insurgency weapons

[Blakeman]

or a FPK rifle (Romania), right, strange enough, that its not the true iraqy SVD ripoff Al Kadesih, but a sniperized AK-47 rifle

The PSL operates internally like an AK but still shoots the 7.62x54R round and is only slightly less accurate than the SVD at the ranges they were engaging with it in Iraq. Lot more common than the Al Kadesih, which I believe still shoots 7.62x39?

[Eddie Baker]

The PSL operates internally like an AK but still shoots the 7.62x54R round and is only slightly less accurate than the SVD at the ranges they were engaging with it in Iraq. Lot more common than the Al Kadesih, which I believe still shoots 7.62x39?

No, the Al K still uses 7.62 x 54R. The Tabuk sniper rifle uses/used 7.62 x 39mm. Since neither are being made anymore, the PSL and SVD are becoming the most common variants.

[Hunt3r]

It would be realistic to have the Javelin in PR the way it is in CA, but it would probably be quite game-breaking unless the tanks get countermeasures for it.

[gazzthompson]

It would be realistic to have the Javelin in PR the way it is in CA, but it would probably be quite game-breaking unless the tanks get countermeasures for it.

and what sort of realistic counter measures are there?

[Startrekern]

and what sort of realistic counter measures are there?

Shooting the guy with the Javelin in the face.

[503]

and what sort of realistic counter measures are there?

Go into a bunker.

[Ninja2dan]

and what sort of realistic counter measures are there?

In order to defeat IR-guided munitions, be it ground- or air-launched, the use of certain smoke agents such as WP can obscure the target signature (under ideal conditions) enough to cause the weapon system to lose track. This almost always works against a laser-guided weapon, but many of the newer thermal-guided seekers can still engage through WP and similar smoke screens.

On the other hand, there is a countermeasure for armored vehicles in use already that defeats SACLOS weapons, aka wire-guided, such as the TOW. These systems are not spoken of much and are rarely if ever known about by the civilian population, but they do exist.

I can post some information here regarding the system in use by the US military (US Army and USMC) that does not violate OPSEC.


AN/VLQ-8 MCD (Missile Countermeasure Device)

Design Features. The VLQ-8A infrared missile countermeasure device is an active electro-optical system designed to provide armored vehicles with a self-defense capability against anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) threats that employ IR-guidance technology. The system comprises a small, lightweight but robust transmitter with an integral control unit. That in turn contains both the operator signal and a built-in test circuitry. It is believed that this particular system transmits or "flashes" a rapid series of signals in the IR frequency spectrum that interferes not with the missile itself but the ATGM launcher’s IR tracking loop.

A large percentage of current-generation ATGMs employ semi-automatic command to line-of-sight guidance technology. Flight control is achieved through micro-thin wires that spool out behind the missile as it flies to the target and are connected to the launcher. An IR-source in the form of a flare is located at the back of the missile, enabling the optical sensor in the launcher sighting unit to detect the missile's position relative to the line-of-sight. The sighting unit guidance computer analyzes the line-of-sight offset between the missile and target, and feeds command signals back to the ATGM via the trailing control wires. The infantryman operating the launcher directs the ATGM to its target by keeping the target within the crosshairs of his optical sight.

By saturating the launcher's seeker with "bursts" of IR energy the VLQ-8A disrupts the ATGM operator's ability to acquire and control the flight of the ATGM to the target. The device is normally mounted at the front of the vehicle atop the turret structure, in order to maximize the field of view and allow it to face forward in the direction that the turret and main gun are traversed. The US Army uses the VLQ-8A in conjunction with the AN/VLQ-6 multithreat jammer on its armored-vehicle applications.

I am not permitted to disclose any further information about the system, including images of the control panels or the procedures for operating the system. What I can add is that the system can be harmful to humans, and the system must be turned off while the crew is unbuttoned or dismounted.

Other nations are also aware of this technology and have tried copying it in various ways. The reason that weapon systems like the Javelin are so successful is because there is almost no way to deter a launched weapon, especially when you don't even know it's on the way. The Javelin also allows soldiers to fire the weapon, drop the empty tube while retaining the CLU, and get out of the area before they are detected.


Unfortunately, real war is not balanced. By adding the Javelin missile system to PR, no matter how much people try to disagree, it will severely imbalance the game without all conventional forces having a similar weapon system available. And this isn't realistic.

Also the tracking method of the Javelin is not possible in PR without a lot of serious scripting problems, and the CA method is not acceptable in my opinion. I seriously doubt we'll ever see the Javelin in PR, hence the reason all threads relating to it are locked faster than Oprah can eat a Snickers bar.

[Meza82]

if the AA kit (or the HAT) for US forces is disabled, which imho is not a bad idea, would this mean a few more open slots for other extra limited kits to be requested like grenadiers, marksman DMRs, medics, LAT AT-4s etc.?

if so theni supprt this idea. by disabling requestable AA (or HAT) would be realistic because the captain or major or whoever could say to the armory "no AA or HAT to this platoon."

[nk87]

Unfortunately, real war is not balanced.

There is my opinion. Add the javalin already

[nedlands1]

Rudd;1231897']Ministry of Defence | Defence News | Equipment and Logistics | Extra bunker-buster missiles for Afghan front line

Out of interest, why would the British MoD need a ~78K USD a pop guided missile system to shoot at mud brick houses? Surely something like a Carl Gustav would be far more cost effective.