Super Duty Pickups???

[Lanzfeld]

Just had my 240 gunner unload over 140 rounds into an abandon pickup truck from 6 meters range and the pickup stayed green. I did a ceasefire to look at the pickup and it was yellow (damaged??).

Really??? I know of no pickup that can withstand that much 7.62 from that close. This thing should have been kaput after 10 to 20 rounds of 7.62 (probably less).

Bug?

Anyone ever notice the uncanny ability of these trucks to absorb lead and keep running? I always suspected but this really highlights the fact that SOMETHING is wrong here.

[gautrek]

So you have never seen Top Gear then.you can't kill a Toyota pick up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrk6vsb77xk

[Elmar Bijlsma]

You aren't a big Top Gear fan, are you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrk6vsb77xk

If anything, their capacity to withstand damage is undermodelled.

I wonder, did someone ever mod the pickup to look like the one from Top Gear? That'd be a laugh.

[Lanzfeld]

Impressive....

Not the same as 140 rounds going through it but impressive.

Granted.....video is not exactly same situation but you get the point. The car is killed.

[Dietrich]

Not to derail the humor (I too am a Top Gear fan), but I think the key to the problem Lanzfeld brought up is that the pickup was abandoned (i.e., "dismounted"). In other words, if the pickup were still crewed when it came under fire from the M240, it would have been knocked out with a few bursts, and the surviving crew would have bailed out, rendering it "destroyed".

[cabal23]

I am currently play testing a scenario with a bunch of trucks and I think it is crazy how much damage a truck takes. I had two platoons shredding an approaching truck. Hits registered everywhere as indicated by the animations and sounds. He rolled in reverse after he started getting pinged as TWO platoons of Brits all fired at him. He reversed out of sight after a full minute of fire. WHAT! This wasn't isolated, I have seen it a lot since I started play testingthis particular scenario. Trucks seem way over armored. A few bullets in an engine blocks can end a vehicle in real life. Why do they seem to take so much damage here?

[Clavicula_Nox]

I am currently play testing a scenario with a bunch of trucks and I think it is crazy how much damage a truck takes. I had two platoons shredding an approaching truck. Hits registered everywhere as indicated by the animations and sounds. He rolled in reverse after he started getting pinged as TWO platoons of Brits all fired at him. He reversed out of sight after a full minute of fire. WHAT! This wasn't isolated, I have seen it a lot since I started play testingthis particular scenario. Trucks seem way over armored. A few bullets in an engine blocks can end a vehicle in real life. Why do they seem to take so much damage here?

You probably missed the gas cap. Everybody knows you have to hit the gas cap.

[Lanzfeld]

You probably missed the gas cap. Everybody knows you have to hit the gas cap.

I forget...

GTA3?

[Lethaface]

lolz. of course 140 close range MG rounds fired at any important part in a car will render it useless.

However in-game some things are abstracted. 100 rounds going through the windshield cause no considerable damage, nor do rounds that only perforate the body work without hitting crucial mechanical parts.

In 1.21 I have just seen plenty of hiluxes blow up, in the British campaign scenario where you have to escort a convoy. Although I had 30MM as well as MG's, I'm quite sure that some 'trucks' were taken out by MG fire only.

EDIT: An engine disabled by bullets would mean a mobility kill (yellow), not a 'destroyed' vehicle. Bullets tend to kill all passengers of a vehicle apart from tearing up vital parts, they do not lead to the total destruction of a vehicle. That unless bullets repeatedly hit any part of the gas tank so that escaping fuel is brought into contact with sparks from impacting bullets upon which it ignites. Apart from that I don't see bullets taking out cars beyond a mobility kill. That's what destroyed engines/tires/etc technically are after all.

