Jump to content

Recommended Posts

this was asked before, but i think we never got an answer from BFC.

what kind of weapons do we get in "technicals"? i guess at least HMGs are certainly in. recoilless rifles are quite likely as well. what about AGS-17, ATGM or "RPG-taxi" variants? if we ever get AA guns or on-board mortars, perhaps variants for those as well?

what about "technicals" themselves? will they all be pickups, or do we perhaps get trucks as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Cpl Steiner:

I will be happy with a single technical model mounting a medium or heavy MG. Then I can realise my dreams of a Black Hawk Down scenario!

Steve, will you at least consider consider such a technical for the USMC module?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

We're not doing very much with technicals. Against light forces, such as the conflicts in Africa, they can be somewhat effective. But against even a dismounted US infantry force they're pretty much toast as soon as they show up. It's tough for us to justify putting the time into things which are effectively useless.

But what about red on red! Like Speedy said. And besides, even in blue on red it would be great to see them turned into toast.

There are so many possibilities for great gameplay for scenarios within the lighter infantry category. Red on red will probably be more fun than having a bunch of guys hunkered down waiting for the airstrike to come in.

Seriously, AS A GAME, people can have a lot of fun with mobile infantry operations between relatively balanced forces in urban areas. Technicals are perfect support there.

btw those guys on the technical in the first pic should really wear seatbelts. Looks dangerous tongue.gif

[ March 31, 2007, 12:15 AM: Message edited by: CMplayer ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Wow.

I'm amazed at the physical differences between the U.S. 105mm recoilless gun (above) and the Russian/Syrian/Iranian 73mm recoilless gun. I did not expect the gun round to look like that.

Photo from Fallugha, found on the net

fallujahba29gz.jpg?t=1177527673

[ April 25, 2007, 12:45 PM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by MikeyD:

Wow.

I'm amazed at the physical differences between the U.S. 105mm recoilless gun (above) and the Russian/Syrian/Iranian 73mm recoilless gun. I did not expect the gun round to look like that.

Photo from Fallugha, found on the net

fallujahba29gz.jpg?t=1177527673

Not an expert on these things - but it looks to me like an RPG7 round with a silver painted toilet roll tube stuck to the end with black PVC tape.

Could be wrong though.... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would we do without Google? ;)

U.S. troops (Marines by the helmet emblem?) 'testing' (ahem) 73mm recoilless gun in Afghanistan. The gun's round, though smaller diameter than an RPG's 85(?)mm warhead, is a kinda rocket/shell hybrid that's said to have twice the penetration, twice the velocity, and more than twice the practical range. And there's apparently a LOT of them in Afghanistan. Funny how I never even knew of its existance til last week!

By the way, can anyone tell the nationality of the chap in back by the unusual camou clothing? Brit perhaps?

SPG9Round.jpg?t=1177687413

[ April 27, 2007, 08:44 AM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MikeyD,

Your problem is likely that you know the weapon as an SPG-9 and don't think of it in terms of being a 73mm recoilless rifle. Another common one there would be the B-10, which the much nastier SPG-9

replaced.

B-10

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-10_recoilless_rifle

SPG-9 (Note incredibly short setup time--less than a minute!)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPG-9

Regards,

John Kettler

[ April 28, 2007, 01:39 AM: Message edited by: John Kettler ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...