agusto

I know many people in Europe who think that the americans love for guns is somewhat weird, and while i somewhat agree to this, i still love american gun shows . Here is a guy having fun with a G36: It looks like a very comfortable gun to shoot, very controlable on full auto.

I find the it interesting how the weight of a tank seems to be related to its combat power. We always talk about Western MBTs beeing superior to their Russian counterparts, but has anyone of you ever noticed that contemporary Western MBTs are -on average- about 15 to 20 tones heavier? Were does all that additional weight go? Additional armour, i suppose, given that tanks like the M1A2 or the Leopard 2 seem to be more resistant to enemy fire than their Russian counterparts, the T-72 and the T-90, but honestly i dont really know. If the answear is that all the additional weight is invested in armor, why dont the Russians then juist build tank of equal weight with equal armor? They certainly must be capable of building engines etc capable to move a 70 ton tank around.

There is a difference between criticism and ridicule. While ridicule as reaction to someone making a mistake may be normal and acceptable to a certain degree, its value is not nearly as high as that of criticism. However natural or justified it may be in a certain situation, ridicule is always destructive, it naturally forces those who are ridiculed on the defensive and even strengthens their believe in what ever they are beeing ridiculed for, while objective cirticism is constructive and allows those who made a fault to improve their behavior without losing their faces. Interpersonal conflicts and even conflicts between states are nowadays as much about such seemingly antiquated values such as honour as they have ever been, and ridicule as an instrument of defilement is thus many times understood as nothing but an invitation to a fight. Objective critcism, on the other hand, is respectful by nature because it displays caring and respect for the cause of the person who is beeing critcised and thus the resistance to make behavioural changes is not nearly as high in the person who is beeing criticised as it is in the person who is beeing ridiculed. I see this in everday situations. When my boss ridicules one of my co-works for making a mistake, that guy often displays passive-aggressive behaviour and makes the same mistake over and and over again. When i tell him how and why he made a mistake and how he can avoid it in the future, that is almost always accepted and leading to an improvement. Of course i personally sometimes ridcule people or organisations too, but just felt it was necessary to point out that ridcule does not equal criticism.

I just accidentially gave you +1. But what i really wanted to say is that i dont understand your comment, could you tell me what you mean by saying that about the T-72 turret?

The problem of the G36 seems to be that during fully automatic fire, the barrel heats up and the plastic parts get soft, reducing accuracy. Tests that were conducted by the BW showed that after 90 shots of fully automatic fire, accuracy drops drastically, rendering the weapon ineffective at ranges beyond 100-150 meters. Many blamed HK for the shortcomings, but in fact the G36 in its standard version met exactly the specifications of the BW when it was introduced. The MG36 was developed for continous fully automatic fire, not the standard version of the rifle. That is why the MG36 has a much heavier barrel. There were also reports of the excessive heat development beeing the result of faulty ammunation, which was confirmed by the manufacturer of that ammo and some 70.000 rounds of the german troops in Afgahnistan were replaced by ammunation from a different manufacturer. But still the BW seems to be unsatisfied with the performance of the G36. As far as i knnow, the BW is currently looking for either and updated version of the G36 or an entirely new weapon. I dont know if it has been decided yet what they are going to do.

How does it steer? A gyroscope? Foldable fins that deploy after it leaves the muzzle? Probably a laser guided, beam riding device, like some ATGMs.

RT is an incredebly bad source indeed. I watched several RT reports of the conflict in Ukraine and it is pretty much Putins personal news outled. I would in general not recommend to anyone to be dependent on just one single news channel or news paper, but if you dont have the time to get your information from multiple sources, RT is certainly one of worse choices.

Well i hope they really introduce the Armata. I have always been curious about new technology and i find it fascinating to look at some particular class of vehicles or aircraft and look at its devlopment during the past 10, 20, 50 years. I mean just look at the F-22 and then imagine that not more than 100 years ago fighter pilots were flying in open-top biplanes, shooting at each other with handguns.

