StrykerPSG
-
Posts
135 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by StrykerPSG
-
-
2 hours ago, MikeyD said:
Night stuff.
It is indeed, but actually a separate sight, added to the day sight. They were always 2 pieces, as the combined weight of both sights would be a bit cumbersome for extended carrying. The day sight(tracker) is an SU-36P and the AN-TAS-5 gets added for night operations.
Here's the link: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/23-24/Ch1.htm
Now trying to remember the night picture on the sight, maybe it was thermal and I am confusing the sight picture with AN/TVS-5 sight picture, which was very much starlight. I just remember the issue was getting batteries and coolant for the night sight and while batteries were in abundance, the coolant was not always readily available. Then, there were issues with the batteries and over-heating. Just not a reliable system overall.
-
3 hours ago, akd said:
Kinda think they’d use the thermal during day also.
US never bought the Dragon III, which had a newer sight with day/night capability in one unit. Dragon and Dragon II only had a day sight and you would attach an AN/
PVS-5 (AN/TAS-5, just googled it)on the tube instead, or was it attached to the sight?(attached to the sight, then onto the missile, bulky as hell, not to mention the weight). Been a while. Anyway, never thermal, but passive night vision, so challenging when there's a lack of star/moon light -
1 minute ago, ng cavscout said:
All the Combat Mission games are well worth the investment. The rate of return in game hours to money spent is very high.
Agreed, 110%. I have been a long time subscriber and even re-bought the CMSF2 series on Steam because I want to support the team. Looking forward to the updated engine that gets tossed around from time to time. I just held off on the latest "Fire and Rubble" series till the text issue could be sorted out properly. Admittedly, wish this could be incorporated into the install, rather than playing with options or waiting for the smarter players, such as yourself, that have a fix.
-
As a former 11BC10 (med AT Gunner) in my first enlistment (1983-1985), I can tell you, the M47 was indeed a system that made one nervous with regards to reliability. Though we had a trainer, it failed to reproduce the initial launching shock of the missile leaving the launcher and the follow on "popcorn" sound of the 200+ small engines igniting to keep your bird on track with your sight. More than a few dumped their missiles initially because of the surprised popping noises and the new gunner trying to get the missile to rise to their viewpoint, rather than giving enough time for it to rise to the proper sighted crosshair. The biggest reward for firing the Dragon is you no longer carried it on your back...lol. Admittedly, I studied every WP armored vehicle poster, noting the location of engine compartments and vulnerabilities on the sides and rear of WP vehicles.
-
Gents, you are awesome! The blurry text in this game and Black Sea, put me off to the point of not wanting to play. I purchased this one, in hopes the development team might have fixed the problem, however, to no avail. You have indeed put forth the fix I needed to succeed and dive into this newest title. Heck, might even give their WWII releases another look.
Thank you both.
-
Belated response but nice update indeed! Loved the original series and would love a reason to see a newer version on my hard drive.
Looking forward to what other stuff you are developing Steve.
-
Kudos to the team for trying with all their best intentions to get us this gem before Christmas. I would much rather have a refined product that proudly shows your title accordingly, with minimal issues then a bug fest filled with agitation by the end user, just to make a hard coded delivery date. Your team has always delivered top notch releases and this one should be no different. Take the time it needs to be released in it's best state.
Thank you for the public statement and causing some to have less anxiety attacks counting down to the 25th....Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to you and the team
Matt
-
LOL, I cheated and bought a 40" LCD TV that runs my desktop resolution....it looks marvelous! I was actually shocked how inexpensive a 40" LCD TV was, about $400. It's been the best electronic purchase in a few years.
-
Hey StrykerPSG... You said that you had all of them except Italy. You may want to rethink that while you wait...in my opinion that with GL is the real gem...4 seasons, different paint schemes on the vehicles for different weather, winter coats, different nationalities, great scenarios...so while you wait you should pick that one up!
I've been eyeballing it for quite some time, just had some other priorities during the release. Now, if it were to say, go on sale.....Christmas is a coming. I will indeed pick it up, just been slacking a bit but I appreciate the kudos for the game.
-
For a minute there I thought this was some geezer starting a thread on women's lingerie.
I about fell outta my chair laughing when I read that one........sorry to disappoint you.
Regarding the "It's done when it's done.....I acknowledge and will go back to my hide until I get that great email talking about my downloadable item is ready. Thanks
Matt
-
So, having bought every CMSF module, as well as every WWII module, sans Italy, I love this series. But, I have to ask, having bought this latest iteration as soon as I saw the link, what's the expected ETA? Mind you, I'm not looking for the exact dates though that would be great too, but at least a projected quarter, winter, spring, summer, etc...
Anyway, very much looking forward to this latest installment.
Cheers,
Matt
PS, if it was announced elsewhere, my apologies for overlooking the link.
-
Any chance of posting updated screen shots, preferably action shots? As someone that purchased every module for the last CMSF series, I very much look forward to what this new series will bring to the table. Also, if you're ever in need of an additional beta tester, I'm always available........
