c3k Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Gents, Last night watching (nevermind) they stated that the total UK production of Warrior IFV's was 789 units. That's a lie. As of this morning, I have singlehandedly directed my 800th Warrior's destruction. (Piccadilly Circus is the culprit. Thanks! ) Based on the combat life expectancy of any Warrior given to me, if that 789 figure were real, the Brits would only be planning a 6 day war. Based on how many I use in CMSF, the REAL production must be classified. Ken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 They rebuild them from the scattered pieces and patch any holes with tar and putty. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 There's a reason they only carry 30 rounds of HE. They never survive long enough to shoot more than that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 There is something fishy about the survivability/lethality equation there, although there is also the possibility that you're not using them properly, or the sheer uberness of the British soldier isn't showing through. Of course, in real life where there are hostile armour forces about, Warriors don't go anywhere without a whole bunch of Challenger 2s. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggum Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 I'am only use them for transport and covering fire, if i think there are ATGM's, RPG's or enemy tanks then its infantery first... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 About Warrior production, that reminds me in CMBB I managed to destroy Germany's entire production run of Ferdinands several times over 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 I don't know. I don't lose that many warriors, Scimitars OTOH. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocal Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 On the other end of the spectrum, I rediscovered just how tough Brads are. http://img25.imageshack.us/i/bradtough1t.jpg/ http://img62.imageshack.us/i/bradtough2q.jpg/ First picture driver was wounded by unk ATGM, hence the two man crew and ten passenger seats. In the second picture, both Brads took hits from late model RPGs and kept it moving without loss or significant damage. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Ah... ERA makes all the difference I remember some footage of a Bradley by either a river or a canal in downtown Baghdad during the initial foray into the city. It got hit by an RPG on its rear right flank (IIRC) and you could see the burn out of the round and the ERA block/s. The Brad backed up, dropped its ramp, then the crunchies came out and made short work of whoever fired it. The Brad was completely operational. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dietrich Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 *shrug* Once an ERA-equipped Warrior of mine withstood at least four hits from SPG-9 and RPG rounds on its starboard side, but then a last SPG-9 round made it blow up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocal Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 *shrug* Once an ERA-equipped Warrior of mine withstood at least four hits from SPG-9 and RPG rounds on its starboard side, but then a last SPG-9 round made it blow up. "Sounds like a design flaw to me!" In case some of you guys don't understand where that comes from: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 The link got a chuckle out of me. As the old saying goes, its funny 'cause its true. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dietrich Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 *shrug* Once an ERA-equipped Warrior of mine withstood at least four hits from SPG-9 and RPG rounds on its starboard side, but then a last SPG-9 round made it blow up. "Sounds like a design flaw to me!" In case some of you guys don't understand where that comes from: As often as my Bradleys and Warriors (even ERA-equipped ones) get knocked out by single RPG-7 rounds, it was refreshing to see one take more hits without internal damage or passenger casualties. The ironic thing, though, is that the Warrior in question only took that many SPG/RPG rounds in the first place because the first SPG round wrecked its starboard tracks. Quite the vid. At times I was laughing, at times I was staring in dismay. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackMoria Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 My god, that link made me laugh so hard I spit my drink all over my screen. My wife worked in PMO (Project Management Office) for the Department of National Defence. From what she told me, the 'thinking' of project management personnel wasn't far off from what the link lampooned. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatdog Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Ironically, it was the Bradley that only made it into service after a number of fudges and fixes when it was found that even an innoucous RPG hit could trigger catastrophic explosions, to the detriment of those inside... Warriors aren't useless and can even knock out MBTs, but seem to be very fragile and often get smoked by Warsaw Pact IFVs in 1v1s. They pulled their weight on the second to last campaign battle: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocal Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 1. Impressive. 2. www.fraps.com 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatdog Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 I usually use Irfan, but the game wouldn't let me. The picture was taken via cellphone. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 For single screenshots be sure to try Ye Olde Printscreen, Alt-Tab out and paste in to what graphics program you prefer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 I normally use Etch a Sketch to capture screenshots. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethaface Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 how are warriors better in taking out a MBT versus any bradley (even the aluminum ones)? the 30mm isn't that powerfull in my experience; especially compared against TOWI/II 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryujin Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 how are warriors better in taking out a MBT versus any bradley (even the aluminum ones)? the 30mm isn't that powerfull in my experience; especially compared against TOWI/II He didn't say better, but that they can take out an MBT (generally a big complaint against the warrior). Compared to an ATGM the 30mm is a spitball, but if you can get a rear or sometimes a side shot you can do damage. Usually best done with 2 or so warriors so you can concentrate fire. Far from ideal, but it can be done. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 What I don't understand is that how Bradley and Warrior of the 1980's can weigh over 10 tons more than BMP-1 of the 1960's yet basic functionality is the same: you bring 7 dismounts to the battlefield, fire a few shots, get hit and explode. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatdog Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 What I don't understand is that how Bradley and Warrior of the 1980's can weigh over 10 tons more than BMP-1 of the 1960's yet basic functionality is the same: you bring 7 dismounts to the battlefield, fire a few shots, get hit and explode. Because in the real world, the Bradley and Warrior have vastly superior fire control systems and the troops aren't squished in like sardines? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 But does that explain the 40% extra weight? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Americans are fat, are they not? There's your extra 10 tons right there. 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.