Chibot Mk IX
-
Posts
620 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Chibot Mk IX
-
-
17 minutes ago, kevinkin said:
I think they ended the boost-glide hypersonic since it was too hard to place on an airframe. But they are researching scram-jet hypersonic weapons: "scramjet-powered Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile, or HACM, program."
The terminated HGV project belongs to USAF. That is a wise decision because AGM-183A ARRW is not fit into USAF arsenal very well. It doesn't improve USAF's strategic(nuclear) strike ability. And in the face of the vast arsenal of tactical weapons in the USAF, ARRW project appears redundant at tactical strike level.
Invest into HACM/Scramjet can be helpful in the next generation air to air missile R&D project
The US army and USN's joint HGV program LRHW/IRCPS is still in progress. Army just deploy one unit in training mode.
-
16 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:
Even one from Red China
I have been away from China for a while, and it has been a long time since my last returned to China.I know several other Chinese members on this forum.
Wondering if there is anyone from ROK and Japan?
-
And, some clips from CMRT. 120mm mortar kills T-34/85 and Panther tank
120mm mortar strike hit Panther's ammo rack
-
Not from CMCW, but here is a prefect example of mission kills in CM
First a penetration on upper hull kills the driver,
then a penetration on the front turret kills the commander , disable the main gun and the coax MG
last, the tracks are trashed by hand grenade. A team of Germany infantry sneak out of the woods, assault the M4/76 with hand grenade.
Fortunately the crew made the right decision. they keep the hatch closed and stay inside. Germany infantry team run out of grenade and retreat back to woods before the reinforcement arrives. But the tank is totally f**ked. I am considering bail out the crew, let them pickup the PPSh from the fallen comrade and join the infantry formation.
-
Yes
And in fact almost all the man-portable anti-tank launchers in CM's WW II title are very effective against troops in buildings.
I have seen a panzerfaust took out six soviet troops in a wooden building.
Sometime it could be a little tricky to have the AT Team to use their launcher, but what is the distance in your case?
-
One of the IS-2 Early fall victim to the 88mm , note the two on the upper hull failed to penetrate. One partially penetrate through the driver's vision port. Probably it kills the driver as it cause the IS-2 early panic and turn the side armor to the KT.
An IS-2 Mid,
same as the pervious one, it withstand several 88mm but got one partially penetrate through driver's vision port
Another IS-2 mid , one shot by KT, it was penetrated on the upper part but during the game the text reads "low front hull penetration"
And here is the beast, IS-2 late
even the hit on the driver's vision port cannot penetrate, the killing round went through the weapon mount
Another IS-2 late, it was killed by "low front hull penetration".
-
The IS-2 in "Tigers at Ogledow" are IS-2 (mid). So they are kind of underdog compared to KT, but KT should still respect their firepower.
I build a sandbox scenario, I put 1 KT vs 1 IS-2 early + 1 IS-2 mid + 1 IS-2 late in an open terrain at 1000 m distance. No way to run a monte carlo simulation here, but from my limited tests, I do feel the KT side has a 20% chance to suffer a humiliated defeat (got killed without take out any IS ) and 20% to achieve a total victory (by kill or disable all 3 IS) . The rest are KT taking out 1 or 2 IS then killed by the 122mm. Same as my pervious impression, all the fatal penetration happens at the low front hull. If KT's low front hull was hit, there is a small chance it won't cause a serious damage (armor spalling) , but very likely 122mm will penetrate through KT's low front armor plate, causing the KT destroyed.
On the IS side, IS-2 late is a monster, 88mm/L71 APCBC is just like a pingpong ball in front of its upper front hull armor plate (120mm/60 degree). But it can still be killed by penetrate low front hull/ turret/weapon mount.
I remember in CMBB, the IS-2 early version's front upper hull is just like a paper plate (the incorrect casting process which caused defect on armor plate was simulated). But in CMRT it is much more resilient than my thought. KT can penetrate its upper front armor but chance is not too high, you would rather the 88mm aim at the low front hull or turret to ensure a quick kill.
-
The armor penetration table from CMBB, no surprise the IS-2 has a hard time to deal with King Tiger at front arc.
