Col Deadmarsh Posted December 18, 2000 Share Posted December 18, 2000 I was wondering why the AVRE which has a 290mm mortar gun leaves a shell hole which is only the size of about an 80mm shell. How come it doesn't leave the same impression as one of those heavy arty shells? ------------------ Youth is wasted on the young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeri Posted December 18, 2000 Share Posted December 18, 2000 Maybe it has something to do with that fact that it fires shaped charges (the ones indicated with 'c') for busting through bunkers. So it's not a normal HE shell which would leave a big crater. Joeri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted December 18, 2000 Author Share Posted December 18, 2000 Possibly. BTS, is this the reason the blast crater is so small? Does the size of the crater it leaves indicate the blast strength of the round or is the visual just an abstraction? ------------------ Youth is wasted on the young. [This message has been edited by Colonel_Deadmarsh (edited 12-18-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OsinO Posted December 18, 2000 Share Posted December 18, 2000 ...or maybe just cuz Artillery falls from thousands of feet in the air.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted December 18, 2000 Share Posted December 18, 2000 ....or maybe its just the only mistake BTS has made all year. (As my father would say.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted December 18, 2000 Author Share Posted December 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>...or maybe just cuz Artillery falls from thousands of feet in the air..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hmm...good point. That velocity thing WOULD come into play, wouldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted December 18, 2000 Share Posted December 18, 2000 Exactly. A round fired from a gun will explode on the surface, whereas a round falling from the sky will penetrate the ground and explode below, throwing up a lot of debris and creating a much larger crater. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted December 18, 2000 Share Posted December 18, 2000 Ack! Do you really think that falling arty is faster than HE fired from a tank? Good god! Go back to physics class! Artillery falling form the sky accelerates at 9.8 meters per second from the instant it reaches the top of its arc. Thus for artillery to reach speeds of 700 meters/sec (roughly the speed of most infantry guns) it would have to fall for 71.42 seconds from the top of it's arc and that is assuming there is no terminal velocity. Now with a little math one can see that the top of this arc would have to be at the altitude of 25,029 meters or roughly 75,087 feet. Hmmm... From this now I would think the DF artillery impacts at a greater speed then IF artillery. Unless that is you know of any artillery that can put it's shell 3 times higher than any bomber at the time could fly. Ugh... Jeff ------------------ I once killed a six pack just to watch it die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Posted December 18, 2000 Share Posted December 18, 2000 jshandorf: The muzzle velocity of the AVRE's gun is 48 meters/sec. ------------------ You mean my Java coded Real Time Bar Fight Simulator Madmatt Mission: Beyond BiteMe ISN'T going to be published?!? Madmatt [This message has been edited by Vanir (edited 12-18-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted December 18, 2000 Share Posted December 18, 2000 jshandorf wrote: > Ack! Do you really think that falling arty is faster than HE fired from a tank? No, but artillery has a higher angle of incidence. Works on the same principle that sloped armour is less penetrable than vertical armour. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted December 18, 2000 Share Posted December 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir: jshandorf: The muzzle velocity of the AVRE's gun is 48 meters/sec. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sweet mother of mary!! 48 flippin' meters per second...?? That's all? Well then just ignore me... Jeff ------------------ I once killed a six pack just to watch it die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OsinO Posted December 18, 2000 Share Posted December 18, 2000 Really? you think im right? I know it makes sense, but I still didnt think that that was the real reason.