antaress73

that changes everythying. IR smoke is useful in dealing with javelins .. and ERA wont do crap against them. But increased survability against light cannons.hmmm

My two cents (and probably worth as much) One standard operating procedure to minimize the javelin threat is to manually pop IR blocking smoke when the first tank is hit and reposition yourself under cover of smoke .. Use overwatch positions so you have a chance to get a spot on the launcher when that happens.. And then use arty or direct fire from your overwatch force (better) to suppress or destroy them. Also move from overhead cover to overhead cover like tree patches in bounds using fast mouvement orders to cross open terrain. Javelin will use the direct fire mode if the target has overhead cover like tree branches and is much less effective and is vulnerable to APS in that mode. The AAR has a good example of this happening because Bill's tank was in a patch of trees. Its warhead is only able to penetrate 600mm which is weak if used in direct fire mode but deadly in the top attack mode. A frontal hit on a T-90 without ERA with a javelin is innefective. The skillful use of these three SOP combined should minimize the effect (but not eliminate it) of "cheating with Javelin" If you are the US, fire them in salvoes once the enemy is in the open as to kill as many targets as possible before it can react by popping IR smoke or bring overwatch area fire on your positions. You can also use them to fix the enemy or prevent avenues of approach and use other assets to flank or bypass. Move them fast once they fire to make it difficult for the enemy to locate and destroy them with arty. And yeah, fear the M1A2.. use air assets on them (the anti-armor ones have lot's (16) of effective ATGM, some even with top attack capabilities like the AT-9 ataka). If your opponent use them on defense in static positions, you can use precision guided arty on them but dont count too much on that. Engage them close and with local numerical superiority and from different directions. Use long-range Krysanthemas AT LONG-RANGE if the map permits it to take flank pot shots at them so you can attrit their numbers before engaging them with your main force. I give more advice to the Russian player because you in a less forgiving position compared to the US player.

25mm bushmaster is in a class of its own. From what i've se en so far, they dont have ERA in the AAR . some of them have ARENA

MickeyD : Well a t-72b3 is survivable against older tanks thé ukranians field .. Saw many hits deflected by kontakt-5 in chrisND's game. Not so much agaibst thé Abrams but it could still hurt if well used. The APS equipped one will also fare well against Bradleys. Also vas IR blocking smoke so shoot.. Pop one up and redeploy under cover of smoke.

The BMP-3 with ERA is fairly survivable against 20-30mm so the manual says. It has a yellow square level of protection (good) agaisnt both HEAT and 20-30mm

Your utter defeat will be internationally known (no offense, i'm very sympathetic to your cause)

Aghh sorry , double post

The manual says .. Dual layer of era on the Hull.. Single on the turret side.. It probably hit the Hull then .. A turret hit would have been more dangerous . The precursor detonated the first layer and actual warhead was stopped by the second

The manual says .. Dual layer of era on thé Hull.. Single on te turret side.. It probable hit the Hull then .. A turret hit would have been more dangerous . Thé precursor detonated thé first layer ettge actual warhead was stopped by the second

Hull is double layered... turret is single layer I think .. and if the more recent version of AT-10 can't do it.. the RPG-7VR 105mm warthead can't either

would 30mm trigger a reactive armor: hit message like in the GIF ?

unless he fired an HE round instead of an ATGM .. but I agree this is one lucky M1A2... if he has luck on his side too.. well...

I see that an M1 was hit on the side by an ATGM from the BMP-3 but the reactive armor saved it. THe missile fired by the BMP_3 has a tandem warhead with 700-750mm of penetration after ERA, Should have made it through anywhere on the sides even with ERA.

T-90 has an ammo bustle on the back of thé turret so no raining turrets

You arty woukd have been useful and your air asseets would have had an easier time without the tunguskas

Bill, its not only the equipment quality disparity... But the sheer numerical superiority with tanks. You could have handled a smaller force and without having to worry about the ukranians.

An M1A2 is prepared positions is a serious obstacle. Unless you can call precision arty strikes on it fast.

You guys are getting what you wanted . a good whipping from Uncle Sam hehe Enjoy !

A plan rarely survives first contact with the enemy.Defensive onion works best when you have a less capable enemy in front of you. Your milleage will vary and you'll get closer to the center as the enemy is more and more capable and powerful. But i agree you should not plan to get hit, that's a given.

or the enemy is doing something good too... if you plan on not getting hit to avoid suffering losses in armored combat you're in trouble already, I agree not getting into trouble is preferable (using speed and tactical proficiency) but against a worthy opponent its unavoidable or else they would only make light Tanks

i'd be more confident about avoiding a gruesome death in an M1 or Leopard 2 or Challenger and to a lesser extent a T-90AM (with the Bustle) than in a T-72.

I was in a M-113 and a VBL-III (canadian modernized LAV-25), similar to the stryker and I must say I much prefer the Stryker

Against an opponent like the Iraqi army where 95% of the shots by tanks missed even at close range its okay. But against a modern and even semi-competent armored opponent with lots of battle tanks wouldnt that be a problem for armor integrity if you're hit many times without penetration by powerful sabot rounds ? sending the tank to the rear for lenghty repairs ? If you have one or two badly damaged tanks that's manageable but many of them would put a strain on the logisitic system and further delay their reintroduction into active service.

modern sabot doesnt deflect,,, not like the conical shaped hard shots of WWII.

I agree that fragments and gases have less room to maneuver and miss you or critical components if the tank is penetrated. The T-72 was east german and even with all sensitive components and instruments removed, it was awfully cramped and my first thought was: I wouldnt like to be in that tank if its penetrated. Not a very confident attitude and bad for morale when going into combat. Being injured and burning to death while screaming my lungs out in pain inside a small furnace is not my ideal kind of death. I must say that I'm claustrophobic and that certainly doesnt help.