Make recoilless rifles fire like cannons, not rockets

[BKnight3 0]

Like I ask in the subject, make recoilless rifles fire like cannons, not rockets as depicted in Arma 2.

Or perhaps its too hard?

[[frl]myke 14]

Erm...what?

[jagheterjan 10]

He's prolly talking about the Carl Gustav.

[Inkompetent 0]

The Carl Gustav and the SPG-9, and the M136 AT-4. All of them are (potentially) rocket-assisted recoilless rifles. However unlike actual rocket-weapons like the RPG, TOW or FFARs they don't fly by the power of a rocket engine, but use it to extend and stabilize their flight, but work more like a rocket-assited cannon round.

All of the above mentioned weapons function by letting half of the explosion force from the ignited propellant exhaust backwards to counter the recoil movement of the weapon. The SPG-9 is a 'soft recoilless weapon' in that it has quite extensive rocket assistance (not near as much as depicted in game), and the CG *can* have rocket-assisted ammunition to extend its range. The AT-4 isn't rocket-assisted at all after the charge leaves the tube.

ACE does this quite well, and shows it can definitely be done in the default game.

[max power 21]

The projectile is launched from the [spg-9] by a small charge, which gives it an initial velocity of between 250 and 400 metres per second. The launch charge also imparts spin to the projectile by a series of offset holes. Once the projectile has travelled approximately 20 meters from the launcher a rocket motor in its base ignites. For the PG-9 projectile, this takes it to a velocity of 700 metres per second before the motor burns out.

How does the behaviour in game differ?

[Inkompetent 0]

How does the behaviour in game differ?

1: There's no 'bang' as the initial charge goes off

2: The rocket engine starts the instant the round leaves the SPG-9's barrel

3: The rocket engine seem to burn indefinitely.

[martyc 10]

1: There's no 'bang' as the initial charge goes off

2: The rocket engine starts the instant the round leaves the SPG-9's barrel

3: The rocket engine seem to burn indefinitely.

I agree with you Inko, the Recoilless weapon systems in Arma 2 aren't quite up to the same level of authenticity as most of the other weapons in the game.

Firstly, the sounds aren't quite as accurate as they could be. Weapons like the AT4, MAAWS, RPG 7 / 18 and pretty much all other soldier fired weapons tend to make an airy whooshing sound in the game. I can tell you that in real life MAAWSs etc go bang, and it's really f**king loud :) . The sound is short, sharp and incapacitating (for about a quarter of a second).

Secondly the models of the projectiles in flight aren't quite as accurate as they could be. Projectiles like the AT 4 / MAAWS / RPG 18 look a lot like tracer when they're in flight, except they glow a bright orange colour instead of red. This is not the rocket motor firing as some people think, but rather the glow from the residual heat generated by the motor. I the game they appear as big yellow dots, much larger that they look in real life. It's not really a biggie but it would impress the hell out of me if they looked more realistic.

They can also bounce like tracer too if they strike an angled target (which is hilarious to watch)

It's not a massive issue, but it would probably be an easy update to make. Also, zeroing AT weapons is incredibly important in real life as they have a highly curved trajectory comapred to bullets, yet zeroing has not yet been incorporated into AT weapons, beyond using the aiming marks on the optics. I know there's serious issues with changing the eye point for iron sights but it would be good see it done. Same-same for GLs as well

Love INKO disposable btw; it should be incorporated into the core game I reckon.

[max power 21]

1: There's no 'bang' as the initial charge goes off

2: The rocket engine starts the instant the round leaves the SPG-9's barrel

3: The rocket engine seem to burn indefinitely.

I don't think the assessment in the original post about the way an spg-9 operates is correct. I don't even think the way it operates in ArmA is all that different from how it actually works.

1. I agree that the sounds are way off.

2. 20m at 400m/s = 0.05s You are quibbling over 5/100ths of a second. If you run arma at 30 fps, you might be able to squeek in a frame of motion where the rocket motor isn't fired.

3. In ArmA, the projectile might emit a smoke effect the whole way, I don't know whether they stop boosting after a while or not. The more unrealistic thing is that they create a lot of smoke!

[Bazul14 10]

Well, I guess that the ballistics here could see some overhaul. In all unguided rockets, the ballistics are horrible. RPGs and SPG-9s don't go straight, or anything near straight. Actually, their shells will drop A LOT after 100m. I guess some changes could be done there.... Oh, and the SPG shell is a lot slower than in game. IRL it is fairly hard to hit a moving target with it.

[max power 21]

700 m/s is 2520 km/h. That's double the speed of sound... I wonder how fast they go ingame to make them 'unrealistically fast'.

[Bazul14 10]

That is way too fast. Can I see your source? 700m/s for a relatively heavy and small rocket seems really unlikely.

[maturin 12]

He may have meant f/s, as that would work out to the 300 m/s of an RPG.

The SPG-9's muzzle velocity ranges up to 400 m/s with the faster rounds.

[max power 21]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/accp/in0546/lsn2.htm

This is global security, but it is an excerpt from an Army course. The same books are available on scribd but I can't get them to load past the first couple of pages.

And here is the same information corroborated by a tradoc on the FAS website. The information is on page 1-9.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/weg.pdf

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Yeah I have never had much success with scribd either.

[wipman 1]

Hi, sadly BIs don't works on the ArmA2 anymore; they'd advandoned it. BIS only work on OA content so don't spect anything from 'em for the ArmA2, maybe for some OA related content, but i doubt that they make any good change in their bugged engine; they're very proud of it. Let's C ya

[Beagle 684]

Hi, sadly BIs don't works on the ArmA2 anymore; they'd advandoned it. BIS only work on OA content so don't spect anything from 'em for the ArmA2, maybe for some OA related content, but i doubt that they make any good change in their bugged engine; they're very proud of it. Let's C ya

ArmA patch 1.09 is out in beta testing...so no word about abandoning here! ArmA II got patched all the time just not as frequent as OA but all changes done to OA that are compatible were applied to ArmA II.

If you want a more actual gema engine buy OA as OA only features will not be patched for free into ArmA II.

Edited March 14, 2011 by Beagle

[fincuan 0]

2. 20m at 400m/s = 0.05s You are quibbling over 5/100ths of a second. If you run arma at 30 fps, you might be able to squeek in a frame of motion where the rocket motor isn't fired.

To the shooter it makes all the difference, as the rocket motor would fire straight into his face if it lit up inside the tube. Depending on the weapon the burn is completed while the projectile is still inside the tube and the motor shuts down before exiting, or it only fires after travelling some distance. Then again this is probably too much to ask as long as we have recoilless weapons without any kind of backblast.

Edited March 14, 2011 by Fincuan

[max power 21]

That brings up an interesting point. Regardless if what the special effects look like, I wonder if there's any delay in the thrust simulation of these weapons. I doubt it, because then these rocket ballistics would become fps dependent.