[John Kettler]

A truck consists of lots of noncritical areas, some important ones, and a few vital ones. Vietnam War experience interdicting trucks on the Ho Chi Minh Trail found that while 40 mm HE demolished the cargo, it took a 105 mm shellburst to destroy truck and cargo. Most of a truck, though, can be shot up and not affect basic operation. Kill probability is derived from the ratio between presented area and vulnerable area, which is why random shots into a truck generally don't do much. Also, many parts of the truck can be hit, but won't yield a prompt kill. In fact, it might take minutes to hours, depending on the severity of the damage. Contrary to Hollywood, fuel tanks take a lot of work to ignite, and a truck can go quite a way with a leaking tank. By contrast, smash the distributor, and the truck is finished--100% M-Kill. Bottom line? Trucks are much tougher to kill than most people think.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Dietrich]

Good observations, John and Lethaface. To correlate your observations to CMSF: As far as I've ever observed, the weapon of any given technical (DshK, PKM, or SPG-9) has very limited traverse, which is more or less limited to the vehicle's front quarter. As such, technicals tend to have their front ends facing the enemy. This presents a relatively narrow but tall target. The windshield would tend to protect the driver and passenger from light caliber (i.e., 5.56mm) small-arms fire, while the engine and front body would tend to protect the driver's lower two-thirds from medium (i.e., 7.62mm) fire. In other words, the part of a truck usually facing enemy (Blue) fire is the one which will both most likely yield a mobility kill (the engine) and most likely provide a modicum of protection to the occupants (rather than the gunner and loader).

EDIT: However, I still think that the "problem" Lanzfeld noted at the outset is a matter of a technical's crew bailing out before the vehicle has suffered significant damage. In other words, I think it's a pseudo-bug. Also, the TacAI tends to keep hammering at dismounted-but-not-destroyed technicals even when such serves little tactical purpose.

[Lanzfeld]

John.....respect you and all but...

140 rounds of 7.62 from 6 meters is a truck kill. No way around it.

[Ryujin]

I don't know how well the windshield would stop 5.56, but maybe if the angle is right or it's very far away. Also from the front people have would a tendency to duck down behind the engine when under fire which would stop a lot of stuff (I don't think that's abstracted though).

On related note..

Guy charges a SWAT team in an SUV, takes tons of rounds point blank (lots of handgun cal, maybe some .223) and sustains only an arm wound.

[John Kettler]

Lanzfeld,

In order to even semi analyze this issue, it's important to know the truck type, angle and exposure relative to the shooter, diesel or gasoline powered, engine running or engine off (huge differences in terminal effects), fuel injection or carburetor, ammo type/s and breakdown (ball, tracer, AP, AP-I, etc.), whether firer and/or truck is moving, aimed fire or spray, short burst or long (muzzle climb and yaw), shooter's experience level, fatigue state, morale, target motion, if any, relative to shooter (stopped, opening range, closing range (run over threat?)) and much more. A nontrivial, complex problem!

Regards,

John Kettler

[ChrisND]

Lanzfeld,

In order to even semi analyze this issue, it's important to know the truck type, angle and exposure relative to the shooter, diesel or gasoline powered, engine running or engine off (huge differences in terminal effects), fuel injection or carburetor, ammo type/s and breakdown (ball, tracer, AP, AP-I, etc.), whether firer and/or truck is moving, aimed fire or spray, short burst or long (muzzle climb and yaw), shooter's experience level, fatigue state, morale, target motion, if any, relative to shooter (stopped, opening range, closing range (run over threat?)) and much more. A nontrivial, complex problem!

Regards,

John Kettler

Speaking as someone who has actually lit up on a pickup truck with an M240, 140 rounds hitting it and the thing still running is overkill. It's that simple.

[dan/california]

I have noticed that 25mm from Bradleys does it on the first burst every time, though.

I have scratched my head a time or two about how much 50 cal it can take though.....

[slug88]

Speaking as someone who has actually lit up on a pickup truck with an M240, 140 rounds hitting it and the thing still running is overkill. It's that simple.

But it wasn't running, as indicated in the initial post it was immobilized.

[ChrisND]

But it wasn't running, as indicated in the initial post it was immobilized.

Which is dead for a pickup. Tank and APC crews ditch their vehicles and the game writes it off for simply getting knocked around hard. Why should a pickup be any different?

[Ryujin]

I did some testing, a M240B HMMWV vs a PK technical at 200m, head on.

