Logic behind vehicle mounted TOWs

[Zoddom]

Hi, can does anyone understand why we can shoot TOWs while moving with the mtlv and the T-90 but have to be stationary for 11 (?) secs with spandrel, bradley, puma etc ??
seriously i dont exactly know what works with which vehicle and i dont get why there are differences?
also i dont like that you have to be steady at all, slowing down should be enough (especially because i use awesome pedals for driving )

[=HCM= Shwedor]

Wire-guided missles require you to be stationary when shooting. (don't think the wire is visible ingame)

Beam-riding missles can be fired on the move.

[Zoddom]

yeah i know, but neither the T-90 (although not that sure :/)nor the mtlb (absolutely sure) have beam riding missiles....

[chrisweb89]

Pretty sure its because some vehicle mounts aren't designed to be ready to fire and drive at the same time, I've only read this from other posts. So for the bradley I guess its because the mount isn't sturdy enough for travel. Where as the BMP, or t90 fire the missiles from the barrel so its fine and maybe the mtlb was designed to drive ready to fire.

I liked the old unrealistic way of being able to fire at any point, but the 11 second setup time just seems too long. It may be the RL setup time but in game like PR I think it would be better to wait like 5 seconds, especially since any movement locks the turret. A tank takes more then 2 min to repair IRL, but in PR it takes 2, so why can't we change this time to reflect gameplay aswell?

[Rudd]

Shwedor is on the money, its to do with wire guided and infra red guided missiles iirc but the specifics currently escape me.

[Zoddom]

yeah i would also like to see the timer reduced. i would even like to have a 0 second timer. so we cant aim and shoot while driving but as soon as we are standing still, we can fire, hti seems perfectly realistic to me.

[Mikemonster]

Personally I question the logic behind TOWs when the reason the Warrior was not given one IRL was because the section it housed had a HAT rocket (javelin) and would fire after dismounting.

But i'm unknowledgable on RL tactics of the T90 and Bradley.

[Zoddom]

Pthe Warrior was not given one IRL was because the section it housed had a HAT rocket (javelin) and would fire after dismounting.

i dont really understand that :/

[Mikemonster]

They didn't give the Warrior IFV turret mounted ATGM's because the dismounts had the Javelin to use instead.. But in the UK we have a strange setup for fighting with IFV's apparently (deserves its own thread in the appropriate forums).

[Zoddom]

yeah okay i dont get the problem, i think i dont understand what dismounts are :/

[gaurd502]

The infantry it would be carrying I think.

[jerkzilla]

Its a fine line tbh. I don't think vehicles with TOWs are supposed to actively look for tanks and engage toe to toe (like popping out from behind cover within a tank's area of focus), but rather to easily set up ambushes without the pain in the *** of building a FOB and TOW. Or act as one more layer of defense against tanks.

Still better than before, when they were better tank killers than other tanks.

[chrisweb89]

Only problem is a lot of the time a stationary vehicle is a dead vehicle, if you're actually close to the battle and not in some weird hidden spot ambushing, the IFV will rarely live long using the tactic os sitting back with ATGMs up and waiting. You might kill the first thing that unexpectedly runs into your path, but if the team is decent they will say where you are and either send a HAT after you or a good tank crew can kill a waiting IFV if they know where it is. If they were able to move and wait less than what feels like a minute(when sitting in the open, I know its 15 seconds) than the issue of just having to sit back and hope the enemy isn't smart and flanks you is dealt with. Just because you now have the ability to change your position without taking your main wepon out of action.

[Bringerof_D]

main problem with the wait time is that it doesnt work for an ambush either. i recon it should be reduced to about 5 seconds.

currently when you ambush a tank with IFVs/APCs you die because you switch to your missile and they spot you before you warm up. problem with that is that when setting up an ambush you dont have your ATGM set. you're more likely to encounter infantry at any given time so you almost always have your guns set up instead. and since there's no safety switch, to wait with your ATGM then switch to guns means you might at some point accidentally fire off and lose your missile. ususally happens when switching between thermal and normal sights

as for the definition of a dismount:

Dismounts are to APCs the infantry it carries in the back. for IFVs this means the extra guy that's not currently needed that is told to step out and do something. For light vehicles such as the humvee they may also be known as the GIBs (Guy/s in Back) for all vehicles this includes anyone other than the driver, gunner and sometimes crew commander. the dismounts are used to clear areas where enemy or mines may be hidden. (ie. to conduct a defile drill when crossing a bridge, or lateral drills at intersections) and other misc. tasks which require people to get out of the vehicle.

for vehicles that do not have mounted anti armor capabilities, they usually carry a man portable launcher which is used by said dismounts in the case where they encounter enemy armor.

[ryan d ale]

I think it needs to be changed too.

5 seconds like getting inside a vehicle weapon like HMG or SPG on vehicle

[PatrickLA_CA]

Yeah but even if they are wired I'm sure you don't wait 15 seconds after being stationary to fire them IRL right? It should only be done to be able to fire after 3-5 seconds, not 15.

[Zoddom]

thanks Bringerof_D, now i understand

Yeah but even if they are wired I'm sure you don't wait 15 seconds after being stationary to fire them IRL right? It should only be done to be able to fire after 3-5 seconds, not 15.

yeah exactly what i mean, irl when you stopped you are able to fire and then you DO fire, but somehow we have to wait 15 s (ololololo suicide) first to fire ...

[Wags_]

yeah i know, but neither the T-90 (although not that sure :/)nor the mtlb (absolutely sure) have beam riding missiles....

The Russian T-90 does use a beam-riding ATGM known as the 9M119 "Svir."

9M119 Svir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From what I've collected, the MTLB in real-life (I've never actually used on in PR) uses the Russian AT-6 Spiral radio controlled line-of-sight missile - the same ones the MI-24 Hind uses. So, in regards to whether the T-90 and MTLB should be able to fire anti-tank missiles on the move, they should be able to, in real-life.

9K114 Shturm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many NATO armored vehicles are fitting javelin systems in place of traditional TOW systems to be on par with foreign systems such as the Svir.

I've even heard a couple soldiers who've recently come home from deployments tell me that they used the Avenger system with javelins equiped in Iraq and Afghanistan. After a quick search, I found these links that confirm such things have been done:

". . . and the option to substitute launchers for 2 FGM-148 Javelin missiles in place of 1 Stinger pod."
AN/TWQ-1 Avenger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The information on Wikipedia comes from this link: Avenger Multi-Purpose Short Range Mobile Air Defense System

[goguapsy]

Wait... does a wire guided missile actually has a wire attached to it?

[nater]

Wait... does a wire guided missile actually has a wire attached to it?

Yes, why else would it be called wire guided?