Jump to content

kev2go

Member
  • Content count

    124
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About kev2go

  • Rank
    Squad Leader

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Canada
  • Interests
    Everything and Nothing
  1. When about thermals?

    I'm a bit confused is this a player mod for squad or ....?
  2. Well I was saying more along the lines of If leopards hull is penetrated right hand side Then the crew wont ever have a good day , like never ever. ( as in they be cooked alive and/ or blown up) and possibly the tank ending up with a blown off turret A m1 abrams penetrated in the hull is going facing the death of its driver and a fuel tank fire. Allowing the chance of loader gunner and commander to call it a day.
  3. M1A2 wrong ammo type?

    Um no its a poll based on experience playing a consumer version of tank simulation that is used by various militaries world wide. many of which include former tank crewmen. tankers say that its indeed very good virtual representation of a gunners Fire control systems. so stop the biased cherry picked nonsense. The 2a5/2a6 in 2001 was last gen tech compared to the M1A2 SEP in terms of electronics. yes and so what does that have to with the price of fish? 1:29 - 152 IF Abrams gunners had trouble differentiating friendly and enemy tanks at 2km _+ away with x13 magnification inducing FF incidents in the gulf war ( gen 1 thermals) ., then i doubt you could tell something as small a heat source what was a rabbit with mere x12 magnification or not unless they were right in front of your tank and you switched to day optics to confirm. ( as to not make assumptions) Tell me which tank is a Friendly and which one is the enemy? Oh right you cant. with certainty. with better quality resolution and an option for x50 zoom you would be able to, even at longer distances IFF friend from foe without switching to day sight. unless of course you happened to be gunner on a modernized 2a6 utilizing retrofitted gen 3 thermals. Otherwise Leopards up until few years ago were still using 1st gen thermals up until the 2A6. So otherwise in comparison 2nd gen thermals and x50 magnification would have been far superior to what the 2a6 had in the early 2000s utilizing gen 1 thermals with meager x12 magnification. Plus being a far more digitally integrated platform. to quote This tank is fitted with a digital battlefield management system. It allows commanders to track friendly and hostile forces on the battlefield. This system is near real-time based. Locations of friendly vehicles are constantly updated. This system increases vehicle commander's situational awareness. an embedded version of the US Army's Force XXI command and control architecture (FBCB2) replacing the IVIS, a new Raytheon CITV with second-generation FLIR, commander's display for digital colour terrain maps, DRS Technologies second-generation GEN II TIS thermal imaging gunner's sight with increased range, color driver's integrated display, under armor Auxiliary Power Unit (APU), and a thermal management system for the fighting compartment. Other upgrades to the M1A2's computer systems include: Better microprocessors More memory capacity Better Soldier-Machine Interface (SMI) A new open operating system designed to run the Army's Common Operating Environment (ACOE) software Plus whilst highly vague , its said the M1A2 SEP has a damage diagnostics tool, that tells the commander which part of the armor has X amount of damage, or which mechanical or electrical portions of a tank are malfunctioning allowing faster identification and isolating the specific problem, means the crew will know what to perform an maintenance on without having to poke around ( or if serious enough obviously get sent to a repair depot), al via visual interface. basically its like the sort of feature modern luxury( and even some everman) cars have in recent years. This is yet another features the german leopard 2a6 didn't have in 2001, and probably still doesn't today ( such contemporary features i read would be for the 2a7.2a7+. and M1 is yet again the best MBT in the world with the introduction of the M1A2 SEP V3 https://www.dvidshub.net/news/302498/latest-and-greatest-m1-tank-tested-us-army-yuma-proving-ground The list of improvements is lengthy: improved fire control electronics mean the SEPv3’s gun can shoot faster and more accurately; the engine, drivetrain, and tracks have been updated for higher performance and to support the platform’s weight increase; it may even sport hubcaps and road arms manufactured by way of 3D printing, a facet that is under test here at YPG. “As the technology advances, the tanks have to advance as well,” said Martin Velazquez, test officer. “The SEPv3s have a lot more onboard diagnostics than earlier iterations: they have removable screens that carry the tech manuals that can accomplish a lot of diagnostics on the vehicles without taking it to the shop.” “The Abrams is the best main battle tank on Earth,” said Duda. “The raw mobility that gets you from point A to point B is amazing. The dynamics on the turret, the fire control, and the range it can engage the enemy is phenomenal.” Yes and thats why you got rid of them...... yes it is. US has greater economy. They can afford more expensive toys and more of them even in peace time., and can afford to replace them if a war occurs. They dont necessarily need to go full on production. There are still old cold war M1A1's sitting in storage that can be pulled out and undergo a mass reconstruction and modernization to be brought to M1A2 SEP standards, just like US has been doing to present day. M1A2 was a very limited production tank. Nearly entire fleet are rebuilds of older M1 models. its not that these countries cant afford, they just dont want to. If you truly cant spend at lest 2% GDP being in a military alliance like NATO on a military your a looser. and Germany being #1 European Economic Powerhouse certainly could. And yes I am self critical of my own government for riding off the back of the USA. Its very embarrassing. Lots of crucial capability gaps, like not having any defense against ballistic missiles due to opting out of something that "wasnt needed" https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/policy-says-us-wont-defend-canada-from-missile-attack-norad-general/article36258719/ but hey this is getting political and il leave it at that. Not necessarily the best. Its not just the material that matters, but the armor composition ( what else is it mixed with, how many layers) and how much its angled. but mixed with its NERA arrays it has drastically improved its protection over various iterations when using DU. Non of the export M1A2's use DU, and use tungsten instead, and they are all reported to have inferior protection to thier DU layered contemporaries in US service. DU as a material in Comparison to Tungsten has superior penetrating properties when compared to similar length for ammo, and respectively Similar thickness respectively in terms of armor. IN order to match performance of DU ammo , Germans need the longer , higher velocity L55 120mm with the same ammo, to achieve comparable penetration to contemporary US DU ammo. Tungsten is expensive and a rare material. Uranium is actually cheap and easy to acquire for any nation that had a nuclear weapons program and a large stockpile of nukes ( IE USA and Russia) so for these nations use of depleted uranium for ammunition or even armor composition is economically viable as plentifully available. leopard 2a5/2a6is still able to achieve really good ( possibly better) than M1A2 SEP V1/V2, due to the highly angled hollow wedge shape. turret armor addon. combined with of course the NERA arrays within the main armor.
  4. M1A2 wrong ammo type?

