Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Someone sent me this link, and I believe it will provide much fodder for modern warfare and CMBS comment, not to mention aid anyone working on destroyed tank skins. Every loss is accompanied by one or more color photos.

http://lostarmour.info/armour/

Regards,

John Kettler

This site only seem to show the Ukrainian losses. Apart from that, according to wikipedia those material losses seem 'affordable':

180~ T-64BM "Bulat"

600 T-64BV

1,000T-64B

According to the information that 'came to me' ;) the Ukrainians have made a lot of progress so it seems strange there are only ~5 non Ukrainian destroyed vehicles on that website.

Last friday I feared for a intensification of the conflict after Ukraine claimed to have destroyed a Russian column of armoured vehicles, which a the UK newspaper The Guardian reported to have entered into Ukraine:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/14/russian-military-vehicles-enter-ukraine-aid-convoy-stops-short-border

Russia simply denied and that was that. Me thinks a lot of sweat dripped that day. Anyhow I'm happy it didn't escalate in an (all out) open conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 500
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In all seriousness, does the Shtora system actually do anything other than make the tank look angry?

He reached out from the past!   

May I ask whether that is based on 'inside' knowledge of CMBS or your perception of how it will be? ;)

I'm expecting the US might versus the Russian's in CM:BS to be less dramatic than against the Syrians in Shock Force. Granted there are a lot of differences apart from the M1A2 SEP vs Russian T-90, I was also hoping for a more balanced tank 'duel'. Not an expert with RL knowledge myself but I would think the Russian version of the T-90(M)S is a whole different beast than the Syrian T-90. An active protection system would mitigate the danger of the barrel launched ATGM's, but there is more going for the T-90MS including Russian APFSDS rounds, Arena, Relikt ERA, command and control systems?

The Russians have nothing that can reliably penetrate the M1A2 across it's frontal arc. From the side or rear is a different story, of course, but getting the jump on an Abrams is hard to do because of it's advanced sensors/sights and APS. Yes, this is my experience playing the game, but we have several beta testers with intimate knowledge of the Abrams who say this is accurate.

Having said that, almost every aspect of the game is being continuously tested, questioned and adjusted. Also, M1A2s without APS will be available in-game. But my impression is that even the modern Russian army struggles to deal with the Abrams and the FGM-148 Javelin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Russians have nothing that can reliably penetrate the M1A2 across it's frontal arc. From the side or rear is a different story, of course, but getting the jump on an Abrams is hard to do because of it's advanced sensors/sights and APS. Yes, this is my experience playing the game, but we have several beta testers with intimate knowledge of the Abrams who say this is accurate.

Having said that, almost every aspect of the game is being continuously tested, questioned and adjusted. Also, M1A2s without APS will be available in-game. But my impression is that even the modern Russian army struggles to deal with the Abrams and the FGM-148 Javelin.

Ok, thanks for the bones ;)

Anyway I didn't expect Russian APFSDS to reliably penetrate the Abrams frontal arc in CMBS, even only because in CMSF Blue on Blue that didn't happen. Nor did I expect the best T-90 to be a 1-1 match against the Abrams (M1A2 SEP). But I do expect them to be more potent than the Syrian T-90 against the M1A2SEP in CMSF. DU rounds, better armor, command and control, etc. But perhaps the (gamewise) wish is the father of my thought.

Regarding the Javelin: how does Arena perform against those?

Link to post
Share on other sites

But I do expect them to be more potent than the Syrian T-90 against the M1A2SEP in CMSF. DU rounds, better armor, command and control, etc. But perhaps the (gamewise) wish is the father of my thought.

How much more potent is a Sherman 76 than a Sherman 75 against a King Tiger? :P

If you let the US Army have all of it's latest and greatest toys the Russians can't really compete on a 1 to 1 basis. Fortunately the TO&E is flexible enough to where you can easily field a sort-of post budget cuts version of the US Army without vehicle APS, Javelins and one or two other things I'm not sure I'm allowed to mention.

