Will the skies get any more crowded with the Marines Module?

[birdstrike]

First, I'm more than happy about the addition of trucks to the Marines Module (actually BF could release a module "Just Trucks" and I'd be happy, still ),

nevertheless, I was wondering if there was any word whether we will see some additional blue air support besides AV8s in the upcoming MM, as well.

Some AC-130 maybe? UAVs? Little Nelly?

[Cpl Steiner]

I think AC-130 would be classed as "strategic" rather than "tactical", given how it can obliterate pretty much anything in a km wide area in a single mission. Anyone played COD4 where you get to be an AC-130 crewman in one mission? Boss!

[permanent666]

Originally posted by Cpl Steiner:

Anyone played COD4 where you get to be an AC-130 crewman in one mission? Boss!

do you mean this one:

[Cpl Steiner]

Originally posted by permanent666:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Cpl Steiner:

Anyone played COD4 where you get to be an AC-130 crewman in one mission? Boss!

do you mean this one:

</font>

[Flanker15]

The COD4 gunship mission was pretty funny how they just casually flew an AC-130 enemy territory when they knew that they have fighters and SAMs! Not to mention a helicopter had just been shot down in that very area.

[ June 02, 2008, 04:50 PM: Message edited by: Flanker15 ]

[Field Marshal Blücher]

Originally posted by Flanker15:

The COD4 gunship mission was pretty funny how they just casually flew an AC-130 enemy territory when they new that they have fighters and SAMs! Not to mention a helicopter had just been shot down in that very area.

Well, you could say things like that about the entire game. For instance, "Why the [expletive of your choice] is Marine Force Recon conducting frontal assaults in urban terrain in broad daylight?" Anyway, getting a little off-topic here.

I too would like to see some new air units. F/A-18s and A-6s would be as welcome as Av-8Bs for me.

-FMB

[ June 02, 2008, 04:49 PM: Message edited by: Field Marshal Blücher ]

[gibsonm]

A-6’s?

Why do you expect to see an aircraft that was retired in 1997 still operating in the futurish time frame of CM:SF?

What next F-14’s?

[Will7813]

Originally posted by Cpl Steiner:

I think AC-130 would be classed as "strategic" rather than "tactical", given how it can obliterate pretty much anything in a km wide area in a single mission. Anyone played COD4 where you get to be an AC-130 crewman in one mission? Boss!

I disagree. Many times I have read of AC-130s providing direct CAS support to troops on the ground, sometimes regulars but mroe often SF. They are not a strategic asset - they are not deplyed as a first stike or bombing aircraft. They are used when air superiority is gained and they can operate freely in support of ground forces; if there were any enemy aircraft flying I would be very worried were I in an AC-130.

Will

[Field Marshal Blücher]

Originally posted by gibsonm:

A-6’s?

Why do you expect to see an aircraft that was retired in 1997 still operating in the futurish time frame of CM:SF?

What next F-14’s?

Well, I wasn't aware that they were retired. Thanks for the correction!

-FMB

[gibsonm]

No worries.

They are pretty “iconic” as US Navy strike aircraft (just like the A-7 Corsiar II) and the F-14 as a US Navy fighter.

Seems the images we get used to just keep on changing.

So its F/A-18 for everything these days.

[afreu]

The only thing I would like to see added is this typical A-10 sound when it surpresses enemy positions with its 30mm maingun.

Like this: http://youtube.com/watch?v=AU32sKRB_uw @ 0:05 & 0:33.

And perhaps for ambience some sounds of aircraft flying overhead when odering CAS.

[Fat Dave]

Sure, having that distinctive ripping sound would make for a more immersive gaming experience, but isn't anyone else a little underwhelmed by the actual in-game damage done with this massive 30 mm gatling gun?

Visually it looks very nice, but I sort of expected a lot more damage, certainly against structures and soft targets.

After watching several videos of several close call A-10 gun runs I am inclined to think that not much would survive this sort of strike.

Out of curiosity, how many passes could an A-10 make while firing 'standard' bursts of its cannon?

[birdstrike]

Never played COD4 myself... last time I saw an AC-130 in a game was waaay back in Jane's Navy Fighters .

The AC-130 certainly packs a whole lot of firepower, though I'd not say it's particuarily more of an strategic asset than any fighter bomber. What makes it seem especially devastating is, I guess, that it's capable of hammering its target pretty much continously while circling above it while, in contrast, other Strike aircraft would have more "pauses" in between their attacks (e.g. make a single pass then turn around and make another).

To include this in the game, however, this would need some change to the usual air strike routines currently used, I reckon.

[birdstrike]

Originally posted by Fat Dave:

Out of curiosity, how many passes could an A-10 make while firing 'standard' bursts of its cannon?

Good question.

Depends on the definition of 'standard'.

I'd say a 2 second window per pass is quite reasonable, which mounts up to 2x 1-second burst or 1x 2 second burst.

Taking that and what wikipedia offers (3900RPM and ~1150 rounds carried), this would sum up to approximately 9 runs.

So it's probably less than that .

[Fat Dave]

Cheers for that bit of math Birdstrike

What is your take on the damage model of it's cannon? Should we be seing immense dust clouds obscuring the target for longer than a few seconds after a pass?

At the moment it feels like it lacks a bit of punch.

[Mishga]

All I ever seem to get is 2000lb bombs when I call in air support. I thought there was a variety of bombs? 500lb 1000lb etc?

[birdstrike]

Dave,

about the dust, I have to admit I never paid much attention to that, but isn't this also related to the ground condtion (wet, dry), like with artillery? I will keep an eye on that.