    want to elaborate? the true potential of 125mm gun has been limited due to Russian tank philosophy of making lower profile, smaller tanks, with autoloaders. IN its beggining the 125mm gun was good enough to deal with Most older generation tank threats, but still Russian ammo was limited in potential due to making APSDS from basic steel. These had pretty poor performance against Angled armor relative to Calibre and velocity the ammo was fired at. again material and cruder APFSDS design was the reason for this. Tungsten and especially DU made for better materials than using steel cored ammo. It basically took the development of the 3bm46 Svinets in 1991 to have an advanced composite monobloc designed APFSDS , allowing for a close matching in penetration the US M829A1 performance. its 2 piece ammo, and the T series tanks size prevented a sizable enough auto loader to fit larger ammo types up until the T14 Armata. Fitted with newer higher velocity 125mm 2A82 and larger autoloader allowing T14 to utilize for even more powerful APFSDS types than any of the T90s or modernized T72's could. ( or probably ever will) Natos 120mm guns are far from bad. They were proved to a worthy successor to the 105mm NATO, they are very good guns.The L44 or L55 are hardly inferior to the 2a46 series of 125mm guns.
  5. Right now in tanks as a gunner you point at any target, and the gun sight automatically shows you the exact range for both realism and a balancing point of view, the below change i will suggest will make more sense : when the lasing button is pressed, range is displayed, all the while the Tank's Fire control should simultaneously adjust gun elevation , and provide necessary lead ( when tracking moving target). This mean to hit a target a new target has to be Lased each time. for the fire control to make necessary range adjustments to actually be able to hit targets IRL its not done real time like it is in game. Introduce 2 buttons 1 for Lazing, and another to reset the Laser rangefinder to ZERO distance and at the same time zeroing the gun back down to 0 elevation.
  6. When about thermals?

    the limited counter against FLIR from armored vehicles, Smome screen. adjustments in how Fire control works would mean one cannot laze a tank to have fire control adjust for elevation. YOu can see the tank through smoke, but the laser will give incorrect retuns. US and German tanks from Tank gunner sights will show heat sources via green background. M1A1 SA thermal sights M1A2 SEP Tank Commanders CCITV viewer Thermal sights
  7. Night operations?