Generally the HMMWV killed 2 to 3 occupants within the first 40-50 rounds (obviously taking it out of action)

However since the AI sees fit to make it extra dead, it took about 120 rounds (in total) to kill the engine (the AI however didn't know it and would keep firing, I didn't wait around to see how many hundreds of rounds it would take to set it on fire). Keep in mind the AI didn't aim for the engine, a few tight bursts happened to go in, but the bursts were all over the front of the truck. Maybe half went in the engine, or at least that area. That probably makes a big difference in the number of rounds to kill the engine, considering the AI is just shooting "at" the truck, they seem happy enough if they're just ventilating the bodywork.

[John Kettler]

Had a longer post, but it got eaten in a freeze and aftermath.

Lanzfeld,

Wanted to know how the truck was oriented relative to the shooter.

Normal Dude,

Always good to get first person accounts!

dan/california,

Considering the 25 mm M792 HEI-T has a radius of effect of 5 meters for blast/frag/incendiary effects, I'm not surprised.

Dietrich,

Am surprised about the mount traverse limits you gave, considering such shots as these:

http://warisboring.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/somalia_technicals-1.jpg

http://membres.lycos.fr/France40/techphot.html

10 minute vid from pioneering doc on technicals

http://www.journeyman.tv/?lid=8936

Ryujin,

Love to see tests!

Regards,

John Kettler

[Lanzfeld]

Truck was about 90 degrees to shooter.

I, too, own a 5.56, a 7.62, and a 7.62x39 for that matter and I have shot quite a few objects but not a vehicle. (Ohh....sounds like fun though!!!)

Can someone put 140 rounds through the upper truckbed walls at 20 feet and the truck still run? Sure. But in combat nobody would do that. We are talking about 10 to 14 seconds of "end of Rambo movie fire" here and that would be spread around the whole truck. The shooter???...tired or awake, frail or gungho, wearing body armor or a thong...truck is dead.

But I didnt know that the yellow state after the ceasefire meant the truck was dead. I thought it meant the truck was just immobile. If it does mean truck is dead then there is no problem.

Although, like a few people here, I question the amount of .50 cal the trucks can take sometimes.

EDIT: Thinking about it though...if a truck is immobile then what good is it? What is the difference between immobile and destroyed? (not on fire).

[John Kettler]

Lanzfeld,

Now you know why I try not to hate the MythBusters! Adam and Jamie get to do so many cool things, such as their failed effort to set a Cadillac ablaze/blow it up even when firing tracer from a BAR directly into an already leaking fuel tank. Mind, the distance to the target was considerably greater than what we're talking here!

I don't know what any special rules may be for armed softskins in CM:SF, but the general CMx1 rule was that an immobilized vehicle could still fight, as long as its weapon worked, but it was iffy because the crew might just bail when immobilized, gun working or not. All to do with the psychology of being a sitting duck! This was also true for tanks, SPs, TDs, etc.

Regards,

John Kettler

[acrashb]

The windshield would tend to protect the driver and passenger from light caliber (i.e., 5.56mm) small-arms fire

[...]

while the engine and front body would tend to protect the driver's lower two-thirds from medium (i.e., 7.62mm) fire.

A windshield will do essentially nothing to reduce the passenger/driver survivability against 5.56. Especially SS109, but even commercial .223 will slide through it - there might be some deflection equal to a couple of inches... but we aren't talking about precision headshots.

The engine itself might stop ball 7.62 for a time (cover degrades), but the "front body" might as well not be there. Sheet metal is not armour, whether it's the front fender or the firewall.

Just about any hit to the engine, from the front, will quickly or immediately m-kill the vehicle. Belts, water pumps, computers, linkages, water jackets, plug wires, radiator, oil pan, transmission (if 4x4 or fwd), you name it. There aren't any "spare" parts or areas up there in modern vehicles.

If you have access to a friend with a .223 rifle and a piece of .25" sheet steel, set it up at 100 yards (no closer) and then retrieve it with nice round holes cleanly punched out. Eye-opening.

[stikkypixie]

Death clock?

[Ryujin]

I think the problem is not so much how many rounds it takes to kill it but the definition of killed.

CMSF and the AI consider it killed when it's burning scrap. I think this is because it will not be considered "dead" until it is completely useless. 100 rounds will kill the truck, but the mounted weapon is still usable. So although the crew is probably dead or fleeing, you could still get back on the gun and start shooting. You can see the same thing with the AFVs, you can bail out of an tank with the engine fried and the AI will still shoot it up.