ... dang, I had forgotten all about how dangerous a muzzleblast is.
Well, if nothing else, this little incident was the perfect platform for elaborating on CMBB’s fantastic level off detail and off course my friend was instantly hooked.
I specifically remember reading about this on the forum in the early days, but I can’t seem to find it, so don’t mind if I do pose a question or two. Here goes ...
</font>
- Am I right in my recollection that muzzleblast from guns, and backblast from recoilless rifles, the “stove pipe” and the like are indeed deadly/incapacitating out to a certain range and that this is simulated in CMBB? The backblast definitely is in CMBO ...
</font> - If so is the incapacitating zone backward and to the sides due to muzzlebrake also simulated?
</font> - What is the range and arc of the incapacitating zone from guns forward + backward/sides if muzzlebrake and from backblast weapons backward?
</font> - Is the incapacitating range somewhat correlated with calibre due to the larger amount of propellant needed, or are there other significant factors in play? If so what kind of shots(AP)/shells uses the largest amount of propellant?
</font> - What factors influence the arc of the incapacitating zone?
</font>
Any answers are much appreciated.
[ September 12, 2002, 06:17 PM: Message edited by: HawkerT ]
- Am I right in my recollection that muzzleblast from guns, and backblast from recoilless rifles, the “stove pipe” and the like are indeed deadly/incapacitating out to a certain range and that this is simulated in CMBB? The backblast definitely is in CMBO ...
-
Bastables, thank you very much for your high quality answers. Interesting topic this. I must try to dig a little deeper in the future when I have some more time on my hands.
If you desire some cannonfodder trainig then please, feel free to send me a CMBB setup file. I have only had time to play the Tutorial (Both sides) and Yelnia Stare (Axis), so we could do the third one blind perhaps ? I'm not terribly good but will die with honour and return at least one turn a day.
Thank you again.
-
Thank you for your reply Bastables.
My grog skills has tremendous room for improvement, so I had to look up the definition for “sub-calibre rounds”. After a lot of searching (must be looking in the wrong places) I found a good website containing all the ins and outs of AFV munitions ballistics, not forgetting the plethora of pictures hosted – link at the bottom of this post.
For your reading pleasure I have excerpted the relevant section about sub calibre rounds. First pictures and then their WWII history and definition.
Sub-calibre amunition From left to right: German 28/20mm PzB 41 (Gerlich squeezebore) (28x187), French 37mm Mle 1935 APCR (37x94), German 37mm PaK 36 AP 40 APCR (37x248), British 2 pdr APSV Mk 2 (Littlejohn squeezebore) (40x304), Soviet 45mm APCR (45x310), German 5 cm KwK 38 L/42 APCR (50x289R), British 6 pdr APDS (57x441), Soviet 57mm APCR (57x480)
Sub-calibre projectiles, from left to right: sectioned German 28/20mm PzB 41 AT (without nose cap), British 2pdr APSV (Littlejohn Mk 1), Russian 45mm APCR, Russian 57mm APCR, British 6 pdr APDS, British 17 pdr APDS, core from 17 pdr (all replicas, except for the 28/20mm and the 17 pdr core)
I could not however find any reference to “t” rounds. Please elaborate on this, I assume it refers to Tungsten rounds?SUB-CALIBRE PROJECTILES
This term is used to describe projectiles which are smaller than the caliber of the gun they are fired from. Nowadays this normally means APDS or APFSDS, but I will also deal with two related developments; APCR and squeezebore guns.
As we have seen, a large caliber will permit more energy to be generated than a small one. On the other hand, for a given projectile weight a smaller caliber will have a higher SD and therefore better long-range and AP performances. Designers have therefore tried different ways of combining the advantages of the two.
The simplest type was known to the British in WW2 as APCR (armour piercing, composite rigid - I have seen an early document which referred to this as "composite rigid armour piercing" but they presumably thought better of the acronym…), to the Americans as HVAP (high velocity armour piercing) and to the Germans as Hartkernmunition or Pzgr.40. However, it was probably the French who fielded it first, in the M1935 loading for the little 37x94R round still being used in some tank guns (there's a picture of one, plus sub-calibre projectiles, in the photo gallery on this website). It is nowadays commonly known as APHC, for armour piercing hard core, and is mainly used in MGs, HMGs and small-calibre cannon.