Matt
-
Team,
I thought I had already purchased Market Garden for CMBN, after I just installed the 3.0 upgrade. If I purchase Market Garden now, do I have to uninstall everything or does Market Garden now ship as 3.0?
Thanks
-
Hi,
I bought the game this week and started playing the "Road to Montebourg" campaign. It's a great game and I enjoy playing it immensly. BUT I now have repeatedly experienced a tiny little nuisance, that threatens to suck all the fun out of this game.
During campaign play I noticed that off-map mortars are incredibly inaccurate. In the current mission, I've a platoon HQ targeting a hedge 180m to the front. I designated line targets for two sections of 81mm mortars. The HQ team sits safely behind a hedge, it is not under fire and not hiding and the team is Rested. However, all of the spotting spots for the two mortar sections land in the same positions, ca. 70-100m away from the target. The full barrages land in the same positions, widely off target.
I've seen similiar things in prior missions. While in this case no friendly troops were harmed, there were other cases, in which a "lucky" spotting round landed 200m off target and took down half a squad.
QUESTION: Is this by design or a bug? If the inaccuracy is intentional, mortars and other artillery do not seem to have any use, besides pre-planned barrages.
Aaargh! Search the forums peoples..........kidding, sorta. I think BFC has done a pretty good job of incorporating the multitudes of factors that would affect indirect fire, including experience level of the FO's, weather, LOS and overall reaction of the crews to various events, such as setting up in a tree line. They have even made calling for missions if out of radio contact impossible until comms are established.
Professionally, not sure of anyone else that ever incorporated so many real world issues successfully as BFC has done. It is because of their attentions to detail that I have bought everything they've made for CMSF and after. Anyway, there are at least four other threads about the trials and tribulations of indrect fire. I would heartily recommend finding them and see the other observations your comrades have found in this latest iteration. I would be willing to bet you would be hard pressed to find anyone giving this level of detail to such a simple weapon system.
Matt
-
LOL, yes, would be sort of cool. Reminds me of a bunker at Fort Benning where trainees/students were put inside, with lexan view ports and 105mm, 120mm, 81mm and 60mm rounds were fired within 100 meters of the bunker, strictly for effects and feel. It was quite an eye opener and not sure if they still do this practice, but you left in awe at the power arrayed in front of you. It was spectacular. Admittedly, the mortar rounds were far more earthmoving, but I'm biased.
Matt
-
Yes, if you're using a GPS, however, that tech obviously didn't exist back then but used with great frequency today. Also depends on signal quality as to whether or not you'll get all 13 digits as anything other than 0's for the last few numbers of the northing and easting.
Matt
-
Easting has a maximum of 6 digits, northing has maximum of 7 digits. Most usually rounded in zeroes and rarely exceeds 8-10 digits.
Matt
-
Real world Steps are:
1. WAIT FOR THE F'in BARRAGE TO FINISH
2. CHANGE YOUR UNDERWEAR as may be required
3. SEND OUT THE FNG TO DO THE CRATER ANALYSIS...etc
LMAO, how true, how true.
Matt
-
IRL, it's not easy to spot mortar bombs flying through the air. And in any event, it would be difficult to correctly judge azimuth and bearing by eye, so that you could calculate the location of the mortars mathematically. But if you get close enough to the enemy mortars that you can see or at least hear them, or even just make a good educated guess as to where they are based on reading of terrain and the areas they're targeting, then the game will let you do this now.
So I don't see the issue here...
I agree spotting would be tough, near impossible. However, one techique being overlooked and is quite an old technique is one called crater analysis. It's quite easy actually and moderately accurate for a direction and caliber range. Can be used for either mortars or artillery. Steps are:
1)Locate the crater, secure a fragment
2)Depending on spray pattern, mortars and artillery possess disctinct burst pattern in the ground. Place a stake near fuze burrow, another stake in the middle of the spray pattern
3)Using a compass or Aiming Circle, shoot a back azimuth to determine direction
4)Securing one of the casing fragments, match it to the caliber template to determine minimum and maximum range
5)Record all data on a counterbattery card with DTG
6)Record 8-13 digit grid(yes, 13 for GPS grids, not 12)
7)Await another impacting round and repeat process.
That's it. It's actually a bit more complex, but simple in design and used to take out quite a few insurgent guns in Iraq. It doesn't give an exact fix, but generally we ar creatures of habit and as such, will go back to where we have secured and fired from before. By having an azimuth and caliber, the S2 shop can begin tracing lines and come up with a pattern that becomes predicatable and often fatal to a negligent crew, which is why I always assumed my enemy has a similar capacity to conduct basic geometry.
Here's the hyperlink to FM 6-50, Appendix J, Crater Analysis: https://rdl.train.army.mil/soldierPortal/atia/adlsc/view/public/9512-1/fm/6-50/Appj.htm
Please note, you will initially get a warning about certificate errors, continue to website anyway. It's actually quite cool and used it regularly enough that it became a BDE standard.
