Reducing Abrams über status in-game?

[MikeyD]

Here's a sobering report I found from "Moscow Defense Brief" on armor protection in Iraq. Y'all might want to look it over with an eye towards game settings.

Moscow Defense Brief Link

Unexpectly, the article glows with praise for the Stryker, especially comparing it to the Bradley, listing incidents that would've wrecked a Bradley that the Sryker survived (I'm sure we're all surprised by that!).

And here's something new to me:

"One unexpected failing of the Abrams main cannon derived from the use of a fibreglass bore evacuator. Combat operations revealed that the bore evacuator is easily disabled by small arms fire, and the smoke generated by a malfunctioning bore evacuator drives the crew out of the tank after the firing of just two or three rounds."

Sounds like the maddening old CMx1 "Gun Hit" message may actually survive into CMSF!

[Yardstick]

In battle with mobile enemy, Abrams crews used mostly open mounted machine guns (the commander’s 12.7 mm gun and the loader’s 7.62 machinegun on skate mount). A lack of protection for the machine gunner from small arms fire led to several casualties and created opportunities for the destruction of the crew compartment through the open hatch.

That sounds like a load of crap to me. The ma duce on top of the Abrams can be controlled by the commander while buttoned.

The fragmentation ammunition of the IFV’s 25 mm automatic cannon was not effective against enemy infantry in buildings,

This too sounds like poo. I know our 25mm capped some mofos, no problem.

(The TOW)...The firepower of these missiles was more than adequate, but limited to two rounds since they are impossible to reload under the protection of armor.

Wrong. We can reload them while under fire. That is just another one of the dismounts many jobs. And yes, we have adequate armor protection while doing it.

This sounds more like someone played a little too much Battlefield 2 and decided to make all their judgements based on that rather than fact.

[MikeyD]

"The ma duce on top of the Abrams can be controlled by the commander while buttoned."

That was true of the original Abrams commander's station, but wasn't that feature discarded at some point? Or did the feature go away then come back? These Abrams upgrades have me all confused.

I do admit with the exception of the Stryker mention that was definitely a 'glass-half-empty' article. But game-wise it may do some good to discard the notion of the Abrams being unbreakable and unstoppable. If nothing else it'll keep the player from using the Abrams recklessly - that's how most King Tigers get killed in CMBB. The player believes the propaganda and throws caution to the wind.

[Yardstick]

I'm with 3ID, our Abrams still have it.

As far as uber-ness, the RPGs and SAF are no problem if the Abrams is employed properly with infantry. Basic combined arms, right?

[hellfish]

The M1A2 removed the commander's ability to fire while buttoned up. The TUSK with it's remote mount should allow it.

[rudel.dietrich]

From the side or rear any tank in the world is vulnurable.

Even a T-55A if it can get a side shot should be able to penetrate an Abrams from the side.

The trick is keeping the Abrams front armour pointed towards the danger at all times.

Nothing short of a RPG-29 or Kornet/Metis is going to be able to punch a hole through that armour with any regularity.

A T-72 or T-12 AT gun might be able to damage it from the front but it would have to be lucky to do so.

And even if you do not kill it, the constant hits could do damage to sites, or the MGs or the main gun if the barrel or the base is struck.

I don't think US tanker in their right minds thinks their tank is indestructable.

They think it is the best tank in the world, and they have good cause to think so.

But they know its limitations.

Smart playing should keep the Abrams alive and in control of the field.

I think there are four rules to keep in mind.

1. Keep your front pointed at the enemy. This is key.

2. Keep the range distant and use your superior optics.

3. Keep in the company of friends. That is what they are for, if your must get close, keep infantry on your flanks and securing your rear.

4. Shoot first and ask questions later.

Use that big 120mm gun!

If its hostile or even looks hostile, pump a heat round into it if your wrong then all thats wasted is a few thousand $ for the round.

Also make liberal use of that .50 MG

[Battlefront.com]

Angryson,

The article must be talking about the M1A2 or M1A2 SEP. Neither one have remote controlled M2. All M1A1 based variants have remote control, as does the TUSK package. BTW, the TUSK package is now being packaged as M1Ax SA. It is an upgrade kit for both the M1A1 and M1A2 family. It is designed to replace the SEP package and offer the M1A1D (and others) an upgrade path to most of the important SEP and TUSK improvements.

Steve

[Yardstick]

Well, I guess I just got my learn on!

[Carbon-14]

Wrong. We can reload them while under fire. That is just another one of the dismounts many jobs. And yes, we have adequate armor protection while doing it.

I think thats exactly what they're refering to. Someone has to dismount to replenish the missile. As opposed to a vehicle with TOW Under Armor where it can be reloaded without leaving the protection of the vehicle.

