rudel.dietrich
-
Posts
644 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by rudel.dietrich
-
-
Angle of impact is important as well.
If a round hits the hull at a 30 degree angle it essentialy has more armour to burn through before it can do damage.
50% was just a guess of mine covering all angles of impact and no matter where the round struck.
My understanding was that the tiles offered very good protection agasint heat based rounds but suffered against kinetic rounds.
I wonder if it is possible to 'prep' the vehicle by hitting it with gernades and machine gun fire and damage the cage and crack or smash the tiles before firing HEAT rounds at it?
Or are the cage and tiles made to withstand 7.62 and 12.7mm rounds?
I am not talking about penetration, just enough protection to keep the tiles from being cracked or broken and opening holes in the tiles for HEAT rounds.
-
I add
Most rounds are of somwhat modern design and should have pretty good penetration stats.
Syria also had good stocks of tandem rounds.
I would say 40% or so of AP rounds fired by regular Syrian army units and above should be tandem rounds and have significantly higher penetration stats.
A regular round I would guess has a 50/50 shot at punching a hole in a Styrker assuming it can get past the cage and detonate properly.
A tandem round assuming it can punch through the cage should have a 80-85% chance of punching through the armour
The RPG-18 used by the airborne and some SF units should have a 80% or so chance of punching through.
However since the round is small the damage done should be 25-30% less if penetration does occur
The RPG-29
Well ****, if a Styrker gets hit by that and gets past the cage it would be a act of God if it did not punch through both sides of the vehicle.
I would say a 95%+ chance of penetration and then significant damage upon penetration.
Of course the cage is going to offset therse chances because the round might detonate early.
Bad for the cage but it would allow the vehcile to remain alive.
So to sum it all up.
The RPG should be a deadlier weapon than intended in the hands of certain units.
[ November 20, 2006, 03:17 PM: Message edited by: rudel.dietrich ]
-
I remember in a thread a few months back that Steve stated that in the coding for the game RPGs would have a pretty low damage date due to duds and HE rounds being used instead of AP rounds.
This is a thread to get him to reconsider his stance on the issue.
Now first I want to make it clear.
For Hezbollah and milita units the dud rate and wrong ammo type rate should be somewhat high.
Syrian milita units store their weapons in armories that are poorly kept and mantained and scattered all over the country ready for mobilization.
Many of the rounds there would be in poor shape.
For reserve units the dud rate should be slightly lower.
However as poorly trained as these units are, they are still equiped with both HE and AP rounds and would use the correct ones in the correct situation.
It really does not take alot of brain activity to identify what you are trying to kill and then picking the right rocket for the job.
Even a conscript that has not picked up a rifle in 10 years would use the right round.
The only case in which a unit of reserve quality of higher would use a HE round in a vehicle is if AP rounds are not avaliavbe.
Now going back to my orginal point.
Regular Syrian army units and above should have a pretty low dud rate and always use the right round for the job.
Do not Iraq fool you.
To a certain degree, the Syrian army would know what it would be doing.
A RPG round may not always get past the cage and may not always defeat the ceramic armour.
But the rounds would for the most part detonate as they were supossed too and if avaliavble the round would be a AP round.
If used improperly the casulty rate of a Styrker should be pretty high against the RPG-7v assuming that the firer has the skill to hit the target.
Reserve units should have a few more duds.
Milita units should be a total crap shoot since the dud rate is high and having both types of rounds avaliable and using the right one in the heat of battle are not always guaranteed.
Hezbollah units do not really have the privelege of having the right equipment for the job.
They might be forced to use a HE round and the dud rate should be high since they get their equipment from sources not of the highest quality.
However their accuracy should be pretty good since the baseline Hezbollah fighter is going to be cool under stress and be pretty good at what he does.
That is how I see things.
And I reguard this issue as high imnportence since the basic RPG is possibly the single most important weapon to the Syrians.
-
I actualy said between 80-90Originally posted by Battlefront.com:Most sources I've seen put the number of BMP-3 at just about 100, but Rudel's sources seem to put the number higher. Either way, we're planning on the BMP-3 going into the 1st Module, not the initial release.
100 more are on order but will probably never see delivery.
100 is close enough as a a few might have slipped through or Syria purchased the trial models they were given back at the begining of the decade.