Mishga,

AFAIK the payload is determined by the scen designer when choosing light, medium or heavy loadout for the aircraft. Picking light or medium should give you lighter bombs or missiles.

[Mishga]

Cheers, Birdstrike. Thanks for the info.

[Lee]

Anything an A-10 is strafing should be getting really messed up. Whether it's a building, vehicles, enemy infantry, etc. If it isn't, then an adjustment should be made on the damage output per burst in CMII. Typical combat strafing runs in an A-10 are 1-2 second bursts, usually no more than 3 seconds at one time. A two second burst equals around 140 rounds, more than enough to take out most things in one go.

And I agree that it would be much better to hear the actual sound of an A-10's gun firing when it makes a strafing run. Fortunately, this would not be hard to do, just play the sound of an A-10 firing it's gun any time a strafing run is made. And it's not a problem getting very good samples of that sound from the many videos available. So hopefully Steve will do this soon, since this one thing on the wish list that is realistic, fun and easy to do.

There should also be considerable dust if the ground conditions are dry from where the rounds are impacting, where it's a point target or a stretched out target (like strafing along the ground at a group of enemy spread out in a line 100 yards long).

[Fat Dave]

After a few test runs with the A-10 in its 'light' support role (where it will use its cannon on several passes before obliterating the target with a bomb) I have observed the following.

Firstly, on an entrenched position in the open, the casualties are surprisingly light. The cannon fire would lash a given area but I have yet to see (what I would expect) an entire squad get obliterated. At most I would lose 2-3 guys in one pass. Given the state of trenches at present, I had expected to see an area hit by cannon fire to be rendered into absolute shreds.

Second, the dust created by such a cannon pass is minimal. I used very dry conditions and although dust would be created by the impacting rounds, it was not large in volume and dissapeared very quick despite the 'no wind' conditions. From what I saw, it would be gone within 10-15 seconds.

Are we perhaps seeing the A-10's damage capability deliberately toned down as to not give the Blue side complete dominance of the battlefield once this bad boy shows up?

For me at least, I feel the feared A-10 lacks punch when using its cannons. Sure, when it drops a bomb, its devastating, but I had hoped for more instant destruction when the 30mm barks up

[Flanker15]

That would probably be because the A-10 cannon isn't that powerful, it's powerful by air gun standard though. You would only get a few casualties if you fired at a squad with it since it has little blast and fragmentation effects and low spread. Thus requiring direct or near hits, with troops spread out you'd not get very good results unless you lined up just right.

It's main use is against light-medium armored vehicles which it does well in CM:SF of course you can't expect it to do anything but annoy a modern T-72 but it will shred a BMP or BRDM in one pass. Bunkers are also killed in one pass and the older tanks can be killed from the rear.

[Fat Dave]

Hmm, it certainly looks pretty powerful Having seen numerous clips showing A-10 cannon passes, not to mention the recent YouTube British A-10 close-call in Afghanistan, I would still expect some serious death and destruction in any area worked over by its 30mm cannon. If not directly hit (Christ, I'd hate to see what that looked like) surely the flying bits of stone, wood etc would create a fairly lethal environment for a nasty couple os seconds?

I can see if troops were adequately dispersed then yes, the potential for absolute destruction would be minimised somewhat. However, if you see how a Syrian squad forms up in a trench, where grenades can take out 2-3 guys if you are unlucky, I would expect a serious (and on target) 30mm cannon pass to chop these guys into rags.

At present I am not seeing a lot of that happening

[Flanker15]

It looks very powerful and flashy because it uses API and HEI rounds which make lots of sparks and smoke when they hit. I will agree that it doesn't work very well in SF like rockets.

[c3k]

The following is from Wikipedia:

"Although the A-10 can carry considerable disposable stores, its primary built-in weapon is the 30 mm GAU-8/A Avenger Gatling gun. One of the most powerful aircraft cannons ever flown, it fires large depleted uranium armor-piercing shells. In the original design, the pilot could switch between two rates of fire: 2,100 or 4,200 rounds per minute.[18] This was changed to a fixed rate of 3,900 rounds per minute.[19] The cannon takes about half a second to come up to speed, so 50 rounds are fired during the first second, 65 or 70 rounds per second thereafter. The gun is accurate; it can place 80% of its shots within a 40-foot (12.4 meter) circle from 4,000 feet (1,220 meters) while in flight.[20] The GAU-8 is optimized for a slant range of 4,000 feet (1,220 m) with the A-10 in a 30 degree dive.[21]

Another view of the A-10's GAU-8 installation.The fuselage of the aircraft is built around the gun.[22] For example, the nose wheel is offset to the right so that the gun's firing barrel at the 9 o'clock position is aligned on the aircraft's centerline. The early A-10s carried 1,350 rounds of 30 mm ammunition, but it was replaced by a 1,174 round drum"

So, we have 1174 rounds fired at a rate of 50 then 65 rounds per second. Assume a 2 second burst; that's 115 rounds. Given 1174 rounds available, the math makes a good argument that there are only 10 bursts of 2 seconds each available. (If it were one long sustained burst, the 50 rounds for the first second followed by a sustained rate of 65 rounds per seconds would yield a trigger time of 18.3 seconds.)

Regards,

Ken

[birdstrike]

btw. if anyone missed that, there is an impressive picture on the wiki page where the gun is compared in size to an old VW beetle.

Probably no longer that impressive when put mext to a modern day SUV, but still...

Gau-8 meets VW