Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

Alex

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    438

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Alex

    Modern armor internal arrays & what defeated them or might

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Hm... Not sure that all 3500kg is front protection. How I understand Leo2A5/6 also have more heavy armor on turret sides, and it also mast have some weight. And has I understand Leo2A5/6 have a new sight, some new electronic and anti-fire/flame systems, all it have some weight (for example 'Oplot-M' panoramic sight mass is 400kg). Also new L-55 gun have new shock-absorber system and maybe new stabilizations system, all it have mass. And as MAIN Leo2A5/6 have longest 'ass'.

    And I think my poor english don't give my a chance to explain my thoughts, but what sort of armor material can lift up armor weight so hight? I think DU (Uranium), but Germany have a bad situation with it, they don't have it a lot even for shells. If it not DU, than that?

    Why there is no 3BM44 and 3BM48 in the table?

    P.S. If you interesting I can show your table on one good russian tank forum, and will see that peoples say.

    0

    Syrian defense camping, is it interesting, or not?

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    I want to do a little announcement

    Our Red-vs-blue campaign not closed, just we slow the temp, because now is summer and we want some rest.

    Now situation is:

    7 mission is 100% done

    5 missions don't have briefing at english and needs some testing.

    2 mission in slow work (some about 50% ready)

    I think that we can finish the campaign in September, but now we don't have beta-tester and man who can translate briefings from rus to engl.

    So that all news for today ;-)

    0

    Modern armor internal arrays & what defeated them or might

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Ah... my english is to bad and I don't know if I can wrote what we wanted to show. :-)

    It's my problem too ;-) Ты по русски не говоришь случайно? :-)

    The wedge on Leo2A5/A6 is 33mm thick, and it is a composite of two HHS plates with rubber between them, I don't see why such armor with additional plates inside, (yes there are two additional plates inside) won't give 5-10%? And K-5 gives 20% against modern APFSDS ammo, dunno what is in case of older ammo.

    So if you clear know it (about 33mm and construction), I agree, it maybe can give 5-10% protection against KE. But this "beak" don't look so seriously.

    Only Leopard 2 and Challenger 2 got weaker side armor over turret bustle, M1 and Leclerc got there thick composite armor. Side armor over crew compartment in all western tanks is 300mm with minimal thickness, and with safe manouver angles of 30-35 degrees it gives such protection as my friend estimated.

    Yes, but armor at turret sides, also not so heavy and it's a weak zone too.

    image010.jpg

    http://btvt.narod.ru/1/tank3.htm

    I am not Rusofob but Russian and Ukrainian sources tend to overestimate ex soviet designs and underestimate western ones to the level of absurd, completely ignoring that in many western tanks there are several subversions with upgraded protection or other upgrades.

    Not really, this is problem of competence, and this problem have not only a Russian source, but western too (and also chines, Indian and etc). Many western "expert's" think if russian tank have lower (than wester tanks) mass it's mean that it have liter armor.

    If you will look at Andrey_BT, you can see, that he underestimate western tanks, but If you will look more attention you will see, that he also underestimate russian tanks, and only "Oplot" is' most perfect tank for him. Of course it's not mean that he is incompetence, but it's mean that he is biased some times. So I want to say, that in russian internet you can see a 'popular/appreciable' sources/'expert's' like Andrey_BT, but also has not so popular peoples like Khlopotov, Fofanov, Muhin, and they don't have some illusions.

    I think your range of night sight is very optimistic for T-72, 650m more real as I heard.

    Its not extending, in russian tanks protection is not same on turret front in different places, it's just show what is protection in weak zone and what is protection in not weak zone.

    Hm... But western tank's also have not same protection at frontal projection.

    0

    Modern armor internal arrays & what defeated them or might

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Not me, my friend. Well, wedge is mainly anti HEAT screen, but it also gives boost in KE protection, this is very complex but t give some hint, it make penetrator to broke or something like that.

    The 'Kontakt-5' ERA gives 20% against APFSDS (as you wrote) and 'beak' this 10-15mm of some sort of steel gives 5-10%? Don't you think that some thing wrong in this? If all was so simple, I think all tanks had this 'beak'. I clear understand how 'beak' work against HEAT it's divided armor, but against APFSDS...

    Also I want to say, that ERA 'Kontakt-5" gives not 20% protection against APFSDS, it gives some about 50-60% but it depends from penetrator are long, if it short (like old models) than ERA can destroy it at 40-90%, but newest models, like M829A3 or DM53 have longest penetrator and 'Kontakt-5' work against it only at 20%.

    Andrey_BT is a "Ukrainian" patriot he love only "Oplot" ;)

    And Damian I don't sure understand why "weak zone" at russian tanks extends on a cone at the end?

    Also need to say, that western tanks have long turret back and it's very weak, but russian tank's have short 'ass'.

    I think you see it before, but I think it's close to reality

    25983164.jpg

    0

    Little Bug?

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    It's not a bug.

    Hay guys CMSFengin don't have object physic, you also can try move up your vehicle/soldier on any mount (don't mater what angle of slope it have), and if terrain is passableness, unit will go up.

    Terran can be impassableness for units if it have height difference at 5-10m between squares.

    0

    What is AI logic of using antipersonnel (HE/TERMO) ammo for RPG?

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    I did some tests:

    Syrian infantry (squad with RPG-7) attack enemy INF at open ground.

    1. Conscript start attack ("order attack") at 450m: AT; AT; AP; AP; AT; AT.

    1.1. Conscript start attack ("order attack") at 350m: AT; AT; AP; AT; AP; AT.

    2. Regulars start attack ("order attack") at 450m: AT; AT; AT; AP; AT; AP.

    3. Veterans start attack ("order attack") at 450m: AT; AT; AT; AP; AT; AP.

    Some time syrians loose contact with enemy, and some time may see how RPG shooter load AP grenade, but after that shot AT.

    So as you can see AP grenades not primary ammo to attack infantry, and not clear how exactly AI make deassign to use AP grenades.

    Also I made test where my syrians RPG-7 attack enemy in buildings, and AI at first used all AT, and only after that use AP.

    P.S. Interesting, that OG-7V have excellent ballistic, but syrians can't hit anything by it, but AT grenades (with badly ballistic) goes close to the enemy.

    AT- antitank HEAT (PG-7VL)

    AP - antipersonnel HE (OG-7V)

    For me this is strange situation.

    0
×
×
  • Create New...