-
My sources match up well with that.Originally posted by Battlefront.com:As for the various types of armored troop transports, according to one source, as of about 2005 the Syrians had the following available:
BTR-152...560
BTR-60...1000
BMP-1.....2450
BMP-2......100
BDRM-2...950
Other soruces I've got put the number of BMP-2s higher (~300) and BDRMs a little lower (~800). BTR are usually lumpped into one group so I can't really tell what proportions they think are running or not. And that is a critical point, too, since I read one source that said the BTR-152s are all largely inopperable. Another source claims 1600 BTRs without any BTR-152s.
In terms of how common something is, proportionally you'd likely see:
25 BMP-1
15 BTRs
8 BDRM
2 BMP-2
1 BMP-3
Most sources I've seen put the number of BMP-3 at just about 100, but Rudel's sources seem to put the number higher. Either way, we're planning on the BMP-3 going into the 1st Module, not the initial release.
The really interesting thing to note here is that you'd be two or perhaps three times as likely to see Syrian infantry in a BMP of some sort compared to a BTR of some sort. The difference between the chances is if the BTR-152 is still in use or if the BTR count of 1600 does not include 152s.
In any case, there is no Rarity system for CM:SF so the proportion thing is simply to get into the right frame of mind for CM:SF.
Steve
Janes has everything a bit higher but Janes always over estimates.
The latest report I could get my hands on was for August 2006 and is usualy reliable.
It has quanities of almost every weapon used by a nation including what is estimated to be on order and some of those umm...off the record sort of deals that are done through the black market or terrorist organizations.
Anyways, he is that source averaged with a few others I like.
Number is () is what you have listed
Second number is mine
BTR-152...(560) 500
BTR-60...(1000) 1050 200 are on order
BMP-1.....(2450) 2250 Syria losses about 25 of these a month due to lack of spare parts, poor matinence, age, wrecks and just falling apart.
300 used are on order and huge quanities of spare parts to try and keep the huge mass of them running
BMP-2......(100) 150-200 A new shipment came on over the summer as part of that weapons for natural gas order
250 more are on order but are not going to make it in the near future
BDRM-2...(950) 900
Suffers the same problem as the BMP-1
Lack of matinence and age are taking a toll and not enough spare parts and trained personal to keep them all running.
So our numbers match up pretty well except for the BMP-2
Overall I have a few hundred less vehicles but that makes sense since as I said most of the fleet is falling apart and being canibilized for spare parts.
Overall that is the theme for the entire military.
Trying to keep 15-30 year old weapons and small arms in working order on a very limited budget and in massive quanities.
Only the SF and airborne and guards division can afford to keep their stuff up and running at a close to peak efficiency rate.
And this is good evidence that the breakdown and malfunction rate for Syrian hardware should be somewhat high.
-
So the video underrepresents the protective capability of body armour - but after all it was only designed to show penetration of building materials. </font>Originally posted by acrashb:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by PLM2:
it went through quite easily every shot.
-
I dont care if it is CM:2 or CM:58
I just cant get excited to go back to Normandy for the 10 thounsandth time.
One moudle I would like to see for CM:2 is the Korean War
That subject is untapped gold and I do not think has ever been done in 3-D
It is basicly like WW2 as well so it would not be hard to port over a good chunk of exsisting work.
-
There are quite a few reserve armoured formations as well.
They would use T-55s and older model T-62s
-
If you watch cable new than you are watching to be entertained, not informed.
Cable news by virture of being cable news has to keep people tuning it, you dont do that by actualy analyzing and reporting on topics.
You wrap the topic in an entertaining shell and then look at it from two extreme view points.
Or you show entertaining bits that are not really news (or at least important news)
The long version is all of the news servies are garbage and debating which is best is debating which one entertains you the best.
-
I have a very cool picture of a Syria SF operator leaning over the lip of a rooftop doing security overwatch in Lebanon with a SG-550 with a huge scope.
His spotter looks to have a heavily modifying MP-5
I wish I could post it here but I would get in trouble
I can clearly see what looks to be body armour that can at least stop high powered pistol rounds
Knee pads, elbow pads and a kevlar helmet round out the deal.
I could not see the boots.
It is a black and white photo but the uniform and armour look dark grey/black from head to toe.