[hellfish]

They don't have to dismount. There's a hatch on the back of the Bradley that lets the guys in back reload the launcher.

[Carbon-14]

**Edit **

Nevermind, I was mistaken

[hellfish]

Not really. The hatch provides some cover and the turret provides a lot of cover too.

[Capt. Toleran]

Just like to point out that the jihadi videos have plenty of scenes with a M1 or Bradley TC getting plugged, so that part of the article wasn't BS. See Ogrish's archives for details.

There's also one on Ogrish that has a Stryker getting wasted by an IED that was posted recently, but I wasn't sure about the rules about posting that stuff here, so I'm just letting you know.

I read somewhere recently that Ogrish is a big favorite with US troops that are deployed, because they can see the jihadi tactics and know what to watch out for. Anyone planning to play this game should probably watch some of those videos to appreciate the dangers that will be simulated in this game.

[Yardstick]

Yeah, I really couldn't see any way to develop valuable TTPs from watching trash like that. But that's just me.

[Capt. Toleran]

Sounds like those same TC's beg to differ, it reminds them how easy it is to get sniped over there. You can learn a lot about setups by seeing the enemy actually teach you how he did it. I'm kinda surprised at your flip remark. I hate the jihadis and the insurgents, but don't turn down a chance for intelligence.

[M1A1TC]

The bore evacuator on the M1A1s are made out of metal, most likely aluminum. The reason I know this that I damaged one by hitting it with a tree, and had to tear apart the rivets holding it together to take it off the gun tube

[Battlefront.com]

It would appear that this article is not being specific enough about which model of Abrams it is discussing. Unfortunately, this is VERY common. In fact, we're trying to sort out various things Abrams related right now, and it is frustrating to say the least. For example...

There are several lettered M1A1 variants in the field today. M1A1 (stock), M1A1 HC, and M1A1 D. The D is an upgrade of some earlier model, probably the HC with additional armor on it (aka HC+). But it doesn't have to be any particular model! All the D requires is the B Kit and C Kit improvements. This means an older stock M1A1 with these two kits would be considered a D variant, even though it doesn't have the same armor as the HC or HC+ variants with the D designation. Also, a vehicle with A Kit and B Kit is significantly different than a vehicle without them, yet there is no designation change for having these kits installed. Adding to the confusion is the fact that the A and B Kits used to be reffered to as the "Situational Awareness", or SA, upgrade. Now these changes have been rolled into downgraded SEP upgrade (for the M1A2, just to confuse things more!) and is apparently means the designation of the vehicle will be "M1A1 SA". It would appear this is a M1A1D with enhanced features. On top of that there is the TUSK kit which offers some of the SA enhancements on its own, though by and large is a totally unique upgrade which, I think, can be applied to *any* previous M1A1 model. Fortunately this doesn't change the base designation, meaning it will be M1A1D TUSK.

This stuff is maddening

Steve

[John Kettler]

Steve,

Even the explanation of M1 nomenclature made my head hurt. Suggest you visit a Deep Old One, though, in order to be properly calibrated on SAN loss!

Regards,

John Kettler

[BeauCoupDinkyDau]

I remember the Bradley's poor protection being criticized in the very late 1980's. The US military shrugged off the vehicle's inadequacies, saying it met its requirements for what it was designed for. But in fact it wasn't—the armor was very easy to defeat, and in most test cases the crew and passenger compartments were destroyed when the vehicle took a hit.

And our government at the time insisted politics and big business dollars didn’t play a role in who won the contracts to build the Bradley. Yeah, right.

[dixon_el]

Duh!!

the M1 variants are:

XM1 - orginal protype

M1 - orginal production model - 105mm main gun, supported idler

M1IP - unsupported idler - 105mm main gun - increased top armor - improved battle override

M1A1 - heavier top armor - 120 mm main gun

M1A1 HA (Heavy Armor) - Increased overall armor - (post-Iraq 1)

M1A2 - Digital control - hatbox

M1A2 SEP - improved fire control - centralized electrical/data system

M1A2 TUSK - protype

Simplified list of the M1s

[Battlefront.com]

Just found out that all D variants have been withdrawn as of 2005. They are apparently going to be worked over, but not sure if they are AIM candidates or will make the conversion to A2. Seems the A2s are coming up in numbers in Iraq, but the most common version appears to be the HA or HA+. Not sure how many of them have Kit A, B, or C.

TUSK kits will be available for both A1 and A2 models. The new SA conversions apparently are destined just for A1s, but I don't know which one. Most straight A1s are mothballed anyway.

Steve