BlackAlpha

There are physical limitations. You need an X amount of explosives to be able to defeat the armor. This means the missiles need to be of a certain size. That's why something like a Javelin is so large. You try to create a MIRV version of a Javelin and you make it impossible for an infantry man to carry it. Something different now. Something that I don't see people discuss is strategies and tactics. The tank has survived all this time and is still doing so well because it can fulfill certain strategies and tactics very well that no other vehicle can. What else are you going to use to maneuver quickly while still being able to deliver a lot of firepower and sustain a lot of incoming fire?

I just edited my previous post: Another big thing is being able to see and identify a target at longer ranges (past 200/300 meters). Optics help with that hell of a lot.

Well, it certainly doesn't hurt. And past 200 or so meters it makes it much easier to hit something for someone who isn't a marksman. Plus, if you want to effectively engage at longer distances, you really need to have some optics.

Might've been a maneuver they were practicing. Maybe on how to dodge incoming missiles? Remember that from your point of view it might've looked like it was not moving, but it could've been moving away from you like that jet in the video I gave you.

I think you are confusing verifying an account with verifying an account name. The latter would mark your name as official, ie. you are really who you say you are. But you don't really need that. You just need to verify your account to indicate you are not a bot and unlock all the Youtube features. I verified my account ages ago and the system has changed since then, so I'm not sure how it's done these days, but I found the following that gives you instructions on how to do it with the current system:

I did some digging on Youtube for a video and adjusted my previous post with better explanations. Check above.

Terrain/buildings can obscure sound. Other sounds in the area can also obscure certain sounds. The golden glow in your first story sounds like a jet you saw in the distance. The glow would've been the afterburner of a fighter jet. You maybe don't remember, but there probably was a very low hum as well, which would've been the jet engine. I hope you don't think you saw aliens or something. EDIT: It's kind of hard to find a proper video of it on Youtube. The following video is the closest I could find to what you probably saw. Note how it's very hard to hear the jet after a while, the afterburner hum is drowned out by other noises:

Can't make it on Sunday evening. Will it be uploaded on Youtube?

It's war. War consists of more than armies fighting each other. War touches on all aspects of life. For that reason, misinformation is created to manipulate people's opinion. Lies and half-truths are told. This happens by both sides. This has always been like that during war and this will always be like that in the future. So, don't be surprised by it. I can second the claim that Kiev has told a lot of lies. Maybe not as much as Moscow but still pretty close.

For a future installment set a bit further into the future, it might be worth it to do research into weather patterns and how it affects IR systems. How to avoid being detected by IR using the environment and/or cloaking systems seems to be the next big thing.

I'm guessing that the internal temperature is different from the temperate at the surface of the person/object.

I wouldn't call the Javelin the same as other man-portable ATGMs. Correct me if I'm wrong. Judging by what the Javelin manual says: The CLU locks on to a picture and sends the picture to the missile. The missile then memorizes the picture and tries to fly to where the lock is. It can also somehow figure it out when the lock is moving and the missile can maintain the lock. It uses that method in both the top and direct attack modes. It's fire and forget, it is not SACLOS. The CLU does not send any data to the missile once the missile is in the air. The CLU or the missile (I'm not sure which) checks the distance to the target. The missiles uses the distance to the target to determine how high the missile should go before leveling out. This happens so that the missile can go as high as possible while still being able to keep looking at the target during the entire time the missile is in the air. In the top attack mode the manual suggests the missile impacts at an angle of at least 45 degrees. That might be enough to fly closer to a target behind smoke, regain the lock and hit the target. But that's just my wild guess. I don't know what the maximum angles for the hard-kill APS systems are. I'm assuming that to create the lock the missile looks for a certain pattern but also accepts small changes to the pattern. I'm guessing that it will lose the lock if the pattern suddenly, drastically changes (let's say a tank changes into something as large as a building or vice versa). I'm also guessing that the missile tries to predict the path of a moving lock and so maybe can also deal with situations where it loses the lock for a short while. But that's just another wild guess. Fun fact: When you activate the seeker to try to get a final lock (you then get to see what the missile actually sees), you get 4 minutes to get the lock and fire before the battery attached to the missile runs out. You cannot make the battery stop. If it runs out, you need to remove the battery and attach a new one. Then you need to do the final lock sequence with the seeker again.

Actually, the manual says multiple times that it can happen that the Javelin may not be able to distinguish a target due to crossover. "4-59. Sometimes the seeker will not be able to distinguish between the background and the target because the two have the same temperature (crossover)." - 4-19 "During these two periods, everything in the target scene is about the same temperature, which means there are few, if any measurable ΔTs. As shown earlier, when there is no measurable ΔT, the gunner cannot distinguish a target from its background." - E-8 The part you quoted at e-21 technically only says that the gunner may adjust the brightness to "locate" a target. But it doesn't specify if you then also can fire at it (will the missile get a lock?). So, the way I understand this is that during crossover (thermal inversion) you may be able to spot a vague blur using high-end FLIR by adjusting the brightness to the extreme, but you may not be able to identify what you see or fire at it.

