Marwek77 aka Red Reporter Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Back in Syria CMSF times my Red tanks commanders when unbutonned were able to use top roof-mounted 12.7-mm machine gun. Now they just sit there and smile like real Hollywood actors. On www.military-today.com is writtten that the 12.7-mm MG is controlled manually by the vehicle commander. But in the game i have never seen to be used. How is it modelled? Can it fire on helicopters? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 (edited) It's mounted on a traversable ring, along with the commander's sight and hatch. The CM engine seems to not allow for traversable rings to traverse, so it has to be set in a some position permanently. Unfortunately, the chosen position is with the machine gun facing backwards, which is correct for when the commander is buttoned but not when he is unbuttoned. I personally think this is a mistake; that it should be turned around and the commander's sight fudged. I will lobby for it internally but don't hold your breath. Edited February 4, 2015 by Vanir Ausf B 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kieme(ITA) Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I have seen commander's cupola rotating independently on the T-64, but after some testing not on the T-72B3... also, the commander's cupola is in the right direction as Vanir said, so I belive that's the best for spotting and commander's visual checks when buttoned, but it's impossible to use the machine gun when unbuttoned. Tricky. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marwek77 aka Red Reporter Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 In CMSF direction of MG was same like now. When the commander was unbuttoned, machine gun started to traverse and after a while he was able to shoot with mg. So it was coded once and still is in T-64... looks like its somehow forgotten in T-72B3... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Na Vaske Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 So am I to understand the T-72B3 is molded so that the commander's machine gun is permanently locked in the travel position rendering it for the most part useless? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stagler Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 It seems so yes. May have been overlooked because of hte backwards mount. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 It was incorrectly always facing forward. In the process of fixing this, it seems the TC's ability to use the MG may have been borked. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Na Vaske Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 It was incorrectly always facing forward. In the process of fixing this, it seems the TC's ability to use the MG may have been borked. I would rather have an aesthetical abnormality than lose the ability to use a weapon system. :/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 As Marwek noted, it was working in CMSF, so it is not an either or situation, just a bug with correcting the default MG position. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marwek77 aka Red Reporter Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 So T72B3 and Oplot when commander unbuttoned cannot use roof mounted machine gun. All other eastern tanks when commander unbuttoned will use machine gun remotely from inside, so the tanker goes inside during firing. Dont know US tanks... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 (edited) As Marwek noted, it was working in CMSF, so it is not an either or situation, just a bug with correcting the default MG position. Awesome. I never played CMSF so didn't know it used to move. Edited February 4, 2015 by Vanir Ausf B 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stagler Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Im sure this will be fixed in a later patch then 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marwek77 aka Red Reporter Posted February 6, 2015 Author Share Posted February 6, 2015 So how to report this possible bug? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snarre Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 i didint want start new topic but anyway, im now done 20 test run whit T90 am x5 vs abraham x1 on field. im tjust wonderin is T90 am turret front armor too weak because all shot are goued trought it, not ewen one armor spaling or partial penetration. total shot number is now 100. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 what is the distance? If fairly close then you are probably having most shots hit the area around the gun, which is a weaker point on most tanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 (edited) That's normal. At 2000 meters about 91% of Abrams hits on the T-90 front will penetrate. Single ERA blocks never stop the Abrams. Only when the shot happens to hit on the edge of an ERA block and thereby detonate two of them does it deflect. Edited February 6, 2015 by Vanir Ausf B 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snarre Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 (edited) distance is ower 3 km and all sou tested other test run 5 km but still same thing. i didint count hits to gun or gun manttel. only thous what hitted to upper turret armor and front turret armor, sou basicly side of gun where armor should be strongest. T90 am using this "relikt" armor if im right ? that should be mutch stronger than "kontakt-5" Edited February 6, 2015 by snarre 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzersaurkrautwerfer Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 The M1A2 SEP V2 in CMBS is slinging M829E4s, which by most estimates represent the cutting edge in KE rounds, and designed to be very ERA resistant from inception. There's not much tank or tanklike that's going to come out of a hit from such a round intact. Once you discard the ERA the T-90 series on a whole is not especially well armored anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 (edited) Relikt would not be ignored, just not fully effective (e.g. instead of a 1.5 multiplier it might only provide a 1.2 multiplier). I think the sloped to the side parts of the front turret array could probably take a M829E4 hit from 0°, or at least not be guaranteed a penetration. Of course this area does not represent a huge part of the overall front area, but could be significant in a hull down position. Also not sure how much armor the mantlet on the T-90AM provides over the area with 435mm LOS in the drawing below. Might be worth testing more. Edited February 6, 2015 by akd 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snarre Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 (edited) yep this i meaned because it should be strongest part. i trived short test run then T90 AM vs T84 and if i looked right T84 and abraham using same rounds, only caliber is litlebit difrend. in test T90 AM can eat all day long moust of T84 shots. Sou why there is then sou big difrense in test ? Edited February 7, 2015 by snarre 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzersaurkrautwerfer Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 They are totally different rounds, in generation, dimensions, materials employed, and velocity. They may be similar types of rounds, but that is only similar in how they do their job, not performance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerdwing Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 3k meters sounds a bit extreme though for penetration. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTR Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 Personally, I don't think that even the A4 round can go through AM's turret side armor, and towards the outer rim of the glacis. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.