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted December 18, 2000 Author Share Posted December 18, 2000 How can the muzzle velocity of the AVRE gun make any difference when the shot is fired up into the air and comes down to its target in an arc? There's not much more velocity in this kind of shot than there would be using a handgrenade, right? The shot is not being fired like a regular tank would fire it's round where it's the shortest distance from point to point. ------------------ Youth is wasted on the young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow 1st Hussars Posted December 18, 2000 Share Posted December 18, 2000 Check the blast radius in the unit info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumvir Posted December 19, 2000 Share Posted December 19, 2000 jshandorf, when you consider the impact velocity of an artillery shell, don't forget the forward component. An artillery shell doesn't fall straight down from the height of its arc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricochet Posted December 19, 2000 Share Posted December 19, 2000 We discussed the AVRE in a thread a couple of weeks ago. I did some research and found out the AVRE does not have a gun but an externaly loaded mortar. I found a picture and the co-driver’s hatch slides open and he stands up and loads the mortar from the outside. I couldn’t find any information on the mortar itself. Although it was described as being able to collapse or take the face off of a building in one shot several players tried using one in the game and found that that was not the case and wouldn’t use one again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted December 19, 2000 Author Share Posted December 19, 2000 I know the feeling... I'm using an AVRE in a PBEM right now. I crept up behind some trees and fired an area shot at a bunch of trees where my enemy's armored car lies behind. I'd say the shot was about 10m away from his vehicle and I still don't detect any damage. In Close Combat 2 that would've been a kill... It seems that a 290mm shell would do more damage than what we see on screen but I think more testing is needed. Has anyone had success using the AVRE? ------------------ Youth is wasted on the young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grobdeutschland Posted December 19, 2000 Share Posted December 19, 2000 Just use a jackson-it can blast & bust. It's not as good as the AVRE's firepower, but it's faster & cheaper. ------------------ "Far better it is To dare mighty things... Then to take rank with Those poor, timid spirits Who know neither Victory nor defeat." Theodore Roosevelt 1899 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted December 20, 2000 Share Posted December 20, 2000 Colonel_Deadmarsh wrote: > In Close Combat 2 that would've been a kill... Nice to see you're maintaining your scholarly principles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mikey D Posted December 20, 2000 Share Posted December 20, 2000 Don't forget, unless it's on a delay fuze artilley will burst within a microsecond of impact so velocity shouldn't come into the 'big hole' equation. Wasn't the big ARVE round nicknamed the 'flying dustbin' for it's trash can size and shape? About 40-50 pounds of HE, hollow charge or not, compared to twelve(?) perhaps stuffed into an artillery shell? I was expecting more boom for my buck with the ARVE as well. fun to watch the flying dustbin's trajectory though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OsinO Posted December 20, 2000 Share Posted December 20, 2000 Hehe, you guys seem to have bad experiances with the Avre.. Ive had good. When I first discovered the AVRE I was like "WHOOAHH!" so I started up a Quick Battle so I can use it I was defending a flag, and the Axis had a lot of troops in bunch of Tall Pines. I made sure they had no more Panzerfausts, and crept the Avre right in front of them (so they can all see the trash cans come flying in). KATHUUUMP.......KATHUUUMPP....KATHUUUMP. Each round killed atleast 3 infantry. This thing is a real infantry killer..especially when they are bunched up. I cant imagine what would happen if it was Scattered trees.. End result? 40+ infantry kills. Ive also had an AVRE kill a King Tiger Easily from the side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted December 20, 2000 Share Posted December 20, 2000 Don't forget that AVRE is just a general term – Armoured Vehicle Royal Engineers I think. What we're discussing here is the Churchill armed with a Petard mortar. =) David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted December 20, 2000 Author Share Posted December 20, 2000 David said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Colonel_Deadmarsh wrote: > In Close Combat 2 that would've been a kill... Nice to see you're maintaining your scholarly principles.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say but knowing you, I'm guessing it's sarcasm. ------------------ Youth is wasted on the young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted December 20, 2000 Share Posted December 20, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh: David said: I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say but knowing you, I'm guessing it's sarcasm.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Give the man a lolly! Regards Jim R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted December 20, 2000 Author Share Posted December 20, 2000 You know, a lot of times when I bring up Close Combat in relation to CM, I'm doing so in jest. For instance, my quote before in this thread is a good example. So calm down all you realist freaks out there. I'm fully aware that CM is the more realistic of the two games. ------------------ Youth is wasted on the young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts