Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

BTR

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    745

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Posts posted by BTR

    Operating your IFV/APC under the threat of Javelin

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    19 hours ago, Erwin said:

    Quite...  :)

    Note that in the game however, when intensively playtesting MOS' TOC scenario, we found the UAV's (even Elite with Elite JTAC controllers) did not do a good job of spotting infantry or even moving vehicles.  It took a few WEGO turns/minutes for an Elite UAV "team" to spot stationary vehicles in the open.  I can't recall ever spotting any enemy infantry - altho the inf would have been in woods.

    Well yea spotting with UAVs is wonky and takes time, but why you always got to be in a hurry? 😋

    0

    Igla, RPO reloads

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    You can't really carry more than two RPOs per person, so only four per squad. There should be 8 or so additional RPOs in the RPO Platoon MTLBs. That seems a bit low since the standard allocation for BMO-based platoons is 180 launchers, but I don't have the sources for MTLB to compare. 

    1

    Russian army under equipped?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    49 minutes ago, DerKommissar said:

    I see your point, a hybrid system has benefits. I recently read a US Army article about the potential challenges with Russia's diverse military and paramilitary forces. I think it could work, if done right. My problem with the current system is that it lacks the meritocracy of a proper professional system, while also having a corrupt conscription process. So, you're not giving much incentive for career soldiers/officers and meanwhile letting anyone with money/connections skip conscription.

    A lot of the top brass, including Shoigu have questionable credentials. I would not consider them for the positions that they occupy, based on merit alone (more on backroom politics, corruption, etc.). I believe the saying goes, "The fish rots from the head."

    I'm not sure where this assessment comes from. Who aside of Shoigu lacks credentials in your opinion? At the very least in the General Staff.

    As for meritocracy there are completely different development paths within the body of the armed forces (in many ways more similar to western schools) but Grau and Bartles handle their description and typing with a much more elegant command of written English language so I suggest you read them. The current professional system is designed and dedicated solely to creation of a specialist in equipment handling, tactical operation and low-level command. You are not going to grow beyond that without dedicated studies so your possible "merit" level is directly linked to the education ceiling you have.  

    There are deeply rooted problems with the contract system like constant overwork, non-competitive salaries at lower positions, plus all the beauty that's associated with military life like insane pressure to deliver at all costs and the bureaucratic system executed with the "army method™". Hell, there are people on this forum who've done their contract work and they'll tell you a lot more about it than I can. These problems are however not related to the perceived conscription process inefficiencies and I don't even think these two are related. 

    0

    Lackluster documentation

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted · Edited by BTR

    2 hours ago, Kaunitz said:

    Thanks. May I ask how you tested the BMP-3 sighting? Maybe I can recreate the test and check out a few selected vehicles and try to draw some conclusions from it. 

    Not in any particular test environment, but just though campaigns and PBEMs that involved them. I don't exactly know what test can be set up to test the exact spotting variation.  

    Quote

    Also interesting to know that the game does differentiate thermal generations. Is that documented somewhere?

    It's not documented anywhere to my knowledge other than by the fact that M1A2s will out-spot any opponents with mechanically scanned thermal matrices (T-90A, T-72B3, T-90M). 

    0

    Russian army under equipped?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    10 hours ago, Sublime said:

    If you had like Stalin like power and it were over Ru Army and its future what would you choose for current and future tanks, apcs and assault rifles?

    I'm always so bad at things like this because it's a question that has so much that needs to be established before answering. I guess the quick and dirty answer is I'd hold the expansionism of the ground element so there is no need to add more refurbished AFV types to the already diverse inventory list and concentrate on getting new families of vehicles into service.

    0

    Lackluster documentation

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    I'm not one of those "experienced" guys, but I'll give it a shot based on my observations and experience. 

    Quote

     What are the effects of the lack of the commander in the BMP-2, if any?

    I've not been observing BMP-2 behavior, but I've spent some time looking after BMP-3's. Every position occupied in a vehicle gives more acute spotting. This can be noticed in three stages, with just two men crewing BMP-3, with three men crewing BMP-3 and with additional two MG gunners on the front. I presume this is the same for BMP-2 crewing. 

    Quote

    Also, what is the effect of having my "IR" (infra red) system damaged?

    Less spotting power at night conditions. I'm not sure if it also affect night-time accuracy. 

    Quote

    Does the game differentiate between rest light / infra red / thermal imaging? 

    Yes. Different thermal generations are even handled with spotting acuteness, but I'm not sure about the other two. 

    0

    Russian army under equipped?

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Sublime said:

    ok so BTR and D Kommissar fuel expense aside is the turbine T80 the better tank engine wise? Are turbines the future?

    I just gave you a list of things that aren't related to fuel expenses. The particular problem of low autonomy under idling has largely been tackled from T-80U onward with an on-board APU. As far as tactical level is concerned the T-80s were (and a big emphasis on the past tense here) a better tank dynamically because they were easier for the driver (only four gears) and the turbine was smoother in operation under changing revs.

    As for the future, it's a mixed answer from me. In the immediate future I don't see any alternatives to complex diesel power plants with a automatic gearboxes. Modern tank diesels when compared to turbines

    • have a similar or greater level of hp/cm^3,
    • have equally adaptable power-curves,
    • are equally easy to operate because of the software and automatics in between the driver and the powerplant,
    • have no problems running in the cold,
    • have a lower and more manageable heat signatures, something that wasn't of a concern back when first tank turbines appeared,
    • have the same or longer working cycle and operational hours before repairs,
    • they are good enough for all heavy platforms based on a tank chassis without being excessive. 

    Perhaps in the far future turbine once again will become an appealing alternative as part of a "diesel-electric" chassis where the turbine is always operated at the most efficient level and is used to generate electricity for the electric drives. There have been such plans from at least three countries, but they were all too complex and/or expensive back when they were developed. 

    1

    Lackluster documentation

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Kaunitz said:

    The problem is: the 1st and 2nd vehicle never get a filled commander slot, even if the respective squads are in the vehicle. So presumably (nobody knows how it really works...) the best spotting devices of those two BMPs are never crewed/active and the right side of the turret is horribly blind against close targets? Maybe it doesn't work like this at all  and everything is more abstract. But in any case I think we should be allowed to know!

    Crew and infantry are handled as entirely separate classes I think, so they can't cross over and thus the commander position remains empty. Just one of the many approximations in the way transports and dismounts work. To many the ambiguity of the systems in CMx2 is a large part of the charm. After all, figuring things out for yourself is the only freedom anyone really has.

    1

    Lackluster documentation

    in Combat Mission Black Sea

    Posted

    38 minutes ago, Kaunitz said:

    About the BMP: It seems to work differently? I have an Ukrainian mechanized platoon (mounted in 3 BMP-2s). Two of the vehicles (1st, 3rd) only have 2 crew-slots (indicated by the blue dots) and never get a commander, even if the squad is in the vehicle. One vehicle (2nd) shows 3 crew-slots (at the cost of one passenger-slot) and always has a commander, regardless of whether a squad is in the vehicle or not.

    This is a correct implementation of BMP platoon organization. Platoon 2IC never leaves the second vehicle while platoon leader dismounts from the first BMP while the third BMP has infantry squad leader share a vehicle CO role when mounted but also dismounts in combat. I'm not sure Ukraine uses this system though, but we surely do (at least did) over here. 

    0
×
×
  • Create New...