As the names suggest, this consists of a lightweight projectile (normally mainly aluminium) with a hard, small caliber core (normally tungsten alloy, which is heavier and harder than steel).The light projectile in a large-calibre gun gives a high muzzle velocity but when it strikes the target, only the hard core penetrates so it can go through much more armour than a full-calibre projectile of the same weight. The only disadvantage is that the light projectile has a low SD and therefore slows down more quickly than a normal projectile, steadily losing its penetration advantage as the range increases. To overcome this problem, later versions tended to be little if any lighter than a standard shell, thereby trading some of their short-range penetration for better long-range effectiveness. A modern example of this is the 30mm API used in the GAU-8/A cannon fitted to the A-10 aircraft; this is also unusual in having a depleted uranium core.
Another approach to achieving the best of both worlds was the squeezebore gun, of which there were two basic types; the Gerlich and the Littlejohn. In both, a projectile fitted with flanges to fit a large caliber barrel was squeezed down to a smaller caliber before it left the muzzle. The difference between them was that the Gerlich guns had tapered barrels whereas the Littlejohns had normal barrels with a tapered attachment fitted to the muzzle, in principle not unlike a shotgun choke. These worked very well and both saw limited service in WW2, the Gerlich in some German AT guns and the Littlejohn (named after the Czech designer, Janecek, which translates as little John) in some Allied armoured car and light tank guns. Their main problem, apart from the cost of the tungsten-cored ammo (and in the case of the Gerlich, the expensive barrel manufacturing) was that they could only fire this type of ammunition; they could not fire full-calibre HE shells. For this reason, they lost favour as soon as a better solution emerged.
The better solution was APDS, for armour piercing discarding sabot. This was like the APCR shell, except that the light alloy sabot (French for shoe) was designed to fall away from the small-calibre penetrator as soon as the projectile left the muzzle. This therefore combined the advantages of a large caliber for maximum energy with a small caliber for best flight and penetration performance, and allowed conventional ammunition to be fired from the same gun. It was initially designed in France before WW2, but was then developed in Canada and the UK, being issued for British 6pdr and 17pdr guns from mid-1944 onwards.
Apart from the cost and availability of the tungsten (always an issue in WW2) the only problem was that early version were very inaccurate because the flight of the projectile was disturbed by sabot separation. The British carried on using conventional AP tank ammunition into the 1950s, and APDS only really became supreme with the British 105mm tank gun of the late 1950s, which became the NATO standard for many years.
The replacement for APDS in tank guns (it is still used in small caliber cannon and HMGs) was APFSDS, which takes the design principles to their logical conclusion in producing the longest and thinnest practical projectile. The problem, as we have seen, is that achieving stability by spinning doesn't work with such long projectiles so they have to be fin stabilised. Modern manufacturing quality means that a high degree of accuracy can be achieved, and APFSDS seems likely to remain the supreme penetrator until conventional guns are replaced by different technologies.
SOURCES:
NRA Firearms Fact Book (3rd edition, 1989). A fascinating compendium of assorted data from the American National Rifle Association.
Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders by P. O. Ackley - a classic, which comes with a pack of charts and tables for do-it-yourself ballistics without formulae, let alone computer programmes.
Brassey's Military Ballistics, by Moss, Leeming and Farrar
...and decades of collecting odd snippets of information from all over the place
Now back to the AP shells . I hope I am not being a nuisance when asking these few questions.
A) Is the implication of the above that all the German WWII AFV tank gun full-calibre rounds shown below contain HE, and that this is true for all except Commonwealth nations?
Is there a direct link from the exploding 20mm-30mm rounds fired from WWII fighter aircraft auto cannons, to the rounds shown below? C) Is the ammunition used for the AFV’s the same used by towed AT guns?
D) Is AP shells found on lower calibre guns as well, say 12.7mm or even 7.62mm fired from HMG’s/LMG’s, or are these rounds just AP shots?
From left to right: 3.7cm (37x250mm), 5cm L/42 Pzgr 40 (50x289mm), 5cm L/60 (50x420mm), 7.5cm L/24 (75x243mm), 7.5cm L/43 and L/48 (75x495mm), 7.5cm L/70 (75x640mm), 8.8cm L/56 (88x571mm), 8.8cm L/71 (88x822mm).
All the above information is excerpts from this excellent website CANNON, MACHINE GUNS AND AMMUNITION
[ September 06, 2002, 03:41 AM: Message edited by: HawkerT ]
-
Big Time Software have been rightly praised for CMBO and their responsiveness at this board many times before, but having felt the power of the tremendous CMBB demo, on my own body, I promised myself that I would take the time to write this post and give them some feedback. I will therefore rise from the silent masses and spill a few kind words, and if you get sick when good vibes hit the fan Big Time (pun intended), you should probably skip to the miscellaneous section of this post, or just skip it all together (the post is to long, my lingo is bad and I don’t bring much new to the table). Thou be now fairly warned.
Love and Gratitude:
Dear Big Time Software and crew – a.k.a. Battlefront.Com
How are you hanging in there? I hope that after releasing the demo, you will get some time now to take a deep breath, lift your eyes towards the blue sky, empty your minds and dream of things to come. I hope that despite all the hard work your hearts are still young and filled with the visions of that perfect war game that is the beacon towards which you sail. Stability is not about winning ten matches in a row, but about winning ten years in a row.
Besides setting a new higher standard for war gaming, you also run a tight ship. You handle this here fine board with finesse, integrity and humour, and manages to steer it clear of all the rocks and keeping it a friendly goldmine of information that keeps us all coming back for more.
When setting out on your original CM endeavour, you chose a path that might differ from the rest of the industry, but that you felt had to be taken because it is right. I find that this little story pictures it quite well: Two bulls, son and dad, are standing on top of a hill looking down on a herd of cows
Sonny Bull:
“Daddy, lets run down and hump a cow …”
Papa Bull:
“No son, lets walk down and hump them all !”
Your bold stand has definitely left you victorious. May your reign be long and prosperous.
Things I really love about CMBB so far:
The new step down the road of artillery improvements and infantry/MG improvements. For me this is the hidden gold of the CM series. The commendable effort to reinstate the queens of battle, thus creating the most realistic WWII war game ever. This of course coupled with the excellent new AFV features such as death clock, optics quality increments, Cover arc/ Hull down commands and incredible penetration/kill calculations. Keep improving this core guys, and the competition will never be able to catch you.
Looking very much forward to the new operations and any user created campaigns (starting the wave) made possible by the Quick Battle mouse hole left open by Charles, i.e. The ability to import the final autosave from a previous battle.
I definitely also like good visuals as much as the next guy. How about this for a new engine rewrite visual splendour - Shell rides, piggy bagging the shell from turret to target? Well just an old thought.
The new interface. I think that DeanCo has done a splendid job with things like the unit pictures, ordnance and weaponry pictures. The whole feel is more in par with the look of the characters, vehicles and terrain - a little bit cartoonish and clean yet realistic. For me the perfect visual expression of the game would be like the computer-animated film “Final Fantasy”. Any more realistic then that and I wouldn’t be able to stomach the reality of it all.
All the new visual effects are right on target. The smaller tracers, doodads, bullet impact dust, canister rounds etc. No more atomic buildings and tubes, exit the dreaded shockwave effect. The new firing visuals are simply astonishing, so much more realistic. I simply have to show Tigers picture again – say no more …
Miscellaneous:
Here is my ten cents worth on the sphere around the core of the game! I find the manual an extremely valuable asset to any game. In fact I think of it as worth half the prize of a game. There is nothing better then a manual that goes beyond the game itself and addresses technical (the men and their weapons) and historical issues. Besides being able to reap higher rewards when playing the game a good (read colossal) manual gives the time pressed player a possibility to live in the virtual universe of the game longer (who said escapism). You can read it when on the toilet, in the car/train/bus and … you get the picture. But the manual is very often neglected and one of the points where most other games fail. MicroProse used to excel in this realm (sold their games with high quality books/booklets filled with information, schematics and drawings). While I believe you did fairly well with CMBO, there is still room for some more extravagance (crossing fingers for CMBB manual). How about say a compendium of tactics, weapons etc. for CMBB, elaborating on stuff like differences between AP, APC, APCBC, HEAT, HE, APCR, APFSDS and HVAP. Well I guess there is nothing wrong with dreaming about it anyway. I know it takes time, drive, knowledge and overview to undertake such a project, but having pages left to read in such a beast would be better then money in the bank.