Matt
-
You can only use indirect means in a covered area if they have an area above that is mostly free of obstructions. This is part of their 5 safety checks and is pretty common amongst all mortars. This safety check was mask and overhead clearence. In laymans terms, you could set up in a wooded area or behind a building, but gunner would elevate cannon to highest & lowest elevations to establish the elevations that would safely clear the obstacles, by looking along the axis of the cannon for clearence. Those elevations are reported to the Fire Direction Center, as well as manually record on the gun itself in the form of a safety T. The general rule of thumb was we could/would shoot through branches but they had to be half the diameter of the round and those first rounds breaking brush were guaranteed to miss the original burst point by quite a bit.
Back in the 90's, when nets were still popular, had many an excited gun crew forget to pull their nets down and shoot their first rounds through the net. The rounds wouldn't detonate but did punch through, generally quite a ways off from the original calculated burst point.
Also, was mentioned about setting up behind buildings, which is a great barrier for counter battery fire, but again, mask and overhead must be utilized. So, it seems the game replicates this quite well, it's just a matter of not setting up so close to the obstacle as to pose a greater hazard to the gun crew and surrounding Soldiers.
Matt
-
Gents, first, you realize that Nvidia cards use surround to allow multiple monitor setup? ATI uses something very similar so there is no need to buy a Matrox splitter. I routinely play the demo on three 24" and there is marginal hits on FPS, though admittedly have two GTX 480's in SLI. You can pick up 24" monitors for about $175.00, less if you do the homework on the net for lowest prices. Anyway, the Matrox digital triple head runs for more than $300, their standard version can be found for about $170.00. Anyway, just thought I would throw in more minutia to chew on...
Matt
-
Good lord, will send me over the edge. Please don't hesitate to ask for an assist with some of the new mods. The family has really grown some major legs and butt kicking improvements. I think you would be suprised and could probably even get you a personal tour of the family when you get serious about CMSF2. Thanks again, and looking to fill my Collectors tin with all the great add ons for this series as well.
Matt
-
Agree with all. Thanks BFC for keeping such a great gaming platform around in it's various reincarnations. You have garnered my support for many years to come.
Matt
-
Not arguing with any of that. Based on my own experience it all makes good sense. - BUT having trailed around with FOO's and MFC, I just don't ever remember defining a pattern of fire in the call for fire message.
I'd be really interested to see a call for Fire format for a WW2 FOO, and see if they could specify things like linear targets. I assume detailed fire plans would be another thing all together.
Today, with LINAPS and all the wizzy gear I am sure they can do all manner of wonderment, but even back in the 1980's Battle Group Mortars could basically handle a grid reference and that was about it.
Today, pattern or sheaf is not part of the basic call for fire, but contained in the MTO (Message To Observer) when describing linear, converged or open sheaf. Also, target description would play a piece into that selection as well. Without the newer gear, this required a bit of doodling on the plotting board, but could and was certainly regularly obtained on Company level and Battalion levels of mortar gunnery.
And whilst survey points are great, they are mostly a thing of the past with GPS the norm. We still run azimumths from the base gun to the flank guns and generally the only time the guns are laid within the burst radius of the base gun are for garrison firing points. I prefer to think my enemy is equipped with counter battery capabilities and space the guns considerably further apart, rarely in compliance with one standard formation and always on a reverse slope when able.
In WWII, survey certainly makes sense and especially in a defensive position when registration would be part of the norm for a static firing point. In the offensive, you'll never get the Arty guys to give up their survey teams long enough to get a surveyed point that would only be used for a short duration. Matter of fact, the last I saw the survey guys was when I was a young gunner participating in Week of the Eagles competion at Campbell. Since 9-11, haven't seen em since or really needed em.
Anyway, love all of the facts and theories floating around. Great to see good discussions with others that love this stuff as much as I do. On a final note about dispersion, there are factors of winds, max ordinate, charge, etc that all play into the dispersion radius during impact, however, again when discussing direct lay on the target, where everyone sees each other, the charges are generally lower, lower max ordinate and the gunner is continuously eliminating the circle of error because he's in control of the gun, it's azimuth and can see where his rounds are landing. Plus, the gun and sight are now boresighted onto the target. This is much different than having an observer relays their angle from the gun to the target and guessing ranges and deviation. While the gun is still generally aligned with the target, the other variables certainly come into greater play now.
Sorry, gettin off my soap box, but am very passionate about mortars and their effects. Just don't get me started on Strykers and mortars...it'll be pages of theories..
Matt
An early experience with the M47 Dragon in CMCW
in Combat Mission Cold War
Posted
Thanks for the clarification. I now recall that similar image, when the parts were all available. I remember being told to never try a frontal shot, only flank or rear shots to maximize a higher chance of a kill shot. They were indeed renown for being inaccurate and unreliable, as would become amplified during expenditure of older stock.