Rangoon Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Is there a real-world explanation for why the C2 is so poor for the mobile gun system Stykers? The chain of command links are lit red, except for their own group of vehicles. And when you select one of them, the rest of the units around disappear (on iron difficulty). Why would this be? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 If you don't mind a humorous response, the electronics in the vehicle are probably fried. Overheated, locking up shutting down, not working to spec. A year and a half ago a trade journal posted a scathing article named "New Stryker Sucking." Pentagon's response was (apparently) to pull all public domain photos of MGS under the theory that news outlets wouldn't print stories without accompanying photos. No, that's not the 'real' annswer to your question. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Not sure it means much but looking at pictures of it there doesn't seem to be real good all round vision from the cupolas. They are all down below the gun itself. Might be a factor ? Does it make a difference if the unit is closed up or not? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangoon Posted July 27, 2011 Author Share Posted July 27, 2011 Does it make a difference if the unit is closed up or not? I will try that next time I have a chance. Good idea. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Here's a rare pict of MGS in action, I think at the start of its deployment: I just did a quick look. All green dots in the editor. Started a QB and all green dots for MGS there too. If it a scenario then its dependent on if there's a necessary chain of command for the vehicles to link to. Often Battalion commanders are sent into 'exile' (3 hour reinforcements for a 1 hour game) in order to keep the C&C without the bodies on the map. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangoon Posted July 28, 2011 Author Share Posted July 28, 2011 I tried the "open up" function and it definitely improved situational awareness. It appears the only thing they are aware of when turned it is a small visual cone in front. When turned out, SA goes up dramatically. I'm still learning what affect radio communications has across units. I would think communications to/from this MGS vehicle would be better than they are. Or maybe the way it's simulated isn't yet making sense to me (timing, accuracy, etc.). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 Certainly be opened up make a huge difference for AFV's I have cleaned up a number of times fighting closed down tanks. But the Radio link seems to be a worry. Could the MGS's be under a different commander? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackladder Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 That's odd that Stryker MGS have poor C2, given that they should all have integrated IVIS/FBCB2 systems. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 Does it have IVIS? I can only find references to that system in the M1A2 ????? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangoon Posted July 28, 2011 Author Share Posted July 28, 2011 I'm still learning about how C2 works and what I should/shouldn't be seeing. I'll do more digging. I'm not implying there is something wrong with my game; just surprised how poor the MGS's SA is compared to other units. I do recall seeing a red connection to the first superior, but will try to confirm that again with my current mission. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 You'll notice there's a (in real life swiveling) optical box located above the main gun. That's the TC's primary method for head-up wide angle viewing because out-of-hatch heads-up involved a steel wall to his immediate left. It was the electronics for this that tended to overheat and lock up during summer deployment. That would really really make situational awareness problematic during an engagement. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangoon Posted July 31, 2011 Author Share Posted July 31, 2011 That all makes sense. I can understand now why the situational awareness is so poor in the MGS. I guess it just coincided with that unit also managing to lose contact with its superior somehow. I haven't seen that problem lately; at least any more than with other units. I just thought it must have been related. And it makes sense in that they can only know so precisely where other units are, if they can't see them directly. Although I thought they all had a GPS link and could see other units on a geo-referenced moving map. And maybe they can. The question mark just means no LOS? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Although I thought they all had a GPS link and could see other units on a geo-referenced moving map. And maybe they can. The question mark just means no LOS? That is correct. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 They have a data link, GPS is a passive system that provides your own location not communication. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangoon Posted July 31, 2011 Author Share Posted July 31, 2011 So I guess the question mark for friendly units would coincide precisely with the location of the actual unit in the case of a working data link but not LOS. It is just a limitation of the icon system that it doesn't show which unit is there (since that would be known through data link, not unknown). But for other units, which don't have a data link, the question mark may not reflect the actual location of the non-LOS unit since LOS is the only way to know exactly where and what it is (which explains why they bounce around or disappear once the original unit is deselected). Sound about right? I wish there was an elegant way for the question mark to also show what unit the selected unit THINKS is being represented by said question mark. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 I don't really know how the IVIS works, it could be a continuous real time set up in shich case you'd know where your mates where pretty much all the time, or it could send updates every few minutes or so. It would also depend on the range of the data link, if a unit goes out of range does the last known position stay on the unit? I actually find all the question makes really annoying. I'd rather use my memory to recall where enemy units had been seen and only have displayed current info that showed a definite sighting and recognition, a sighting that had not yet been fully id'ed (like a tank but we don't know what type) and a suspected contact (like sounds or suspect movement) Dare I say it? Like CM1 used to do :eek: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ermolov Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 I don't really know how the IVIS works, it could be a continuous real time set up in shich case you'd know where your mates where pretty much all the time, or it could send updates every few minutes or so. It would also depend on the range of the data link, if a unit goes out of range does the last known position stay on the unit? I actually find all the question makes really annoying. I'd rather use my memory to recall where enemy units had been seen and only have displayed current info that showed a definite sighting and recognition, a sighting that had not yet been fully id'ed (like a tank but we don't know what type) and a suspected contact (like sounds or suspect movement) Dare I say it? Like CM1 used to do :eek: IVIS is an outdated BLUEFOR tracker from the mid 90s that was on the M1A2. FBCB squared is its evolution. Only real useful thing with it was getting a quick grid to what you lase to call for fire. Other than that, in practice it was widely ignored by the operator but praised by the commanders. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 So FBCB2 is the system in use today? What comms link does it use? Does it go through the mounted vehicles' normal comms set up or does it have it's own setup? Is it an automated thing or is it subject to the operator sending a message ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ermolov Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 So FBCB2 is the system in use today? What comms link does it use? Does it go through the mounted vehicles' normal comms set up or does it have it's own setup? Is it an automated thing or is it subject to the operator sending a message ? FBCB2 is a stand alone piece of equipment that works in conjunction with a PLGR and EPLARS. The PLGR provides the positioning and the EPLARS is the data link. It is also connected to the intercom system so it can alert you if you are with in x meters of a reported enemy, but this is normally disconnected do to being extremely annoying, especially being near a minefield or something. It is a separate component from the radios. The data link and positioning is constant, but if you want to make a spot report or cff or something you need to send the message. In practice it is best used for navigation, as you see where you are on a map or sat picture in real time, and sending some of your daily reports like orange reports(supply status) to the PSG so he can send it to the 1SG. A lot of the other stuff it too time intensive to do in contact so your hand mic/boom mic is still the best. IVIS used the same data link system, but was like a 486 processor compared to some hardcore gaming computer of the FBCB2 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.