hellfish Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 Very true. The M240 is a couple pounds heavier than the M60, and a bit longer, but has been used by many militiaries (as the FN MAG/MAG58) as squad support weapons without assistant gunners or ammo bearers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
konstantine Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 thanks for the links everyone. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 The M249 can use the 30 round M16 magazines, but usually uses linked ammunition from 100-200 round belts. Obviously a rifle can't fire link and I understand that it's no small job to de-link it. So, in the context of a CM battle, I don't think you'll find M16/M4s using SAW ammunition AB would be Ammo Bearer? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 AB = ammo bearers, yes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 Originally posted by fytinghellfish: Very true. The M240 is a couple pounds heavier than the M60, and a bit longer, but has been used by many militiaries (as the FN MAG/MAG58) as squad support weapons without assistant gunners or ammo bearers. But that's why we have the M249/Minimi/C9 now - the MAG 58/M240B/C6 is at its best with a couple of barrels and a few belts; preferably on the tripod (no pun intended) and set up to support the platoon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hortlund Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 Originally posted by fytinghellfish: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Leutnant Hortlund: Is it just me or is the Company HQ missing a couple of guys to drive the trucks? It looks like the noncombatants with the company HQ aren't listed - the First Sergeant, company clerk, armorer, supply sergeant and his two guys, the NBC NCO, etc. Those are the guys who would drive the trucks and humvees in the company HQ. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 I'm sticking this one to the top so people can get edumacated! Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 We already have the 3 man M240 MG team programmed and animated in CM:SF. We simply don't have the resources or time to graphically show everything these guys can do with their weapon (and let's not start in with the wisecracks!), but we do have the basics. The M240 can be used on a tripod or independently on its own bipod. The behavior of the MG team differs depending on how it deploys itself. We are also simulating the soft "saddlebag" that is being used in ever growing numbers. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoolaman Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 For those who know absolutely nothing about modern US armaments, (myself being one of those people), here is a nice link to go with the stryker company TOE listed at the start. Army equipment file 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 Originally posted by flamingknives: The M249 can use the 30 round M16 magazines, but usually uses linked ammunition from 100-200 round belts. Obviously a rifle can't fire link and I understand that it's no small job to de-link it. So, in the context of a CM battle, I don't think you'll find M16/M4s using SAW ammunition AB would be Ammo Bearer? The M249 can technically use mags but it is so unreliable, unless they have fixed it since I got out, that it has been officially nixed. I guess it could still be done in an emergency. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 Yeah, we never used mags in the M249 except for one NBC firing qualification we had. Didn't jam on us, but IIRC it stripped the hell out of the mags. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnersman Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 It is interesting, there is no one below the rank of E3 in a Stryker Brigade. According to the above graphic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 Originally posted by Sergei: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dillweed: I'm kinda suprised they didn't call it the SchwarzkopfI don't think you can expect an AFV named Schwarzkopf any time soon. Spelling issues there... plus I don't recall any US AFV's named after a living person, are there any? And who's General Stryker? </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 Strykers are named after two medal of honor winners - one Stryker was in WWII, one unrelated Stryker was in Vietnam. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
konstantine Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 I came up with this list. Some links are reposts from elsewhere in this forum. Credit to original posters of course, sorry I can't remember who posted what. The Stryker http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/iav.htm http://www.army-technology.com/projects/stryker/ http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/images/stryker-co.jpg http://strykernews.com/ Stryker brigade overview and policy http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-21-31/ General info. on US army (there is no way of knowing yet exactly which units will be integrated into the first game, other than Stryker units, or which will be integrated into follow-up modules) http://www.army.mil/organization/ general info. on Syria (of course, CMSF will simulate a recent Syrian coup d'etat, so the political info. is only partially relevant) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syria maps of Syria political map (best I could find): http://www.worldhistoryplus.com/maps/syria_map.jpg satellite maps (awesome source for satellite maps of any kind in fact): http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_set.php?categoryID=2139 Current Syrian Army info. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/syria/army.htm Syrian Air force http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Air_Force List of Soviet tanks (basic, scroll down for modern MBTs) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_soviet_tanks#Heavy_tanks_2 The modern Russian army (I'm assuming here that since it is a fictional game set in the future, BFC may incorporate some more units into the Syrian arsenal, perhaps of Russian origin) http://warfare.ru/ Stryker unit soldier's blog (Iraq, of indirect relevance but interesting nonetheless) http://bet.iline.cz/~mk/MIRROR/cbftw.blogspot.com/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbott Posted October 10, 2005 Author Share Posted October 10, 2005 Here are some links with useful information I have been gathering from the posters to this Forum. They range in scope from The United States Central Intelligence Agency to a Syrian Blogger. From the US Army and Marine websites to Wargaming websites. No claim to political correctness is made and I have not had time to read in detail all of the information included. Use at your own risk. CIA-The world fact book- Syria Lots of interesting and useful information. Link Syria Topography of the Areas Surveyed in Syria Link City populations, Syria web page General information and photos, Syria web page Amarji - A Heretic's Blog Current and General information on Syria. (social) “This is the blog haven of Syrian author Ammar Abdulhamid, the place where he gets to express his thoughts and vent his frustration with regard to the ever so pretentious march of human folly. In this, he seeks to tread ever so carefully and lightly so as to avoid the usual pitfalls of megalomania and cynicism in which authors living in feverish times tend, customarily, to fall. Will he succeed? But then, and with an introduction like this, perhaps his fate is already sealed.” web page Stryker embedded correspondent Iraq The Battle For Mosul IV web page Deuce Four Recon Photos 1-25th ID 1-24 Infantry Regiment web page US Army Field Manuals (You will need to register) web page 2nd Bn. 5th. Marines Infantry training website. Good stuff here! web page Wargaming modern equipment information web page Tank protection levels Syrian and US. Tank armor and ammunition. web page US Army military fact file Weapon and vehicle information. web page Modern Russian armor page web page The Syrian military Report from 2001. web page RPG-7/RPG-7V/RPG-7VR Rocket Propelled Grenade Launcher (Multi-purpose weapon) web page [ October 09, 2005, 07:11 PM: Message edited by: Abbott ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangerousdave Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 Originally posted by gunnersman: It is interesting, there is no one below the rank of E3 in a Stryker Brigade. According to the above graphic. That's just PFC, which is attained rather quickly. When I was in, I started at that just because I had college credits at the time. I'm assuming its still the same. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 Thanks for the additional links! As for the M249... best we can figure is that the hard box magazines are seen as an emergency measure. Standard is a saddle mag of some sort. You do see a lot of hard ones around in other armies, but it appears the US Army and Marines have favored the soft bags. Somewhere in my collection of info I have some evaluation reports on modified versions currently in use with Swedish and South African forces. From what I can tell there is now domestic US production of these bags, for both M249 and M240. They sure are showing up a lot in recent OIF photos, that's for sure. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnO Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 Will the ESV have rollers/blades mounted on the front to clear minefields/ fill in ditches? What about the Mortar Section, will they be able to dismount the 60mm from the vehicle. Yes I know that the mortar vehicles have 120mm mortars. And they carry the 60mm for dismount fighting. JohnO 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve McClaire Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 I haven't kept up on this, but I recall reading last year that the MGS (mobile gun system) version of the Stryker was pretty much a total failure and was never produced beyond a few test models. The vehicle just isn't big enough to handle the 105mm gun, and there were serious heat / blast issues when it was fired. They may be on the published TO&E but they've never been fielded to my knowledge. Does anyone have any more recent information on this? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 As of 5 days ago, Curtis_Wright was awarded the contract for building the gun system and auto-loader. I doubt they are building it for a system that has been cabcelled. Deployment for the MGS is Fiscal Year 2007, which would be sometime in Late 2006 or early 2007. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve McClaire Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 Cool. Maybe BFC will model the blast effects on friendlies w/in ~400m of the MGS when it fires, and the damage it does to it's own internal electronic equipment like night vision systems. Though to be fair, they should model the blast effects of modern tank guns too ... being outside an Abrahms when it fires is supposed to be pretty unpleasant. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 IIRC, the MGS uses the same M68 gun that was on the M-60 and early M-1 tanks. Did those guns have a problem with unsafe decible levels too? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 Remember, the reports about gun jammings and balance problems were from late 2003 and early 2004. The gun and autoloader have been re-designed. If you look at the latest test firings, look at the barrel and see how it has changed. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve McClaire Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 Originally posted by fytinghellfish: IIRC, the MGS uses the same M68 gun that was on the M-60 and early M-1 tanks. Did those guns have a problem with unsafe decible levels too? Due to the recoil problems they had to put a specially designed muzzle break on the M68 to mount it on the MGS. This was said to have increased blast and noise significantly, though I assume there's still a safety zone for the original weapon too. But it is (hopefully) all academic if they've gone with a new design. 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.