I can see a radio attached to one mans chest and looks like a ear/mouth piece by his helmet.
Pistols and various knick knacks hang all over the uniform.
What could be NV googles hang from one mans neck.
Very cool photo
-
Something I want to clear up
Syria does not have much in the way of motorized infantry.
Its mechanized forces are have formations of BMPs and BTRs
I could not find any motorized divisions or mechanized divisions of pure BTRs
Most of the BTRs in mechanized forces are used for recon work or supply/weapon transport (along with trucks)
I could not find any cut and dry sources or how many regiments of BTRs exsisted and how many of BMPs exsisted.
My feeling and what little I can piece together seems to indicate that BMPs carry most of the fighing infantry while BTRs carry some infantry but mostly recon teams, Engineer teams, support teams (i.e. ATGMs, SAMs and other specialized teams)
A large chunk of Syrias BTRs are tied up with its armoured formations.
In fact I can make a semi safe guess that armoured formations do not contain BMPs but rather BTRs which do the recon work, contain support units and hold ground once the tanks are done.
Like Steve said, mostly battlefield taxis. I would assume that they would try and support the tanks as well relying on the tanks firepower to keep them safe and letting the troops mostly move on foot except when long distances need to be covered.
So based on what I have found Syria posesses little if any BTR formations purely for the purpose of Motorized infantry.
The concept of a Motorized Rifle Division never seemed to have caught on.
Infantry in Syria is either Mechanized or on foot.
You of course have recon and support units but I would not term those infantry.
Now whether or not those support formations contain MGs, I will do some more checking on.
-
Shoot Fulla Holes
-
You misunderstood... in order to get the attention of the DoD (at the level we require) Battlefront woudl have hire guys in $5000 suits take the DoD guys out to lunch, baseball games, golfing trips, arrange for their kids to go to a good private school, etc. You also have to offer the DoD official a job at your company, for a ridiculous amount of money, after he retires from government service. It's totally illegal, of course, but it's how things are done (OK, it's how it is sometimes doneOriginally posted by Battlefront.com:Rudel,
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />My friends at the DoD are screwing me everytime we go out to lunch then!
I always have to pay since I am making the 'big bucks'
).Steve </font>
-
More like SFHOriginally posted by Battlefront.com:Yup, currently only Army Special Forces and Special Terrorist units are being issued body armor in any way shape or form. Everybody else is SOL
Steve
-
I know the answer to this before I even post it.
But I might as well throw it out there.
I know the base SVD is going to be modeled.
And in 95% of cases the weapon will work.
But based on my findings, the Syrian airborne and special forces field a host of other rifles.
Some are not true sniper rifles but serve in the sniper role.
Various bolt action rifles
H&K G-3/SG-1
SG-550s
SG-552
I know that just adds alot of work for little gain, but the US gets various sniper rifles modeled.
So why not the other side?
-
Only Syrian special forces should get body armour
I found no evidence to suggest their guards and airborne units have armour
Hezbollah units should also get some based on a random % that assigns armour to some of its members.
-
Who said we're doing that? The fact is that Syria has a fairly modest sized force that is capable of offensive action. The rest, and we're talking about the vast bulk, are for static fighting only. At best they would move forward in the wake of the maneuver elements, dig in, and hunker down. Syria tried to use their 2nd Line stuff as maneuver elements before and it had disasterous results.Originally posted by Battlefront.com:Cassh,
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I think we do the Syrians and the game a disservice by under playing their capabilities...
As for tripod mounted MGs... even the Soviet Mech forces have hardly any. The reasoning is that they are too slow to move and deploy, which is what Rudel was certainly talking about. Meaning, the firepower is not irrelevant to an attack force, rather it is (according to Soviet doctrine) impractical to bring into action before the engagement is already decided. The armored AFVs, such as BMPs and BTRs, are supposed to make up the firepower difference.
Remember... Soviet doctrine is all about specialization whreas Western doctrine is about well rounded combined arms units capable of pretty much any mission. Some are a little more specialized for one thing vs. another (Airborne and Marines, for example), but their doctrine is quite flexible.
Steve </font>
-
andOriginally posted by cassh:rudel.dietrich said </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Machine guns are useless in most of those roles since they are not very usefull during the attack.