    Russian armed forces also have Night vision goggles. and these sort of Night vision optics for small arms are from a soviet era, and could possibly be found in the hands of factions like the Militia as a sort of second hand surplus purchased equipment.
  8. Tank Interiors addition

    IT simple if a loader is manning a MG, then no reloading for your. tank. That will be simulated extra logistics strain of having a 4th crew member whilst Russian tank commander wont have to worry about loader hanging his ass around. that Or simply have an AI loader , given that it may be a bore for a human player to simply stand there in the loaders position waiting to tap a key to load up ammo based on the tank commanders request. and i don't see performance problems being an issue. there are no performance issues from tank interior alone from those other aforementioned examples were Tank interiors were done..
  9. M1A2 wrong ammo type?

    so did i No tank type that i know of would hasve enough rear or side armor to withstand such agtms.
  10. M1A2 wrong ammo type?

    and export M1A1's and even M1A2's have downgraded armor ( No depleted Uranium) An M1A1 without its DU is baiscally like a Cold war 1985 M1A1 in terms of armor profile. So very much in the time frame of the Leopard 2a4, and so would be the M1A1 HA ( 1988) M1A2 will have newer arrays or use other material than DU, so better than downgraded M1A1, but still worse than M1A2's armor fielded by USA. None of this points to how good a tank is. , All these hits are on the flanks of a tank. Its poor crew training, and poor tactical execution on behalf of commanding officers in an asymmetrical combat environment against militias/ insurgents, besides middle east arab armies don't have a good track recording or properly utilizing military equipment. Out numbered Israelis came out on top against the Syrians, Egyptians and Iraiq's combined in the 1973 war.
  11. if added a startup procedure should be automated. ( single switch to start/ shutoff) If people wanted to self startup an aircraft like in IRL they would go play DCS not squad.
  12. Why I dont want Helicopters

    Adding choppers wont make it feel like battlefield. Although not as realistic as arma, helicopters still worked in rising storm 2 vietnam ( not arcade like bf) and given the size of most maps they have more room to spread their rotors. Transport helps wont really a be a problem for balance. I think delicate situation will be with helicopter gunships. Whixh in modern times arent just firing miniguns/cannons or unguided ro kes but have at least some form guided muntions. Apache will at least have a laser guided hellfire. Including radar guided models would certainly be to op against vehicles I think manpads wilp be nessary as a gunship counter
  13. M1A2 wrong ammo type?