Link to post
Share on other sites
How much more potent is a Sherman 76 than a Sherman 75 against a King Tiger? :P

If you let the US Army have all of it's latest and greatest toys the Russians can't really compete on a 1 to 1 basis. Fortunately the TO&E is flexible enough to where you can easily field a sort-of post budget cuts version of the US Army without vehicle APS, Javelins and one or two other things I'm not sure I'm allowed to mention.

Of course you are. This community has your back. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
How much more potent is a Sherman 76 than a Sherman 75 against a King Tiger? :P

If you let the US Army have all of it's latest and greatest toys the Russians can't really compete on a 1 to 1 basis. Fortunately the TO&E is flexible enough to where you can easily field a sort-of post budget cuts version of the US Army without vehicle APS, Javelins and one or two other things I'm not sure I'm allowed to mention.

Hehehe ok point taken, although that 76mm does make a big difference! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lethaface,

The baseline Arena system has very good overhead coverage which appears (1:40) to be able to deal with a 45% diving missile. The price is the public monument of a radar array atop the turret. This gives away the tank's location when it would otherwise be hidden, making tank crews quite unhappy. Arena is designed to handle not only ground threats but air delivered missiles as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sPfOnLnIbE

In an effort to meet the user demands, a cheaper and more tank friendly version was produced called Arena-E. Sure, it's much lower, but it gave up lots of protective coverage to do so.

Summing up, both versions should theoretically effective vs Javelin in DF mode. Arena, but not Arena-E, should theoretically be able to deal with a Javelin coming down at a 45 degree angle.

And now we have Arena-3, which can't cut it against high diver missiles at all, but is likely to be quite effective against DF threats and overhead ATGM threats (fly over the tank turret, then detonate), such as the TOW2b Aero and Bill 2.

http://defense-update.com/20130925_a-new-arena-aps-debut-at-rae-2013.html#.U_URBlaAZFw

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lethaface,

The baseline Arena system has very good overhead coverage which appears (1:40) to be able to deal with a 45% diving missile.

engagement envelope for standard Arena is said to be -5 to +15°.

The price is the public monument of a radar array atop the turret. This gives away the tank's location when it would otherwise be hidden, making tank crews quite unhappy. Arena is designed to handle not only ground threats but air delivered missiles as well.

Later versions have the radar sensors distributed around the turret. This does not change coverage (and in fact it is said to be improved to full 360° on latest version). The diving projectile engagement issue does not appear to be radar limited, but limited by the way the kill munition functions.

Arena_standoff.jpg

This would probably not stop the munition from intercepting top-attack overflight ATGMs. The question is whether it can attack steeply diving munitions, and if so, exactly how is this done?

And now we have Arena-3

AFAIK, this is a translation issue, and this system is also Arena-E (Arena-"Э").

However, if someone has concrete contradictory information, we'll gladly feed it into the jar.

Link to post
Share on other sites
How much more potent is a Sherman 76 than a Sherman 75 against a King Tiger? :P

If you let the US Army have all of it's latest and greatest toys the Russians can't really compete on a 1 to 1 basis. Fortunately the TO&E is flexible enough to where you can easily field a sort-of post budget cuts version of the US Army without vehicle APS, Javelins and one or two other things I'm not sure I'm allowed to mention.

But think of the reaction of American people to the knowledge that the best equipped armed forces in the World ... weren't. I realise that this is all about gameplay and scenario editor choice but it ain't going to tick the realism box.

Link to post
Share on other sites
How much more potent is a Sherman 76 than a Sherman 75 against a King Tiger? :P

If you let the US Army have all of it's latest and greatest toys the Russians can't really compete on a 1 to 1 basis. Fortunately the TO&E is flexible enough to where you can easily field a sort-of post budget cuts version of the US Army without vehicle APS, Javelins and one or two other things I'm not sure I'm allowed to mention.

Hhmm not my experience. M1s are vulnerable to a lot of stuff in the Russian military set-up - you don't have to KO a tank to destroy it's offensive/combat capability... Just like Tigers were to the correct combination of arms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But think of the reaction of American people to the knowledge that the best equipped armed forces in the World ... weren't. I realise that this is all about gameplay and scenario editor choice but it ain't going to tick the realism box.