Yours truly
Frans E. Jensen
P.S.: By the way, which of the abovementioned AP rounds excl. HEAT (and of course HE) have an explosive core if any? Well at least not the last three I guess. Nations using these? Any answers and links to good websites would be much appreciated.
-
For crying out loud fellars (tears streaming from eyes)... stop before I poop my pants!
First the wonderful sneak preview, and then Tankersley outdoes himself ... absolutely marvelous.
After calming down slightly I started reading the hug thread and cracked up completely when reading Joseph Porta's signatue
My god ... the only feasable solution to the TURD BURGLAR problem would be drilling and exercicing the art of "powerdumping" thus minimizing the potential exposure time.TURD BURGLAR: A pooper who does not realize that you're in the stall and tries to force the door open. This is one of the most shocking and vulnerable moments that occur when taking a dump at work. If this occurs, remain in the stall until the TURD BURGLAR leaves. This way you will avoid all uncomfortable eye contact. TURD BURGLARS have been know to cause premature pinchage, which inevitably causes you to pinch one off in the middle.Thank you guys. Your efforts are invaluable. I cant think of a better medicine.
-
Scipio
Thanks for your answers :cool:
I dont want to stir the boiling pot, and therefore rests my case.
I will bye what ever they throw at me here in Denmark and hope for a correcting patch if any. Anyway this is not a showstopper
Thank you gentlemen
[ July 22, 2002, 05:38 PM: Message edited by: HawkerT ]
-
I'm sorry for being persistant, I definately don't want to be a nuicance, but now you guys got me hanging a bit baffeled in the wind
The statement below is taken from Battlefront.com main page.
Now, while I understand the above full well, I am uncertain about the "original English version" thing. Is the "original English version" = the version sold online at Battlefront.com ?European players will find the game in their local retail stores. Besides the original English version, CDV will offer fully localized French and German versions. In Finland, players will be able to purchase the original English game including BOTH the English manual and an additional translated Finnish manual.Answers are much appreciated.
-
Ahh Scipio.
First let me say thanks for your exellent mods and other contributions to this fine community :cool: .
Now I definately hear what you are saying, and of course I agree with any plan concieved by the folks at Battlefront.com, but ... is my assumption correct that I cannot by online from these fine gentlemen just because I live in Denmark ?
Thanks for taking the time to reply
[ July 22, 2002, 05:06 PM: Message edited by: HawkerT ]
-
Hello you blessed grogs you ...
Very infrequent poster typing with wably fingers facing the horror, ohh the horror, of not knowing the clean undisputed facts about how to obtain the next big thing.
Now correct me if I'm wrong (ohh, I hope so !).
Being a Dane I cannot buy the one thing I would like to own online from the only surviving trustworthy source in the gaming market, Battlefront.com, but instead will have to rely on a German vendor manipulating this fine gem that should not - I repeat - NOT be tinkered with. All this even though I am willing to hack the extra dinero to own the full blown version.
Sorry, just had to get this of my chest.
What happened to the exellent way of delivery that served CMBO so well for us oversea'ers ?
Any answers to this measly post is much appreciated ! Bless you all.
-
Lyngby, Denmark
-
Just joining the 'Yes To Campaigns' chorus with my humble voice.
HEAR! HEAR!
I think it serves BTS credit that they have opened the door an inch, and considered some kind of workable solution that gifted individuals in the community can implement in a nonsupported usermade addon.
Here's to BTS and the community.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SenorBeef:
.. and I'm fairly tired. But I feel strongly about this, and I'm willing to do all the programming myself if BTS gives us the extra features to do it with.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Dear SenorBeef, I am very very tired too right now, so I will not elaborate on your exellent idea, but just give you my warmest thanks and support, I also feel very strongly about the issue raised and will help you in any way I can.
