Project Reality Forums

Hey guys, alot of you most likely come across the map Fools road when you play.

You also most likely know the Howitzers, if you have tryed them, you know thats its hard to know how to aim with them.

I have questions about them like anyone else have.







How long can they shot?.

How do you aim with them ( bullet drop etc. )

This would really help me, and a lot of other players thanks.

They aren't Howitzers. They are the militia AT guns.

Howitzers are artillery.

hi mate, they aren't howitzers they are just anti tank guns, generally they are used within teh view distance.

the round does fall over time, so at the longer ranges you may need to compensate, testing when you arent engaged on a static target is a good idea so taht you are aware of the drop at a specific range.

alot of players do shoot the guns accross the map, the round does still work, however you will need to work with a spotter to tell where the round lands.

And also trees get in the way quickly if you shoot into the unknown...

Sit on one in the fort, get your SL to give you markers on inf in the middle of the map. Load HE = Enjoy lots of kills.

(Shoot at the numbers not the marker icon when doing BVR fire.)

About those guns: I remember shooting a BTR-80 in the side with a HEAT shell with one on Kozelsk (the gun near the crossroads, probably the only one on this map), and it was barely smoking. And it killed me. Can the BTR-80 really survive a HEAT shell from an anti-tank gun?

Aren't heat rounds for anti personnel purposes?

HEAT is jsut another Anti-tanks round High Explosive Anti Tank but yes the HEAT round is more effective against inf that the AP round as the AP round has little or no blast damage where as the HE element of the HEAT round provides a very deadly blast radii

Yeah man, shoot it with AP...Those field guns can load AP, HEAT, or smoke.

Ohais wrote:Yeah man, shoot it with AP...Those field guns can load AP, HEAT, or smoke.

But, shouldn't HEAT be enough against APCs? I'd understand against well armored ones like the BMP-3, but the BTR series have thin armor. HEAT also tends to be deadlier than AP (as far as internal damage goes) when it does penetrate, so should a BTR survive it?

Well, you are right about that. Even the BMP-3 would not resist HEAT, unless it haz ERA. I guess HEAT or AP are not so potent on the cannon to prevent it from wasting enemy assets too quickly. Remember, this is not exactly Project Reality, but rather Project Gamepley

Kaurava wrote:But, shouldn't HEAT be enough against APCs? I'd understand against well armored ones like the BMP-3, but the BTR series have thin armor. HEAT also tends to be deadlier than AP (as far as internal damage goes) when it does penetrate, so should a BTR survive it?

The gun was initially produced in 1941, long before compound armor and the 40+ ton armored vehicles of today. Remember that the sherman 75mm cannon would generally deflect off the German Tiger Tank which had a pure steel armor, which is far lighter and less dense than the armor used on modern vehicles.

[R-DEV]Katarn wrote:The gun was initially produced in 1941, long before compound armor and the 40+ ton armored vehicles of today. Remember that the sherman 75mm cannon would generally deflect off the German Tiger Tank which had a pure steel armor, which is far lighter and less dense than the armor used on modern vehicles.

Still, it's an APC. APCs has terribly thin armor, almost paper. It's only good enough to protect against small arms fire. Even a .50cal can penetrate it. A 76mm ZiS-3 should be able to penetrate it. It was quite an effective anti-tank weapon during WW2 and should be effective enough to destroy an APC.

Excavus wrote:Still, it's an APC. APCs has terribly thin armor, almost paper. It's only good enough to protect against small arms fire. Even a .50cal can penetrate it. A 76mm ZiS-3 should be able to penetrate it. It was quite an effective anti-tank weapon during WW2 and should be effective enough to destroy an APC.

U just described the M113.
You make it sound like techies and a few grenades should be capable of destroying APCs, including the modern ones.

BTR-60 Armored Personnel Carrier - btr60
M113 Armored Personnel Carrier - m113 armor
says, that btr 60 has 7mm armor on sides, while m113 has 44(!)mm armor, wich only protects from small arms fire and fragmentation grenades. I assume that m113 has armor from weaker material

after loking around for a little i found this "Aluminium has about one-third the density and stiffness of steel. It is easily machined, cast, drawn and extruded."
and the btr-60's is made out of welded steel so it should have a lot more protection the the m113.

eh m113 is like:
-"We have built a light APC with half meter thick armor!"
-"Cool, put it in mass production!"
Some time later:
-"What armor is that?"
-"Wood!"

Plus the BTR60s armor is sloped, which nearly doubles the ammount of steel to penetrate!