Jump to content

apd1004

Members
  • Content Count

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About apd1004

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Not sure if anything can be done about this but here goes. I understand that the conditions of this campaign are no replacements and no repairs between missions. Bottom Line Up Front: I got some core unit halftracks as normally scheduled reinforcement groups in the second mission of the campaign and when they appeared on the battlefield the halftracks had no drivers. During the first mission of Courage Conquers campaign, I embarked some units onto halftracks that were not part of their organic platoon transport (i.e. - they were halftracks from a different platoon and just happened t
  2. Now that one I will agree sounds easy enough because it takes the human factor out of it. That way it could be done automatically by the ballistic computer according to what range the gunner has dialed in. I'll admit I'm surprised to see that as an ability on such a small round, especially a belted round. In the picture below is a Hungarian BTR-80A in Afghanistan circa 2009. If you can zoom in on the ammo it appears they have the two belts mixed HE/AP with AP being every 3rd or 4th round. The HE rounds look very similar to the ones in the photo further above, but I have no idea if the Hun
  3. Do I believe you can select a specific type of ammunition from the sight, being fed from a different ammunition bin? Absolutely. That's how you do it on the Bradley, you switch between AP and HE by flipping a switch and it feeds from a different storage bin. Do I believe you can automatically change the setting on belted ammunition stowed in a box? Maybe, if the feed/firing mechanism has a way of grabbing the round as it is fed and turning a ring on the round or something to that effect. I'm betting it's the former - they load one bin with regular ammunition and another bin with this type of a
  4. I'm more inclined to think the behavior of a type of round has been abstracted more than it has been modeled to true ballistic performance. Even for tank rounds. A real ballistic computer on a modern MBT takes into account many factors which I doubt are all being modeled in CMBS.
  5. Ok, going to take a stab at this. Re: A670 fuze in CMBS. Do you really believe that the developers have gotten so far down in the weeds and perfected their ballistics model to the point that they have been able to faithfully reproduce a specific type of fuze for a specific type of round? If they have, then I'll eat my slice of humble pie. Re: Programmable timed fuzing on 30mm/25mm HE rounds. I don't buy it for a minute that anyone is taking a belt of several hundred or even a few thousand rounds of 30mm/25mm ammunition and setting time fuzes. First of all, when they load the belt into
  6. If CMBS is just the first step towards a modern-era "construction set", I don't see how you can possibly omit USMC or other NATO countries. There are so many scenario possibilities in and around the Black Sea region besides just the Ukraine that to OMIT USMC and NATO would be overlooking a huge resource for scenario builders. I have never owned CMSF nor do I plan on purchasing it. It came out what, 7 or 8 years ago? So to say "they're already in CMSF" is not a valid argument for others like me who are in the same situation.
  7. In that situation then the CO is the vehicle crew and upon spotting a target he would have issued a fire command to the gunner. CITV is part of the fire control system so in CMBS terms that should count as the crew spotting. In my situation from the first post, the scenario is the first campaign scenario from the 3-69 campaign and the BFV in question is the scout section leader (rank SSG). There needs to be immediate hand-off to the vehicle crew when a passenger spots something. A buttoned up passenger shouldn't even be spotting anything but lets give them the benefit of maybe spotting
  8. Not sure I get how an infantry unit mounted on a closed Bradley can see enemy dismounted infantry, but the Bradley itself can't see them? Capture7 by apd1004, on Flickr
  9. Heh, from the mountains of northern Afghanistan it would take a constant loop of an RTO saying "negative contact, out" with squelch OFF followed by several expletives and "are you sure we have the right keys?" for me to be fully immersed. Iridium phone ringer would be a good one, that was the only semi-reliable thing we had. I called in CAS requests by email from a global Blackberry on more than one occasion, so "You've got mail" would be another good one for me. JTAC to aircraft overhead chatter would be the only one resembling what Mord has provided so I would also need some background F-15
  10. First Clash is a great scenario to get the long range spotting & detection experience. I'm in my very first playing of it right now and have yet to lose an M1 (knocking on wood). I've been wondering about the spotting & detection thing myself because like the OP I'm wondering how most of the time the first time one of my tanks finds out about the enemy is after he gets hit by something. With that being said, I'm still trying to figure out how in First Clash my M1's spotted two Khrizan at 2500m+ and killed both of them before the Khrizans could even launch. Maybe the Khrizans were j
  11. There are a lot of professionally written articles on how Russia has invested a lot of time, money, and effort in upgraded and new AD systems to counter western (read that as US primarily) capability in ISR, Stealth, and PGM. Russia actually has some very capable systems for dealing with those 3 concepts which US military strategy relies upon. Many of their newer systems have impressive shoot-n-scoot capability that didn't exist back in 1991 when most of their longer range systems were almost permanent terrain features. Fortunately Russia isn't swimming in cash these days so I would imagine th
  12. More recently but before CMBS came out, I've been playing around with Command: Modern Air & Naval Operations to game out just those types of encounters. Not much in the way of graphics but the realism is definitely there. It only takes a few minutes to set up a simple scenario to test out different systems and tactics. The database of platforms, weapons, and sensors is incredible.
  13. I had such high hopes for DCS World to get into a tank but when you get down to the ground (be it in a helo or a tank) you can definitely tell the graphics were designed for a flight sim. Ground vehicles were barely more than notional when they finally made some of them playable, at least back in the beginning. Maybe it's better now. The graphics a year and a half ago anyway were meant to be viewed more for when you would be at some sort of altitude or at least flying over it fast enough to not smell the roses. I played Blackshark for a while when it first came out and later I picked up the Th
  14. My idea for a DLC expansion: At the US Army CGSC they use a fictional scenario for the culminating exercise. It takes place in the Georgia/Armenia/Azerbaijan/Turkey (known as GAAT) area and revolves around the Iranian government collapsing and the northern 2/3 of the country with the bulk of the former Iranian military splitting off into a new regime called Ahuristan. Basically Ahuristan invades Azerbaijan to "reunite the people" common to both areas and the wargame centers on the US response. I went through it before I knew about CMBS but I couldn't stop thinking the entire time about
  15. Interesting video, and while the launch sequences look authentic, there is no way of knowing if the target hits are actually from the same missile and I would suspect that they are file footage from other systems. The tank and the bunker almost looked like it could have been placed explosive charges detonating rather than the missile. This is a pretty new system and there aren't a lot of them fielded yet. Russia undoubtedly has similar issues to any other military which is a reluctance to live fire a lot of real missiles because they ain't cheap. The two different versions you see are act
×
×
  • Create New...