Turn engine off on vehicles

[Brooklyn-Tech]

"I know this is off topic...

..Thoughts?"

fully agree,

plus, if you guys want to implement a way of turning off a tanks engine, that's cool. A 4th seat which requires you to be a crewman and be in the squad wouldn't be that bad of an option. But in that case, please disable the gunner from turning the turret (and possibly turn his screen black).

this would be the "price" you would have to pay for doing an unrealistic "sound check".

EDIT: not to mention that it would be realistic since that's what happens when you turn a tanks engine off.

[ComradeHX]

My concern, what's to stop people from just hopping into that 4th seat while the driver is active, thereby just turning the vehicle into a 4-man vehicle? While the intent is to leave the vehicle as a 3-man crew with an optional 4th-seat for the driver to switch between, you know people are going to abuse that feature and just have random guys hopping in for a ride.

Maybe add python code that warn/blackscreen/kills the player trying to get into a tank's 4th-seat if there are already three people(not counting himself) in tank?

[ShaunOTEast]

now the thing is , in PR there is no such thing using tanks right , you have to close your engine , if your not your dead , when your engine is open you can be heard by inf that might have hat so they wont have to look for you , they just prepare the hat , listening where the sound is coming from , when the hat is ready , poping up and shooting you , this is ridiculous also , you can die so easly from a bmp because there is no BMP crew in the universe that doesnt closes their engine to listen for tanks , there is also no shturm crew that dont closes their engine to listen for tanks , and you cant ambush successfuly if you are making the strongest noise on the map so i suggest you just stay out of this if you dont have something smart to say

As a competent tank gunner, I can say with much certainty that you can be heard many many grid references away even if the enemy tanks have their engines on. I'm not sure about you, but I find it extremely easy to be heard as a tank and to hear tanks in general. It is up to the crews' competence and ability to defend themselves and neutralise the enemy tanks. In many instances there is not point in turning of the engines off because they already heard you miles away, and are expecting you. Turning your engines off would only confirm your position and leave you vulnerable. Shutting off engines is, in my opinion, not mandatory to the survival of tanks who stay mobile and situationally aware.
Edit: However I think the 4th seat suggesting would be interesting, combined with the vehicle engine warm-up suggestion however...

[ExeTick]

someone posted this on this forum, I cant hear the engine on so I assume it was turned off.

dont know if he was able to turn his turret but he was sure able to fire.

[Mikemonster]

It's a T55, he probably had a tackle and block system and some galley slaves to move the turret..

Hahaha - good demonstration of a tank with it's engine off just starting it and moving.

[ExeTick]

well I dont know if he was able to turn his turret but he was able to fire when his engine was off.

[Gracler]

I thought this tread long ago established that some tanks can work with engine off... some can until the battery runs out... and some use auxiliary power and make less noise.

Why would it be a surprise that It can shoot with engine off? You don't need a battery to shoot a shotgun do you?

The fact that PR battles are like short engagements it is more unlikely that anyone would turn there primary engine off even if they could.

What Frontliner suggested is a great way of preventing the 1 hit.. bang your dead.... and give tanks there terrifying feel back. The scared Ninja tanks (tanks cloaking around with engine off as much as possible) would be less efficient.

[ExeTick]

Why would it be a surprise that It can shoot with engine off? You don't need a battery to shoot a shotgun do you?

tanks work a little bit different then a shotgun.

to fire tanks main armament you need electric power it have been like that on tanks since a long time. I dont know any tanks after ww2 that can fire without electric power.

[Cavazos]

The fact that PR battles are like short engagements it is more unlikely that anyone would turn there primary engine off even if they could.

Battles in FH2 are even shorter and some skilled tankers sit in the hull MG position so people can't hear the tank camping. I think having the engine turn off would be useful in some situations.

[Gracler]

tanks work a little bit different then a shotgun.

to fire tanks main armament you need electric power it have been like that on tanks since a long time. I dont know any tanks after ww2 that can fire without electric power.

what do you base that on? perhaps the modern tanks are not able to fire manually since they are so heavily dependent on all there fancy electric toys... the tank in question is a t55..
a manual charge can't set off tnt? or you want to use c4 or mining wire or what have ya? to set off tnt?... i'm curious here...... someone with the facts should confirm either of this. Besides a manual generator could produce enough power to set off something that needs electricity..... not like you need much power and a running engine at all.

[Quobble]

Soooo...
The t-55 has two options to move its turret.
1. Via his engine power, meaning if the engine is on, the gunner is able to aim and turn as he wishes.

2. Manual turning. The gunner also has 2 hand wheels. One is for vertical movement, the second is for horizontal movement.

It takes longer and its not that easy, but at least you can shut down your engine to safe fuel and cut away the sound of a tank.


Now today, tanks have move electricity based stuff inside.
Cameras
Air cond. system
Etc etc...

For that the modern tanks have batteries.
Of course you cannot use them for ever, because they run out, but imagine 2 or 3 diesel ship batteries connected^^

After the tanks starts its engine again, the alternator will fill them up again.

I believe there are also emergency hand wheels. In case the power drops

[x-spades-x]

I worked with Abrams and Bradleys, You were able to turn off engines while keeping the accesory electronics running. (just like a car) Therefore we coulds move turrets, use FLIR, everything, while we were off. We would only really cut then engines when laying ambush or trying to use SLLS(stop look listen smell) or posting up an AA(assembly area) for the night.

[Roque_THE_GAMER]

just add a comander seat and the driver to see only in his view. gross but useful.

[Raklodder]

That would indeed be rather cool and tactical, still PR: BF2 is thankfully not ARMA.

[Blackburn92xBHD]

why not just adding a 4th seat (in reality all the western tanks have a crew of 4: Abrams, Leopard 2, Challenger 2.. not sure about the leClerk) that 4th seat could be linked with the drivers camera (if thats possible) so either the 4th guy sees what the driver sees or the driver can swith to the 4th place without losing visual on possible objectives...

only problem: as far as i know russian tanks like T72 and T90 have an autoloader build in it that reduces the crew to 3...

but that doesnt mean that we have to renounce on the 4th seat in the russian tanks... i mean they are tight inside but it is possible for 4 people to be in a t72 at once..

in germany,brandenburg we have the "panzer fun fahrschule heyse" there you can drive training tanks and in their T72 there was room for 4.

[SilentNoobAssasin]

I think it would be useful for tanks because there is always a possibility for the driver to get his head blown off by a sniper when he is on HMG or surveying outside.

My speciality

[Ca6e]

What about anothr sit in the tank, APC, like commander sits, with observation periscope?!? I think it could be implemented, and i think it wouldnt be impossible to code it.

And it will be also good becouse 2 person can observe surroundings from inside safe from small arms fire.

Like blackburn suggest.

solute only 2h