According to the artice, Russia plans to have 80 of those aircraft operational and these 80 aircraft are supposed to airlift 400 Armatas to any place in the world within 7 hours. Every plane will have a payload of 200 tons, they say. One Armata weights 57 tons. This means that under ideal circumstances 80*200/57 = 280.7 Armatas could be airlifted simultaniously with these aircraft, although the real number is probably lower because you cant fit 0,7 tanks into an aircraft without disassembling them. This means however that at least 2 sorties (Russia->Target Country->Russia->Target Country) would be necessary to deliver the 400 Armatas. The direct distance from Moscow to Washington DC is 7865.5 km, so it would take the aircraft at least 3,9 hours to get to its target at maximum speed (2000km/h) and another 3,9 hours to get back to Moscow, totalling 7,8 hours, and in that calculation we havent even accounted for loading/unloading and refuelling etc. Conclusion: even under unrealistically generous premises it would absolutely not be possible for the aircraft to deliver 400 Armatas to any place in the world within 7 hours. But, if the planes specifications really are as good RT claims, It would probably be possible to deliver 400 Armatas within 36-48 hours to a country close to Russia. Just the vehicles i mean, not operational units. 400 Armatas are just 22800 tons of cargo, that is not that much. For example London Heathrow has an average daily cargo throughput of about 4100 tons using conventional aircraft, so it would take about 6 days to deliver cargo worth the weight of 400 Armatas via that airport. I doubt though that the Russians are really capbale of building a plane that meets the specifications mentioned in RT. EDIT: source for Heathrow cargo throughput: http://www.heathrowairport.com/about-us/company-news-and-information/company-information/facts-and-figures source for distance Moscow-Washington: http://www.happyzebra.com/distance-calculator/Washington%20DC-to-Moscow.php

Actually this: "Main point of article: Geman Leopard 2 tanks can not defeat modern Russian armour (T-80, T-90) with their obsolete tungsten carbide-based APFSDS rounds." is not 100% accurate. The article quotes the german Ministry of Defense saying: "es kann im Einzelfall nicht ausgeschlossen werden, dass es moderne Panzerungen gibt, die der Wirkung der gegenwärtigen Panzerbordmunition des Leopard 2 widerstehen", which directly translated means: "it cant be outruled that in isolated cases some contemporary armor can resist the effectes of the Leopard 2s current ammunition.". This is a much more careful statement and it significantly lesses Die Welts generalized statement that the Leopard 2 cant penetrate T-80s and T-90s. It is more like "the Leopard 2 cant reliably kill T-80s and T-90s in all thinkable tactical situations". It also needs to be noted that the germans use 2 different guns on their Leopard 2s: the 120mm L/44 on the A5, which is the same gun the M1 Arbams uses, and the 120mm/L55 which is used in the Leopard 2 A6 and A7. While the 120mm L/44 with tungsten core ammunation is indeed inferior to the US M256 using DU sabots, the L/55 is about equivalent in kinetic energy deliverd to the target, even with tungsten sabots. According to Wikipedia (1) the german army has currently 232 Leopard 2s of which 125 are A5s, the rest are A6 (87) and A7s (20). The article probably is referring to the planned introcution of another 100 A6/A7 (modernized A4s) Leopard 2s which is supposed to start in 2017 (2). (1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_modern_equipment_of_the_German_Army#cite_note-7 (2) http://www.panzerbaer.de/types/bw_kpz_leopard_2_a6m-a.htm http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32257543

Found the full movie, "D-Day" scene starts at 10:25: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dzy_V75wDNE&feature=player_detailpage#t=625

Wasnt there a movie in the cinemas recently where North Korea successfully invades and occupies the US but in the end gets defeated by a group of teenagers? EDIT: Ah, yes, google knows everything: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Dawn_%282012_film%29 I know the trailer looks cool with the paratroopers and the planes getting shot down but the movie is SO bad . I stopped watching it after 15 minutes.

John it is sometimes incredible what you find worthy of a thread. Exchanging private messages is what the private message (aka PM) function is for. I hope he is fine. I dont know how old he is but from what i have heard he must be in his 70s or something.

