time between lasing and shooting

[poesel]

Just out of curiosity: why does it take so (relativly) long between lasing a target and firing on it?

 

I know nothing about the process so all is guessing: first you acquire the target, turn the turret and finally lase the itto get corrections for bearing (wind) and elevation (distance). But these corrections should be rather small so why is there is enough time for the target to create a smoke screen?

[Kieme(ITA)]

Depends on two elements in my opinion.

 

From the targeter point of view: the procedure of firing, from enemy acquisition to the moment the projectile Leaves the gun, several steps are taken. On some tanks these are automatic, on some Others these operations are partially manual (examples: ammunition selection, gun tube alignemnt, turret alignment -and micro-adjustments), moreover, even ballistic computers (which calculate and apply most of the stuff) are different, some are faster than Others (or more modern).

 

From the targeted point of view: some vehicles will deploy smoke screen automatically, i.e. the system detects the threat and in a matter of milliseconds activates the smoke launchers. Some vehicles, even modern ones, will signal (by means of visual and audio aids) the gunner/tank commander, and this person will need to press a button or switch to deploy the smoke. Consider that even a fraction of seconds matters a lot in this process.

 

So you have to evaluate both the parties in order to understand what happened (if a smoke screen is done very rapidly and/or a firing procedure is more or less time consuming).

Edited March 30, 2015 by Kieme(ITA)

[Apocal]

Just out of curiosity: why does it take so (relativly) long between lasing a target and firing on it?

 

I know nothing about the process so all is guessing: first you acquire the target, turn the turret and finally lase the itto get corrections for bearing (wind) and elevation (distance). But these corrections should be rather small so why is there is enough time for the target to create a smoke screen?

 

You have to place the sight over a moving target for one second (at least) to calculate and apply the correct lead. I imagine they are abstracting the little bumps and dips that characterize AFV movement over off-road terrain, so it can take a bit longer.

[Amizaur]

In Steel Beasts (which had opinion of being a very realistic simulation) and western tanks (M1, Leo2)  the time between lasing and shooting could be be  just a fraction of second.

After lasing the gun tube elevation was automatically and almost  instantaneously adjusted by FCS -  so lasing & shooting were almost simultaneous actions - IIRC it usually it took about 0.5s between lasing and shooting.

The target would have absolutely no time to react, it could manage to launch it's smoke grenades but the APFSDS would be on it's way (and it's not guided, doesn't care for smoke).

At least when shooting at stationary targets it was that fast. It could be a little longer if the gynner after lasing had to correct in azimuth against moving targets.

Is it the same in real tanks ? Is it the same in Russian tanks like T-72B, T-72B3, T-90 ?  Never played Steel Bests 2 or SB Pro unfortunately. 

IIRC in T-72M (which really didn't have a true FCS) after lasing only the aiming mark moved, so the gunner has to correct gun elevation manually - that could take a while, let's say  2-3 seconds. 

Edited March 30, 2015 by Amizaur

[IICptMillerII]

I think the lasing time depends heavily on the vehicle. Are you talking about a specific tank/armored vehicle or are you talking about all of them? 

 

I know that the later end Russian tanks, such as the T-90AM tend to aim and fire pretty quickly. Lower end tanks such as the T-72 variant and the Ukrainian T-64's take a bit longer to aim, but not much. I cannot speak for the Abrams yet as I have not played around with it yet, but based on my knowledge of the Abrams I assume the lase and fire time is pretty quick.

 

APCs are a bit different. I've found that they can take a bit longer to engage targets, and tend to be less accurate than tanks, specifically the BMP-3 and its 100mm cannon. Even so I have found that my APCs have been doing a good job at servicing identified targets. 

 

My biggest issue (not with the game, its my own flaw as a commander currently) is that I have trouble spotting the enemy first. Generally speaking the vehicle that spots it target first is the one that wins the engagement. This is a testament to the speed of the FCS systems on the armored vehicles I have been using and fighting against (Russian/Ukrainian)

 

Could you elaborate on which vehicles in particular, or is it all vehicles?

[John Kettler]

poesel,

 

My understanding is that in the Russian tanks lacking integrated FCS, the gunner had to lase, read the range from the LRF display, then manually enter it into the ballistic computer. This tended to slow things down. US Army analyses during the Cold War showed that the tank which fired first won the engagement 80% of the time. Given the tremendous gunnery accuracy jump since, I suspect the odds of winning from having first round downrange advantage are now much higher than that. 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

[Los]

Amizaur beat me to the punch, the time between lasing and shooting in a tank (Russian or English or American or German is less than a second.)

 

Los

[poesel]

So for example a M1 vs a stationary target should be sending he shell downrange in less than a second after the target gets the laser warning. That should not be enough to put up a smokesceen.

 

Haven't done any testing but from my experience so far it's about  50/50 or better for any MBT/MBT challenge that the defender can put up the smoke in time so that the attacker looses LOS before firing. But given the comments it looks like it should be a much more rarer event?

[Stagler]

T72m is very old. B3 has proper fcs, you lase and it adjusts elevation and cross movement as long as you keep crosshair on the target.