Sorry, but you cannot make statements that tripod mounted SFMG are mostly useless in attack - this is entirely wrong and crassly inaccurate. They are integral to any infantry formations offensive capability.People who go off on others without understanding the context of what they are reading annoy meYou are talking about LMG and SAW which are MG in technical terms but not considered MGs in modern army terms.
I am talking about tripod mounted 7.62mm PKM MMGs or 12.7mm NSV
If the Syrians are using a modified version of Soviet doctrine as all their past combat indicates then second echelon and reserve formations are not merely designed to hold captured ground - but actively pin and hold the enemy line through offensive action to allow mobile forces freedom to exploit any breakthrough.
Any even mildly proficient army will use a variety of supporting arms in the attack - down to the lowest levels - it is a basic tenet of command-arms doctrine. You think a machine gun company or platoon sits about doing nothing when it's parent battalion's rifle companies are putting in attack - of course not.
Steve said
Why not - he's right.Don't take J Ruddy seriously.It is volume of fire (and that means all support weapons - HMG, SF GPMG, LMG or SAW, RPGs, LAW, mortars, arty etc) that delivers suppression - the prerequisite of movement. You cannot attack effectively without winning the firefight - and tripod mounted machine guns are integral to that.
I think we do the Syrians and the game a disservice by under playing their capabilities... </font>
-
Originally posted by Battlefront.com:
J Ruddy,
???My friends at the DoD are screwing me everytime we go out to lunch then!
I always have to pay since I am making the 'big bucks'
-
Option two is best
In fact I have read some doctrine that seems to indicate that the HQ squad would break off the RPG team to put into a better location to either support an attack or take up a good ambush posistion.
So option two in a real war might actualy be a realistic option.
-
This statement annoys me even more than option 1. :mad: It makes me want to take on the persona of Gunny Sergeant Hartman, rip your head off and poop down the neck-hole. I don't know who's army attacks without the effective and professional use of 'machine guns', specifically I would not want to 'attack' without one of my great Canadian brothers laying down covering fire with a C9 and targeting sand bagged eejits with a C6 GPMG. Attacking without effective support of either a SAW or GPMG is like bungie jumping without a bungie cord. It might be fun and seem like a good idea, but you're only going to do it once.</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Machine guns are useless in most of those roles since they are not very usefull during the attack.
:mad: :mad: :mad: [/QB]</font>
-
I do not believe the drug thing one bit
In fact I think it is a complete and utter lie
If you shoot someone with 50 5.56 mm rouns the damage done to the body will tear muscles and tendens to the point where the person will not be able to move even if they want too.
And then you have the kinetic impact of the rounds striking flesh and that is enough to stop you dead in your tracks or knock you backwards.
Shooting one person with many magazines worth of rounds and having them still comes at you is pure trash and has no common sense attached to it.
If it was 9mm M-9 rounds I could perhaps believe it.
Not 5.56mm rounds coming from a military grade assault rifle.
-
Machine guns are very common in reserve formations.
The main Syrian army has three functions.
To attack Israel
To counter attack Israel
To move into Lenanbon in case Israel does or is a civil war breaks out
Machine guns are useless in most of those roles since they are not very usefull during the attack.
Reserve formations would be formed during mobilization and would get the larger defensive weaopons like MGs, RRs and AGLs
Those have alot of use in the defensive role.
These formations would either sit in place or move in behind the main army to hold what was taken and prepare for the counter attack and keep supply lines open.
That is where most of the support weapons are.
The trade off is that these formations are straight leg infantry without alot of special weapons or vehicles.
Their tank defenses are RPGs and some very old ATGMs.
They are expected to fortify a posistion as best they can and then sit in place and die and slow down or stop an attack.
-
None that I can findOriginally posted by Battlefront.com:Oh yeah... and any sign of how 60mm Mortars are distributed? Normal Soviet TO&E gives an Infantry (not Mech Infantry) Battalion a 9x60mm Mortars divided up into three sections of three each. Yet I don't see them in your TO&E outlines.
Thanks!
Steve
Brink of civil war in Lebanon
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
You are seeing Syrian special forces in action.
I am almost positive this was a hit carried out by them.
Most likely by members of the Al-Sa'iqa regiment carried out the attack.