Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'aps'.

The search index is currently processing. Current results may not be complete.
  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • CM2
    • Combat Mission - General Discussion
    • Combat Mission Cold War
    • Combat Mission Shock Force 2
    • Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg
    • Combat Mission Black Sea
    • Combat Mission Red Thunder
    • Combat Mission Fortress Italy
    • Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
    • Combat Mission Shock Force 1
    • Combat Mission Afghanistan
    • Combat Mission: Touch (iOS / Android)
  • CM1
    • Combat Mission Campaigns
    • Combat Mission: Afrika Korps
    • Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
    • Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord
  • General Discussion Forum
    • General Discussion Forum
  • Repository Updates
  • TacOps
    • TacOps 4
  • Opponent Finder Forums
  • Archives
    • Strategic Command
    • CM Archives
    • T-72: Balkans on Fire!
    • Dan Verssen Games
    • Theatre of War
    • DropTeam
    • Assault Wave
    • Empires of Steel
    • PT Boats

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL











Found 6 results

  1. I've been messing around with CM:BS Quick Battles for my campaign system prototype. When a T90 emerges from a hilltop and begins to identify targets and compute firing solution, an M1A2 SEP or a M2A2/M2A3 gets a LASER WARNING. They automatically pop IR blocking smoke and reverse. This can save your skin, as I've seen T90s penetrate M1A2's lower glacis and cupola. However, I've had AFVs reverse in a weird way that exposes their side armour to the T90s. This happens often when there are trees, buildings or the edge of the map behind my AFV. The AFV will steer to the side, and become more vulnerable as a result. Sometimes, the automatic smoke launchers are triggered for a trivial threat -- leaving those charges spent, while a serious threat approaches. Is it possible to prevent my AFVs from automatically reversing and/or popping smoke on LASER WARNINGs? Or is this immutable TC protocol IRL?
  2. http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/americas-killer-m1-abrams-tank-now-has-its-own-shields-22720, A brigade of Abrams with APS makes the games backstory/equipment mix look a lot better, the Army must have gotten tired of waiting for the mythical American made "better" system.
  3. ... in response to Russian APS. Must say I'm surprised - and equally intrigued by its replacement: "Should Russia's new Armata T-14 tanks worry Nato?" http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-40083641 "A Russian innovation in armoured warfare has pushed Norway to replace many of its current anti-tank systems. Active protection systems (APS) are being built into Russia's new Armata T-14 tank, posing a problem for a whole generation of anti-armour weapons, not least the US-supplied Javelin guided missile, used by the Norwegian Army. The warning comes from Brig Ben Barry of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) in London. He says this is a problem that most Nato countries have barely begun to grapple with. APS threatens to make existing anti-tank weapons far less effective, and there is little real discussion of this among many Western militaries, he says. Some countries are conducting research and trials to equip their own tanks with APS. "But they seem to miss the uncomfortable implications for their own anti-armour capabilities," he says. Norway is one of the first Nato countries to grasp this nettle. Its latest defence procurement plan envisages spending 200-350m kroner (£18.5-32.5m; $24-42m) on replacing its Javelin missiles, "to maintain the capacity to fight against heavy armoured vehicles". "There is a need for [an] anti-tank missile," it says, "that can penetrate APS systems"."
  4. While exploring a military news site I found just today when running a search, I came across this status report on current US APS tests. There are no fewer than four systems under live fire testing. Piece has some rather exciting test video, too. Regards, John Kettler
  5. This is, I believe, the latest on the Trophy APS as it applies to the US military. The clarity of the writing in the below abstract is poor, making it difficult to understand what's actually being said. The URL suggests one thing, the murky abstract something else. I think what it's saying is that the Army has Trophy on the Stryker and Abrams (odd there's no mention of the Bradley) and that the Marines are going to buy or lease Trophy themselves, install it, and see how it does. http://defense-update.com/20160415_army-marine-corps-want-to-test-israels-trophy-aps-again.html Regards, John Kettler
  6. When I was using BMP-3 advancing on a mission, a M1a2 ambushed and fire upon me in approximately 500 meters, then the miracle happened, Arena was activated and intercepted the 120mm m256 gun, successfully and the last time I check, the maximum possible interception speed for Arena was only 700m/s(≈2296ft/s) Now, I do considering is that the year 2017 makes Arena more advanced, or is it just some calculation error? or there a statistic test that proofs the Arena is capable of intercepting main battle tank's gun shell? Note: this is not only happens on M1A2, my test in game proof that it is capable of defeating any sort of MBT's main gun. Funny thing is, while overwhelmingly effective against MBT, unguided rocket launcher often easily breaching in the APS defense perimeter and destroy the entire vehicle.
  • Create New...