    Lol no. These were modification specifically for Sweden. I speak of german leopard 2 and thier exact export derivatives. Leopard 2a4 was more sophisticated when it came to contemporary m1a1 varations due to hunter killer capability. But m1a2 and especially m1a2 sep was more sophisticated than 2a6. When it comes to german 2a6s they are basically just 2a5's but upgraded with the l55. In recent years they start having newer tis sights retrofitted in among some other things but this wasnt the case back in 2001 In a simulator https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/7866-which-is-the-most-effective-tank-in-sb-pro-pe-world-take-ii/ Oh and look at this poll. ( and mind you the Spanish 2e is better armor package than the german 2a6 and has some equivlanet to a us blueforce tracker You can see the m1a2 magnification options from images alone of the gunners station.. Iff. Identifying friend or foe Just because you spot a heatblur doesnt mean you can 100% know it's an enemy tank. Friendly fire incidents occurred in the gulf war because at multiple km away tank gunners had fired on thier isn abrams tanks mistaking them for enemy tanks. 1st generstion thermal imagers didnt have good enough quality which made it difficult to identify tank type at multiple km away. with m1a2 sep had second gen higher resolution thermals , but it was also decided to give up to x50 zoom, to make identify enemy tanks easier. That is a significant advantage. Unlike front hull rack the turret is not only in separate compartment behind blast doors, it has blowout panels attached , making it possible to survive an ammo cook off as long as the penetrating round doesnt make into the crew compartment. No. Driver sits in front and has 2 fuel tanks in the front. And its not a strain like you think because the m1 simply stores more ammo throught the turret than the Leo. The ideal normalization effect for du is underneath 1700 meters per second. There is no real gain going for higher velocity ammo when using du based ammo. Upgrade for s new gun wouldnt ne worth it unless going for a higher calibre gun Ultimaltey they dont use du ammo . Doesnt matter what the excuse itand it comes down to the same thing. L55 isnt a needed upgrade for abrams unless overnight someone decided that du would be a no no. Because us can afford it. Ultimately the engine is quite fuel efficient given it's a gas turbine. You grossly over exaggerate the fuel economy disadvantage. The m1 has a range of 426km. The leopard 2 550km. That's far from being 50% better in fuel efficiency. What should be noted is that in emergency the gas turbine can accept various fuel types from various branches of the us military. So this in fact is a logistical advantage in that regard. Also At the same time the gas turbine gave really good performance for its day. O really? And that's why Germany or any other leopard 2 user is able to outfield the usa with 6000 abrams tanks? One also has to take into consideration that major reason why so many leopards found thier way to export is the political situation. After the breakup of the ussr. Germany had huge stocks military equipment that theycouldnt justify keeping in service, given there was no more Soviet threat. They sold off bunch surplus military vehicles including loads of surplus leopards ( notice how most exported vsriantwas the leopard 2a4) at factory price ( basically no profit) just to get rid of them from inventory. Basically a deal too good to refuse for many prospective buyers at the time. Except for the 2a7 concept or a few proposed post production upgrades for export users, the m1a2 sep is better to average 2a6 variation. Sure leopard is still a good tank, and still a much superior choice than buying some export t90 or upgraded t72 model.
  14. M1A2 wrong ammo type?

    the article dates back to 2001 though. I think its subjective. few years later the M1A2 SEP V2 package came out. the Leopard is a damn good tank but i think what could be seen as a disadvantage is placing a Giant rack in the hull. This is ok for fighting in Hulldown like envisioned during the cold war, but IN an offensive with hull exposed its going to be more vulnerable than an M1. The hull isn't as armored as the turret and A single shot has the potential to cook off the entire tank. based on Exchange tankers option , i also heard the m1 is more roomy. The leopard 2 interior is caged up. so if a loader is wounded he cant be pulled through the inside and through the Commanders hatch. The crew would have to hop out then go to the loaders hatch, longer exposing themselves in order to pull him out through there. Leopard 2a6 in comparison at that point in time ( 2001) still had 1st generation thermal sight with x13 magnification . M1A2 SEP v1 was already was using better quality 2nd generation thermals that had up to X50 magnification. M1A2 especially at that time period has a superior Navigation/ Communications System. also m1 Abrams doesn't need L55 cannon. DU based APFSDS don't need to be shot at velocities beyond 1700M/S. Germany doesn't use DU ammo, only tungsten. So they needed a higher velocity 120mm gun ( L55) to compensate for not having quite as high penetrating ammo as the US. It took the L55 to achieve parity with Tungsten vs DU ammo. The reason leopard 2 family being more successful in the export is because its still a high quality Western tank ( not el cheepo eastern Fire cracker) that has better bang for the buck compared to the M1 abrams. M1 for export is more expensive per unit price, and most countries see the Gas turbine to be worse with fuel economy than with diesels . Maybe also some countries would be more willing to buy M1's if US didn't offer downgraded armor packages to everyone. AFAIK germans don't downgrade leopards armor for export market.
  15. Sights should go back when tanks are firing

    this is done on some tanks like Leopard series of but no all tanks in the world This wouldn't apply to an M1 Abrams series of tanks or T72 AFAIK.
×