It's a hypothetical conflict to begin with so I'm not bothered by it in the least. But I suspect most stock scenarios will feature whatever TO&E mix is deemed most likely for 2017. All I'm saying is that the option for experimentation is there to a degree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hhmm not my experience. M1s are vulnerable to a lot of stuff in the Russian military set-up - you don't have to KO a tank to destroy it's offensive/combat capability... Just like Tigers were to the correct combination of arms.

I don't mean to suggest that M1s are invulnerable, merely that people should not expect the latest Russian T-90s to be on par with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't mean to suggest that M1s are invulnerable, merely that people should not expect the latest Russian T-90s to be on par with them.

Ah my bad :D I was doing some playtesting last night which gave me a wee shock as my invincible phalanx of M1s very quickly became an immobilised cluster of targets... Ambushes from T90s on the flank, Russian rotary and fixed wing air strikes, followed up by Russian artillery was impressive but deeply unpleasant for some of these M1s.

I'd agree re M1 vs T90 - open ground at range toe to toe will not end well for the T90s.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Will the ukranians be able to go toe to toe with the russians

I've not played Ukraine vs Russian so can't say.

TBH even the small amount of stuff I've playtested (mostly scenarios I'm designing) are using early versions of the game (as shown in Chris's live streams) so my opinions about how stuff performs should be taken with a pinch of salt. More than a few of the testers are current military guys (several current serving armoured officers amongst them) so they have the best take on how effective M1s and possibly T90s should or shouldn't be.

In CMSF the M1 was a state of the art weapons system. In the timeframe since CMSF was set (early 2000s)the M1 has seen a lot of upgrades so you'd expect it to be a formidable opponent. It's worth being aware that Russian T90s are a different class of tank and aren't really designed to be going toe to toe with M1s, least not without back up i.e. T90s operating as part of a combined arms set-up such as rotary, fixed wing, artillery, ATGMs etc.

What i found in CMSF was M1s were easiyl beat if you picked your fights, so ambush, attacks from multiple directions, good use of ATGMs, arty etc. I think that matrix will be even more important in the Black Sea scenario.

What I have found though is mechanised operations in this modern setting are seriously dynamic affairs. Stuff kills and dies very quickly and very easily. Man or machine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
engagement envelope for standard Arena is said to be -5 to +15°.

Later versions have the radar sensors distributed around the turret. This does not change coverage (and in fact it is said to be improved to full 360° on latest version). The diving projectile engagement issue does not appear to be radar limited, but limited by the way the kill munition functions.

Arena_standoff.jpg

This would probably not stop the munition from intercepting top-attack overflight ATGMs. The question is whether it can attack steeply diving munitions, and if so, exactly how is this done?

AFAIK, this is a translation issue, and this system is also Arena-E (Arena-"Э").

However, if someone has concrete contradictory information, we'll gladly feed it into the jar.

I saw the picture you showed, but among many others, for example on this site:

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?128833-ATGM-vs-APS

Obviously it all depends at what exact moment/distance to target a missile dives on down.

And an old report about Arena being designed to also defeat top attack missiles:

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/3aps98.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hhmm not my experience. M1s are vulnerable to a lot of stuff in the Russian military set-up - you don't have to KO a tank to destroy it's offensive/combat capability... Just like Tigers were to the correct combination of arms.

That's good to hear, I for one didn't expect T-90MS to go toe-to-toe with Abrams M1A2 SEP (AP). But I do expect a noticeable difference from CMSF ;)

P.S. Great to read you are working on CMBS scenario's! Playing "armour attacks" in CMSF was one of great moments CMSF offered me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have also been wondering will us troops be able to use humvees even if they were never given one because in shockforce my infantry would get into the humvee but it would still say it was dismounted

I am hoping that they will preform like the jeeps in fortress italy and. normandy where anyone can use them

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...