Page 3 of 4

Posted: 2007-02-19 11:27
by dunkellic
WNxKenwayy wrote: Reactive armor (which these tanks aren't 'modeled' with but we can assume they would have) pretty much negates a RPG's effect. Also, neato fact, want to know how we stoped RPG attacks in the first part of the war? We wrapped our APC's (which a RPG can penetrate and cause some damage) in wire fencing, the kind around schools and government buildings. The warhead would get stuck in the fencing and not detonate sense its a contact trigger. That's why the striker's now have that wire grid setup around its outside.

uh, tandem-heat warheads are available for rpg´s, which negate the era armor, also the kind of armor you´re talking about is still in use (for example stryker slad armor)

Posted: 2007-02-19 12:11
by Rusty_FunP
Do american tanks really have a ERA in them? I thought the chobham was just a multilayered armor. At least I cant see any type of ERA in the abrams pictures you guys have posted.

Most russian tanks have ERA on top of them, and the reason is that they have not developed a multilayer armor to the level of western allies.

Posted: 2007-02-19 15:21
by dunkellic
there is a special urban "upgrade" for the m1a2 (i dont know wether it´s being used though) that incooperates era - also i think the bradley can be fitted out with era armor

Posted: 2007-02-19 15:28
by eddie
The TUSK upgrade for the M1A2 SEP is what you're thinking of Dunk.

Posted: 2007-02-19 15:51
by dunkellic
exactly ^_^

Posted: 2007-02-19 16:56
by DirtyHarry88
Zimbower wrote:Model then the rpg-29 and 27.
Ok then,this mod will never be more realistic than BF2.Because BF2 engine isnt coded to handle such realism . Forget this project mini realism mod.
To recode the BF2 game engine you need license.
hahaha just leave now.

Posted: 2007-02-19 16:57
by bosco_
Zimbower wrote:Model then the rpg-29 and 27.
Ok then,this mod will never be more realistic than BF2.Because BF2 engine isnt coded to handle such realism . Forget this project mini realism mod.
To recode the BF2 game engine you need license.
DirtyHarry88 wrote:hahaha just leave now.
What the man says.

Posted: 2007-02-19 17:12
by Gaz
Zimbower wrote:Model then the rpg-29 and 27.
Ok then,this mod will never be more realistic than BF2.Because BF2 engine isnt coded to handle such realism . Forget this project mini realism mod.
To recode the BF2 game engine you need license.
1) read the forum for more than 30 seconds and you will find what we can and cannot do with the game engine.

2) This isn't a BF2 engine recode. It's a mod.

3) More realistic than vBF2? Play the mod :| Find out for yourself.

4) Shhhhh. For your own safety. PLEASE.

Posted: 2007-02-19 18:18
by causticbeat
id love to see a heavy AT insurgent kit, possibly a rpg29 or 27?

have it be very rare with long reload times, but it would be a great weapon t ohave

Posted: 2007-02-19 18:35
by Duke
causticbeat wrote:id love to see a heavy AT insurgent kit, possibly a rpg29 or 27?

have it be very rare with long reload times, but it would be a great weapon t ohave
Completely mirrored my thoughts :mrgreen:

make it a rare pickup kit though i take it?

Posted: 2007-02-19 18:39
by Mekstizzle
Nah, motorbike + IED's + zero fear of death = Dead tank

I found out that the hard way, then when i was insurgents realised it's a great and easy tactic to take out tanks as insurgents.

Ak47_nr1

Posted: 2007-02-25 22:03
by Zimbower

Posted: 2007-02-25 22:07
by Bob_Marley
Uh, what does that have to do with the RPG, other than being of the period and soviet?

Though it has a guy who sounds like the EVA unit from RA, so thats pretty cool.

Posted: 2007-02-25 22:14
by Thunder
yes please stop posting only Youtube links ,

if you do post them, use them to back up your statement.

Posted: 2007-02-25 22:18
by Zimbower
backuping my AK-47 statement

Posted: 2007-02-25 22:19
by Zimbower
Zimbower wrote:backuping my AK-47 statement
Youtube is a great place to upload fact videos and easy to access.

Posted: 2007-02-25 22:32
by dunkellic
uh yeah, discovery channel also counted the sheridan to one of the worlds best tanks - despite being amored paper thin, the armor was also flamable (aluminium), oh and the gun was too strong for the tank so that whenever he fired it, he (it?) moved backwards - but yeah, definatly one of the best ten tanks ever...


edit: the show is instant fail for saying that it uses the same mechanics as the stg-44...

