Jump to content

Leos with AMAP-ADS in CMSF:NATO?

Recommended Posts

If, big IF, that has even a 50-75% success rate against Kornet style ATGMs, as well as RPGs it should be mounted on every tank and AFV in the inventory ASAP.

How does it do against top attack missiles?

Does it have any effect on KE rounds?

How Jammable is the radar, and how much does it interfere with other vehicle electronics systems?

Price would be nice to know too?

The armies creation of a EW MOS for inclusion in line units is looking brighter by the second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it should be mounted on every tank and AFV in the inventory ASAP.

I have a couple questions about these 'Trophy'-like systems. What's the electronic footprint? How far away can the signal be picked up? Could the enemy track your unit's movements simply by tracking the electronic signature? Like in Star Trek - "Captain, I'm detecting three aproaching Klingon cruisers!"

Second question: the effect on the crew. If there's a scanning microwave radar involved it sounds like a commander sticking his head out a hatch would find his braincase nuked like frozen burritto. Other micowave emitters like the Prowler aircrafter literally line their cockpits in gold to shield the crew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because of the time frame of 2008, there is no operational deployment of such systems so it most likely will not be in the NATO module.

We haven't been told the timeframe the CMSF 2 will encompass, so it is a possibility but that question is best put to the developers and I would guess that those sort of decisions haven't been made or are not for discussion at this time. They still have the British module, NATO module, a rumoured 'Red' module and CM:N on their plate so CMSF 2 is ways down the road.

Edit: As it stands now, Blue has as a fist full of trump cards and the only real edge that Syrian forces have is the advance ATGMs and tons of RPGs. Assuming even a pessimistic success rate for anti AT weapons of 50%, that means Syrians have their own real advantage reduced by 50%. That means that game is more like kicking puppies at that point for Blue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be old-fashioned, but I wouldn't mind not seeing this sort of über-high-tech stuff in CMx2. It's the same reason why hypertechnological future warfare games don't appeal to me -- sometimes, technology can be too advanced, so advanced that it seems to take the fun out of it. (That's kinda why I save my Javelins for instances when I'm facing actual MBTs and I have not much otherwise in the way of AT assets.) Similarly, neither WW1 nor the Korean War have never interested me as much as simply WW2 -- in the former, technology was underdeveloped (though it did see the dawn of aerial combat), and tactics were appalling; in the latter, technology was pretty much the same as in WW2, as were the tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think "uber tech" would be the word to describe Hard kill defence, the Soviets have had the same system for their tanks for decades known as "Drozd" and "ARENA". "Trophy" was going to be bought from Israel by the US but then they decided not to because they're making their own one now "Quick Kill" (which is very fancy pants because it uses little missiles that shoot out and blow up on the proectile instead of just spraying fragments at it).

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.

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...