This praise also goes to PanzerLeader, Canuck and everybody else who actively supports the idea of campaigns in CM . Your positive and solution focused attitude serves you credit.
Thank you again and good night.
Frans.
-
Hi Jard,
Read you loud and clear
-
Axis Company HQ signing on.
-
Hi guys,
For me something Steve said hits the nail right on. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"if you define "realism" as the game model"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This is exactly why we all love CM - the game model is realistic. It is however the very same reason that makes me fail to understand why a SP-like campaign for CM is out of the question. If realism is defined in the model, then why not ?
For me a campaign would definitely give CM some longevity. I know that no units ever fought throughout the entire war, but frankly that abstraction would not hurt as long as the game model is kept real.
What it would give the game is a purpose for fighting the different scenarios, and the ability for us trainspotters to 'earn' the right to have new hardware in our outfit as the campaign unfolds. It worked well for SP then why not for CM ? Well I think it would, albeit with a much more realistic game model.
Well anyway just 2 cents worth from a very dedicated fan that will happily preorder CM2-9 even without the campaign possibility.
I am very sorry to bring up a issue that have been debated time and time again, but you just hit the nail with your words Steve.
Frans, ducking and diving running for cover.
[This message has been edited by HawkerT (edited 12-07-2000).]
-
I hear you Kump ... loud and clear.
Keep up the beautiful work, your site is a true gem.
Thanks
Frans
-
Hi there Kump,
I must ditto the echoes of gratitude being expressed in this fine thread. I to immensely enjoy the truly educational comparisons at your magnificent site.
I wonder, since I and probably others often agree with your taste in mods, if you could have a continually updated list of the mods that you are currently using posted at your site. And maybe even links to the various mods (I know I am pushing it here
).Well anyway just an idea from a dedicated fan. If you find my english appalling and distasteful, please feel free to send me a setup.....
Wholeheartedly thanks
sincerely
Frans
[This message has been edited by HawkerT (edited 12-05-2000).]
-
Sounds very good Rob/1.
To the great grognard grunts of this grand endeavor:
I will ditto Jards wish for a good campaign, and at the same time, with the risk of repeating myself
, say this.All right lads !... listen up !
Lets invest some personal integrity and keep it real, clean and fun.
Lock and load.
Frans .... dismissed.
-
Tanks PeterNZ, you are the main man.
I can see that you have your hands full on this one and I for one am very grateful for all the work you and Rob/1 put into this.
So seeing as you are now so deep into this I was wondering that maybe, just maybe, if this wonderful adventure into the unknown actually works out, you could evaluate the rights and wrongs of the process, and start a new campaign up that thrived upon the lessons learned from this pioneering experience. Nothing is worse then knowledge that is dropped on the floor and never utilized for something bigger and better.
I of course volunteer to help in any way I can with the daring prospects of the above mentioned.
I know I am pushing my luck here ... but hey ! who dares wins !
Have a safe trip home. Remember that as the Allied supreme HQ you have an obligation to look out and not get hurt. The lives of many brave soldiers lie in your capable hands.
Frans.
[This message has been edited by HawkerT (edited 10-28-2000).]
-
Hi Rob/1 and PeterNZ,
I am afraid that Tiger sparked a nagging thought and spoke for the silent masses that have received the exact same answer to their drafting. So I will have to ditto his lack of certainty regarding the power to which we must throw our utter loyalty.
So riddle me this ..... Jawohl Hauptman or Yes Captain.
Is there a direct link from the exploding 20mm-30mm rounds fired from WWII fighter aircraft auto cannons, to the rounds shown below? 
European release date changed
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted
Thank you Steve.
For your responsiveness and two outstanding games.
I assume that the English version area also includes the Scandinavian countries, correct?
Now, the UK version release date 04.10.2002, is that the date one can expect the game to hit the shelves at the retailers, or is that the date that CDV ships from their production site in Germany (I presume)?
Not that it will make a huge difference, just a "nice to know" for the eager followers in your flok. Well, anyway looking very much forward to the release.
Thank you again.
(Edited for typos)
[ September 15, 2002, 05:02 PM: Message edited by: HawkerT ]