A bit off-topic, but helmet mounted microphones a quite a luxury. Here is a little anecdote from my time in the austrian army: during basic training we were instructed on how to use the platoons only means of communication (besides some nokia mobile phones purchased from the commercial market): a 60 years old field telephone. In order to call someone, you need one guy with a cable spool on the back to run to the guy you want to call and if you want to talk, you have to turn a hand crank attached to a generator to produce electriciy . And i served in 2008-2009! LOL. The drill instructor told us how great that thing was because "the enemy cant jam the signal if you are using a cable".

In my opinion the best armament for an IFV is a combination of a 20-30mm autocannon + 1 or 2 ATGM tubes. This combination makes it perfect for supporting its dismounts with exactely that kind of firepower they need. Enemy DsHK in a building 3000m away? Put an ATGM on it. A wild T-72 appears? Go ATGM! A group of bad guys 250m away in that treeline over there? A burst from the autocannon and they are gone. .50 cal, 40mm grenades and 105mm guns are all nice and good but they cant compete with the versatility and effectivity of the ATGM + autocannon solution.

Nothing wrong with Lord of the Rings though. Is two years really such a short time from prototype to introduction? In peace maybe, but WW2 for example saw vehicles go from the drawing board to the front line in much less than that. It is just a question of how big the demand for the new tank is. But lets just wait for 2017 and see whether or not the Armata has been introduced by then. Maybe write to Putin that he should hurry up the Armata development so it wont enter service too late for the last CMBS module .

I have another question regarding the the 1.03 patch. What happened to 1.02?

I would not change my M4 for a Dragunov sniper rifle. The M4 with all the tactical upgrades and stuff is way cooler, and looking cool is all that matters on the modern battlefield. Remember the Marines in CMSF? They would even wear their pitch black sunglasses in the middle of night!

That is what i was talking about. There is no need to change the already existing TO&E & scenarios because they are part of a fictional timeline, but i definately want CMBS to be capable to simulate real world conflicts as accruately as possible. For example i would definately buy a module that adds unconventional forces so i can play or make scenarios representing the currently ongoing war in Ukraine. This versatility is one of the greatest strengths of CMSF IMO: you can recreate any conflict ranging from the US led 2003 Iraq War, the Iraq Insurgency against Coalition rule, the War in Afgahnistan and the Libyan Civil war to the currently ongoing wars in Syria and Iraq with CMSF. There are even mods that allow you to make scenarios set in Mali in Africa! I would like CMBS to be as versatile, and for that we need an accurate representation of that military hard ware that was either historically or is contemprarily used by the nations involved in those conflicts.

Steve, if military technology develops in a way different from what you guys predicted in CMBS, will the game be adjusted? Let's say for example the Armata platform and all the vehicles derived from it enter mass production and when 2017 arrives IRL, the Russians have multiple Brigades fully equipped with their new IFVs and MBTs, will these formation be present in CMBS? My knowledge on russian military technology isnt up-to-date so i cant judge how likely this is to happen, but it's a fact that CMBS is the first CMx2 game that doesnt use contemporary or historical TO&Es but instead "guesses" what the Armies of the nations participating in the conflict might look like. But what if you guessed wrong?

That is weird. I didnt know you could pick up weapons from WIA/KIAs that are on your side but not your nationality. Doesnt that mean that if you make a scenario in CMBN where Brits and and Germans figth on the same side, the Brits could pick up MG-42s?

No one has yet produced any objective and reproduceable statistical evidence. If you say "Because I can promise you, your statement does not reflect what the game is actually doing. Not on the average anyway.", that is as worthless as what Codename Duchess said. It is a gut feeling, nothing more.

Sp basically the facts on which everbody agrees are that 1) the armata is not just an april fools joke but really exists, 2) there are several prototypes, 3) it is not yet clear if these prototypes will lead to an actual introduction of the armata in the russian army on a large scale. I wonder what is so special about the turret. Cant wait to see the "full version".

I have a flatrate & fast upload speed. If you want to i could look for a free file host and upload them there. I was thinking of moddb.com (excellent site btw! check it out if you havent already) or rapidshare or something like that. I would prefer though to wait with uploading a ~2GB master file until you are completely finished with your work. Send me a PM once you are finished and i will download all your mods, put them in one big zip or rar file and upload them to a free file host. Bittorrent may be an option too.