Ok. But I think it's safe to say that antaress73's point still stands. FLIR has a tendency to have problems during dusk and dawn, and therefore a Javelin CLU/missile would have problems as well. So, as antaress73 asked, will this be modeled in the game? And if so, what about the other IR equipment/weapons?

Ok, but I rather go by what people who have used it say. So I rather believe what SeinfeldRules says. Plus, that fits in with what I've read about the thermal inversion effect. It creates a barrier of air that is of a certain temperate which blocks/degrades the IR signature of objects behind/inside the barrier. I don't see how having more sensitive FLIR can bypass that because the temperature barrier will still be in the way.

Don't know anything about FLIR specs. Could you explain why you think those specs would negate the thermal inversion effect? I did some searching on google and found some quotes that suggest thermal inversion is an issue for FLIR: "...thermal inversion that blanks out the Apache FLIR by rendering all temperatures de-pressingly uniform." http://books.google.nl/books?id=76qUGRiPKpYC&pg=PA121&lpg=PA121&dq=%22thermal+inversion%22+FLIR&source=bl&ots=iLw5Pap30A&sig=Mf3Vvtk_6x361PjOFkq-vCWPxHs&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=QTB9VOKkCISoPYHbgJAP&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22thermal%20inversion%22%20FLIR&f=false "NAVFLIR ... Depending on the temperature differentials and wind conditions, a thermal inversion layer normally builds over the water as the evening temperature drops. This inversion layer has been shown to mask the presence of hot objects (boats) on the water, from mid altitudes until thermal conditions stabilize. Exact timing depends on daytime heating, cloud cover and object characteristics, but in general terms there is a temporary thermal washout in 6-5 early evening as the more "reflective" objects transfer from hot to cold. NVGs may aid in target/object detection during these thermal inversions." http://www.med.navy.mil/Documents/Naval%20Aviation%20Survival%20Training%20Program%20SME%20Website/library/TACAIRNVD.pdf "9-9. AVIATION URBAN OPERATIONS RISK ASSESSMENT Risk assessment, as a step in the military decision-making process (MDMP), must identify and assess unique hazards associated with aviation UO. The following list is not all-inclusive, but it provides a good starting point in identifying possible UO hazards. ... d. Weather. (3) Night-vision systems are degraded due to city lights and thermal inversion." http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-06-11/ch9.htm

I read somewhere that everything that uses IR has problems seeing things at dawn and dusk due to something called thermal inversion or some such.

No, not really. Do you see every western infantry squad/section carrying a Javelin anti tank launcher? Do you see every Russian infantry man carrying a RPG-30? No. Go contemplate why that is so and then you will have the answer on why the tank won't go away any time soon. This situation will probably only change when infantry will be able to carry larger loads, like for example by using exoskeleton suits (which won't happen for a while). If exoskeleton suits never happen, then this situation won't change, not for a long time, at least.

That article was probably written by somebody who doesn't know what a tank is. The wikipedia article makes more sense: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_GXV-T It's definitely not a tank, but it might be an interesting armored vehicle for recon maybe.

If the squad doesn't move, then indeed they will probably die (get bombed or blown up in some way). Don't blame the AR for that. You can do suppressive fire on the move, you know. Or if you want to stay hidden, don't fire at all, while moving. Militaries have been doing this for ages, so what has changed?

I understand what you mean, but even in this modern day, suppressive fire works. People tend not to shoot back when there's a hail of bullets coming their way. The arguments I heard were that it's lighter and more accurate, allowing the AR to easier keep up with the rest of the team. I compare this with the future combat systems light brigades. Maneuvering your way around all the threats is nice but there will always come a time when you stand face to face with the enemy, and then you need raw firepower and brute strength to win.

Did they get the 100 round magazines yet for the AR? Because without it, it's essentially another rifle. That might work when fighting insurgents, but during a conventional war you need a lot more firepower. Remember the BAR and WW2?

Well, anti air weapon technologies have advanced quite a bit since the A-10 was introduced many years ago. I know it can survive AAA but what about modern missiles during a conventional war? And then I'm thinking, it will probably need to survive a lot of modern incoming missiles.

Looking good! Would love to see some gameplay footage (video) containing lots of infantry.

How easy is it to destroy a helicopter or a plane on a modern battlefield? Very. So, why do we still make use of helicopters and planes? Because they still have their uses in certain situations. The exact same thing can be said about the tank.