But on the other hand, I noticed that in CMRT, the KT has a fair high chance to get its lower hull part be hit. That means KT is still vulnerable to 122mm in <1000m distance
-
Regarding ChatGPT make stuff up while answering questions with confidence, couple days ago I asked ChatGPT if Radium - 238 exists.
QuoteYes, radium-238 does exist. It is a radioactive isotope of radium that has a half-life of about 18 years. Radium-238 is produced through the decay of uranium-238, which is a naturally occurring radioactive element found in the Earth's crust. Radium-238 can also be artificially produced in nuclear reactors through the neutron irradiation of thorium-232. Radium-238 has a number of applications, including in nuclear medicine and in the production of radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) used to power space probes and satellites. However, due to its high radioactivity, radium-238 is also a health hazard and must be handled with care.
are you sure that is correct?
I apologize for the mistake in my previous response. Radium-238 does exist, but it actually has a half-life of about 5.75 years, not 18 years as I stated earlier. Radium-238 is a rare and highly radioactive isotope of radium that is produced through the decay of uranium-238, and it can also be produced in nuclear reactors through the neutron irradiation of thorium-232. Radium-238 has a number of important applications, including in nuclear medicine for the treatment of cancer, in the production of radioluminescent paint, and in the production of radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) used to power space probes and satellites. However, due to its high radioactivity, radium-238 is also a health hazard and must be handled with care.
well, the information on wikipedia is different from your answer. Do you want me to share the wiki link with you?
Yes, I would appreciate it if you could share the Wikipedia link with me so that I can review the information and make sure that my previous response was correct. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_radium
Thank you for providing the Wikipedia link. After reviewing the information, I see that my previous response contained some errors. I apologize for any confusion that may have caused. Here is the corrected information:
Radium-238 is a rare and highly radioactive isotope of radium that has a half-life of about 5.75 years. It is produced through the decay of uranium-238, and can also be produced in nuclear reactors through the neutron irradiation of thorium-232. Radium-238 has a number of important applications, including in nuclear medicine for the treatment of cancer, in the production of radioluminescent paint, and in the production of radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) used to power space probes and satellites. Due to its high radioactivity, radium-238 is also a health hazard and must be handled with care.
buddy, I just have a feeling that you confused Ra-238 with Ra-228
You are correct, I apologize for the confusion. I made a mistake in my previous responses. Radium-228 is actually the isotope with a half-life of approximately 5.75 years, while radium-238 has a much longer half-life of about 20.8 years. Radium-228 is produced through the decay of thorium-232, while radium-238 is produced through the decay of uranium-238. I am sorry for any confusion that I may have caused and thank you for bringing this to my attention.
IMHO, I do feel there is something wrong here. I am trying to figure out why. But here is an argument that proves you are not correct. "while radium-238 is produced through the decay of uranium-238. " https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radioactive-decay
I apologize again for my mistake. You are correct that radium-238 is produced through the decay of uranium-238, not thorium-232 as I mistakenly stated earlier. Uranium-238 decays through a series of steps known as the uranium decay series, which eventually leads to the formation of stable lead-206. One of the intermediate steps in this decay series is the production of radium-226, which further decays into radium-222, and then into radium-218, which in turn decays into radon-222. Radon-222 is a radioactive gas that can accumulate in homes and other buildings, and is a health hazard if inhaled. Thank you for bringing this to my attention and please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns.
-
that is correct.
-
And here are some screenshots
Before:
Hit, see the driver disappear
1s After.
See the Radio operator changed to the driver position
-
Hope this can be improved in the future CM engine.
I am playing a CMRT PBEM game, "CMFR Deep Raid".
As you can find out from the video below, my M4A2 was ambushed by a Marder. The AP round kills or incapacitate the driver. But the radio operator replaced the driver instantly, reverse the tank back to safety.
CMRT M4 incapacitated driver replaced by radio operator.