Posted: 2007-02-26 03:39
by Teek
The countdown also put the Huey as the world best Heli, why because it was massed produced
for motocycles, the Vespa was the Best motorcycle ever made, why it was massed produced
the Mazda Miata was the Best sports car in the world!why, it was massed produced
The AK-47 was the best gun in the world, why it was massed produced

Posted: 2007-02-26 06:01
by Skinwehr
Gunwing wrote:if we do this then combat would be a totaly different idea. I think it should be able to kill objects like the destroyable wooden fences and they should for sure go through small trees. I saw somthing on the history chanel about the AK-47 vs the M16. And the AK won on reliability and damage potental but the M16 one out on Accurcey and that it is easy to make unlike the AK that needs to have wooden parts made for it.

Also the AK is twice as heavy as a M16, and has easly 4 times the recoil. On the other hand the M16 has less recoil and is easyer to control. Then agian you can't hit a person with the butt of an M16 hard enough to knock them out without breaking the M16 in half. An AK you can realy hit sombody with it and then go and shoot them when your done.

In short both guns are pritty much on equal footing when it comes to fire arms. It's only one was made to be high tech, the other was made to be low tech.

I am going to ask you this: Have you ever held either of these two weapons, or fired either of them?

I have fired many variants of both.

The AK-47 is an EXTREMELY easy rifle to make. In the past I have manufactured AK-47 rifles from raw materials. A friend of mine just recently manufactured one from scratch and did almost all of the fabrication work with a sledgehammer and a grinder. There is enough good wood in a derilict kitchen table from the trash to finish all the AK's furnishings. Its a one weekend project, i'm serious.

The M-16, on the other hand, is a bit harder to build. I know people who have made them, but to me, it aint worth the effort. First off, you'd need a casting to start with. Otherwise you could mill a billet of 6160 Aluminum but it is still a lot of work. Either way, a machine shop is an absolute necessity. Of course, it's not economic at all to cast your own plastic for the sweet 16's furniture. You gotta mail-order all that. For all that precision fabrication, it's a piece of **** design.

The AK does have more recoil than that aluminum .22 "the sweet 16" but a good muzzle break will mitigate it away. It is BECAUSE the AK weighs more that it is easier to control. The muzzle climb is to the 2 O'clock direction so you cant the break slightly to the right to counter that.

You really cant say what an AK weighs with any degree of accuracy. It's like saying "A russian weighs 200 pounds." A Bulgarian milled reciever AK will weigh more than say an Egyptian stamped one. And a Chinese will weigh even less (thinner reciever material). And what about when they dress up an M-16 in all those battery operated gizmos to make it ridiculous looking for recruiting posters? They look like they would outweigh an underfolder AK.

An AK can be made just as accurate as an AR-15. The Dragunov is proof of concept that. Just that the AK is generally so hastly produced that it suffers in this regard. There is no design reason for the Kalashnikov action to be less accurate tho. Just the tolerances of slave-labor machinists.

Regardless, they are assault rifles. Most combat will occur at ranges between 50 and 200 yards - not 600 yards away. The AK will hit a pepsi can at 150 yards- no problem. I'd rather have the security that my rifle will go BOOM when I pull the trigger than know my grouping at the range is tight whenever my rifle manages to function.

As far as damage- 7.62x39 owns the speedy little .22. I have personally seen military 5.56mm rounds (SS109 ball) fail to penetrate the windshield of a (derilict) car. On the other hand, I have seen 7.62x39 (cheap-*** wolf ammo) go through cinder blocks and still kill saplings behind it. I know 5.56 dont go through cinder block. You could probably use an AK in lieu of a chainsaw to cut down trees.

A college professor I know has an AK which he has taken to the range just about every month for the last 15 years. During that time he has NEVER cleaned the rifle. He says you can blow soot out of the muzzle. You know what tho, he has NEVER had a stovepipe, jam, misfire, hangfire or any fouling related malfunction of any sort. And the thing still shoots decent groups.

Off the top of my head, I can't think of another rifle I would try that with.

If you were to sword fight with an AK vs. an M-16 by holding the rifles by the barrels and swinging them at each other, the M-16 will definitely be rendered unrepairable wheras the AK will most likely suffer only cosmetic damage. I have seen M-16 with cracked recievers and I have heard stories from gunsmiths where an M-16 falls from a workbench and the reciever breaks.

I'll conclude this rant with a link to a website that is written in Polish. I don't know enough polish to read it but I know it is an article about an abrams that was penetrated by a really lucky RPG shot. Może wszelki tutaj przeczytał język polski?

http://www.altair.com.pl/files/r1203_abrams.htm

Posted: 2007-02-26 08:57
by Thunder
'[R-PUB wrote:dunkellic']uh yeah, discovery channel also counted the sheridan to one of the worlds best tanks


edit: the show is instant fail for saying that it uses the same mechanics as the stg-44...
yes i tend to avoid that show, it tends to focus on the top 10 American made weapons.

@Zimbower, what i'm trying to say is that a lot of people here have a very good understanding of guns,
Just posting Youtube clips of guns in is not really needed,
you give us a link to the ten top guns, when you where talking about bullet penetration which has been discussed before if you like to search for it.