-
Mit Karacho is a masterpiece and a very fun scenario. But I am afraid how the score system works makes this not very balance for PBEM
-
-
40 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Yup! And for sure that thought crossed my mind. It certainly is possible, but I dunno... this has the feeling of a Russian op. There's potentially damaging stuff in there, even if it's false.
Steve
Yes,
IMHO, those potentially damaging stuff may not be so easily secured from the beginning. It will be leaked one way or another. So from a military deception perspective, these information can be used as ingredients for a poison.
As people says, the best way to deceive is to mix the truth with the lies (at 70:30 level). So you have the potential damage stuff sent out as the "truth", to convince Russia the authenticity of the leak, and cover the "lies" to be successfully transferred to Russian.
Russia, if takes the bait, is unlikely to publish information contains "lies" to the public as they could consider these are critical information.
Anyway, we will see if this is a brilliant deception operation or a stupid leak. Time will tell.
-
43 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
This isn't good:
Ukraine War Plans Leak Prompts Pentagon Investigation
Classified documents detailing secret American and NATO plans have appeared on Twitter and Telegram.
News is fast breaking and no other major online news source has came up in my search, so apologies for the paywall.
The publication of this information isn't really that much of a problem for Ukraine because the source was probably the Kremlin. In other words, they already had the information in hand. And given how many agents Russia has operating with Ukraine, I'd be surprised if they didn't have a pretty good idea what was going on even without these documents.
So it seems the main purpose here is to wage a disinformation campaign to help motivate Russians to fight.
Steve
Maybe this is another round of Maskirovka.
Remember this one?
-
Another tank thread from Suyi 控
-
Two questions here, not sure if these have been discussed before:
1, While we have occasionally seen some cases of AFV deploy smoke, neither side has used artillery smoke rounds to generate a smoke screen protecting the attack, what is the reason behind that?
2, For the BMP-1/2 used by both side (except new built BMP-2M), none seems to carry turret roof ATGM launcher. Are these ATGM Launchers removed from vehicle due to poor maintenance conditions?
-
So we have seen a bunch of burning T-80B/M1 wreck. How often do you see these beasts be killed by shot in front arc?
I saw one M1 destroyed by penetration at low front hull (at 150m distance). T-80B's low front hull is a weak part, but its front upper hull and front turret are impenetrable to 105mm APFSDS and I-TOW.
-
On 3/16/2023 at 1:41 AM, RockinHarry said:
No go. BFC apparently just allows the gunner station to be used fo LMGunning.
Sad......
on the bright side, ATR can be fired when mounted on the SPW.
Now I have a brilliant idea, I can 5 x ATR team on the SPW and turn my SPW into a fearsome large caliber Anti tank weapon station
The question is, where I can capture the Soviets that willing to fight on a German SPW?
-
-
1 hour ago, Vanir Ausf B said:
I remember Haiduk mentioned that the line charge firing was messed up by strong wind and the failed to detonate might be caused by poor warehouse storage condition of the charges.
-
1 hour ago, danfrodo said:
Summary from my usual UKR news aggregator below. T55s, as we know, that's fun. RU attacks ome more apartment buildings, Zelensky visits somewhere near (in?) Bakhmut. So, the T55s: either RU is running a really good psyops campaign to make us think they are running out of everything..... or they are running out of everything. The bad news is that anything w a gun and some armor is a danger to infantry & light armored vehicles, but certainly better to face one of these than a T72 covered in ERA.
Some of these T-55 might be younger than the T-72 and might still be in a good shape. Soviets kept the T-55 production running until 1981. The newly produced T-55s were sent to Far east military district to buildup the strength of catalog D divisions. Due to the catalog D divisions’ low combat readiness, these T-55s were barely used even on the training ground. I won’t surprise if they have good engine hours left and are in good condition.
-
Don't worry, it won't penetrate T-80B's front turret.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Thank you for sharing, it's an interesting video, we have witnessed the history.
I saw the uploader mention that this is the second known incident of Russian forces surrendering to a drone, but it should be the first documented case of humans surrendering to a drone.
This surrendering appears to be low efficiency. Perhaps in the future, we might witness each squadron of drones with one drone assign to a special task, carrying a loudspeaker, communicating with the Russian forces below?