Tanks with TROPHY?!

[Sabot And Heat 10]

C4 explosive velocity - 26,550 fps

Naval Railgun Projectile (R-KE) - 22,500 fps

APFSDS (Sabot) - 4,725 fps

Sound - 1,126 fps

Trophy doesnt stand a chance against a railgun.

Reactive armor will also have zero effect. The reactive armor would have to explode four times the speed of sound prior to the R-KE round entering the block in order to meet the R-KE round. In effect.. no longer reactive, but pro-active armor. You would have to use 4,000 feet thick reactive armor for the C4 to have time to outrun the R-KE.

Powerful, low-angle generated magnetic feilds would be the only thing reasonably able to alter a R-KE round.

Edited June 15, 2011 by frostybowman

[max power 21]

If there is a railgun on the Slammer tanks, it would not be a naval railgun.

[Uberduderofdoomer 10]

At first i wondered "what the hell is dis" and then i started to wonder how a tank's armor value would in any way be affected by achievements. Then I thought I was catching on by thinking that you were joking. Then I facepalmed myself when I saw you posted a video explaining it. Today I am just slow as hell.

I think a million countermeasure things could be implemented, but before we even talk about trophy systems I wonder if it they could first get ERA and RPG cages working. Then this would be epic. But then they would hopefully find something for infantry or give a massive realistic disadvantage to vehicles that would keep the gameplay in tact.

[wolfbite 8]

Navalised or not the speed would still be similar...

[Rebel44 10]

Well, its look like that Trophy works in Army3

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/trailers/3447-Arma-III-Teaser

---------- Post added at 01:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:40 PM ----------

C4 explosive velocity - 26,550 fps

Naval Railgun Projectile (R-KE) - 22,500 fps

APFSDS (Sabot) - 4,725 fps

Sound - 1,126 fps

Trophy doesnt stand a chance against a railgun.

Reactive armor will also have zero effect. The reactive armor would have to explode four times the speed of sound prior to the R-KE round entering the block in order to meet the R-KE round. In effect.. no longer reactive, but pro-active armor. You would have to use 4,000 feet thick reactive armor for the C4 to have time to outrun the R-KE.

Powerful, low-angle generated magnetic feilds would be the only thing reasonably able to alter a R-KE round.

Explosion speed of reactive armor is similar to that of C4 - so it would be effective.

---------- Post added at 01:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:42 PM ----------

RPG-30 wins such a system. Please include it in the game too.

I doubt that it would be effective - Trophy is computer controlled automated system, so its just matter of Trophy having instructions that in case of incomming projectile splitting into two (RPG-30 warhead + decoy) to shoot for bigger projectile - because RPG-30s decoy is small - so small that even if you jammed some warhead there instead of it, it wouldnt have enough power to cause any problem to tank.

---------- Post added at 01:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:52 PM ----------

Pretty much only ATGM that I know of capable of defeating Trophy and destroying modern well armored MBT like Merkava 4 or Abrams is/was american LOSAT (which was canceled)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOSAT

Edited June 16, 2011 by Rebel44

[roberthammer 582]

Pretty much only ATGM that I know of capable of defeating Trophy and destroying modern well armored MBT like Merkava 4 or Abrams is/was american LOSAT (which was canceled)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOSAT

In ArmA 3 - there can be CKEM , loaded on helicopters or on vehicles

[pavel volonsky 44]

Youtube...Facebook...

You may know that citizens of "some" countries are unable to goto these websites.

[Sabot And Heat 10]

@Rebel44

I am fully aware of the explosives used in reactive armor since it is used on my tanks in the Iraq. Which is exactly why I listed it.

The reason it would not be effective against R-KE rounds is that your failing to calculate that there is a time requirement to detonate that block of reactive armor. Your also failing to calculate that explosives lose speed rapidly. Any projectile does not lose energy as quickly as explosive.

The rate at which C4 explodes would not have time to speed pass the R-KE round in the distance (thickness) given by a reactive armor block. In effect the point of explosion could not catch up and pass to get between the tank and R-KE round. The explosion would then actually act to propel the round faster as it is exploding behind the impact area but travelling faster than the R-KE.

P.S. Lockheed Martin CKEM - "The U.S. Army and Lockheed Martin has conducted a successful flight test of the Compact Kinetic Energy Missile (CKEM) against a T-72 tank recently at Eglin Air Force Base, FL. All objectives for this test were achieved. The T-72, equipped with Enhanced Reactive Armor, was engaged at a range of 3400 meters. The flight evaluated CKEM's lethality while also gathering missile guidance and performance data."

CKEM - 7,220 fps. (That's 1/3 rd the speed of a R-KE round.)

Rebel44, your wrong, reactive armor will not be effective against R-KE. Have a great day.

Edited June 16, 2011 by frostybowman

[maturin 12]

Russian Relikt ERA explodes before the round makes contact because radar tracks the incoming threat. Blurring the line between APS and ERA, really. This functionality will be mature long before KE missiles predominate.

[Uberduderofdoomer 10]

Railguns are only planned on appearing on big ass ships right now, so unless you are near a shorline, tanks should not even have to encounter rail guns in ARMA 3.

Of course this would be boring, so to entertain the notion that you did in fact encounter this scenario, rest assured that even if ERA detonated before the projectile got past it, it wouldnt do jack shit over the course of a millisecond to a round traveling at rail gun projectile speeds. Your concern at that point is if the railgun hit the feul tank or ammo dump and if you are going to explode or get hit by the projectile as it comes through the armor. In fact, it might hit it so powerfully that the explosion from the sheer physical force of the round impacting might kill you. I'm not a complete expert on railguns, but to say they send things flying pretty fast would be the understatement of the year. They need a full blown platform and a jigganormousgigantic amount of energy, so its not like a normal heat round or KE projectile.

Edited June 17, 2011 by Uberduderofdoomer

[max power 21]

Well, never-the-less, there was some strange special effects coming out of a tank in a teaser that looks like what games commonly use for railguns and that sort of thing.

[wolfbite 8]

I thought it was just exhaust fume gases and Arena in the trailer...

[max power 21]

I think perhaps you may have turned the video off before the 'credits' ended.

[BlackAlpha 10]

Railguns are only planned on appearing on big ass ships right now, so unless you are near a shorline, tanks should not even have to encounter rail guns in ARMA 3.

I think the whole point of putting railguns on big ships is so that those big ships can shoot further inland. So they should be a threat, especially in a futuristic setting where hightech drones can relay the exact position of the target.

Well, never-the-less, there was some strange special effects coming out of a tank in a teaser that looks like what games commonly use for railguns and that sort of thing.

The company that made this video probably though they needed something cool looking to get people's attention. They figured it would be totally "rad" to have a heat haze effect marking the trail of the fired shell. It was either the exaggerated heat haze or exaggerated smoke/flash coming out of the barrel. They probably wanted to go with both, but the smoke/flash obscured the cool looking heat haze effect. So they got rid of the exaggerated smoke/flash effect and went with just the exaggerated heat haze.

And when ArmA 3 comes out and it turns out there are railgun tanks, I'll eat my hat... And my shoe! :p

[walker 0]

Hi all

There are various solutions to active defense systems. They come under the broad headlines of Spoofing, Jamming, Reload Gap and Saturation.

Spoofing would be via the use of false targets and signal generators stimulating the system to act on a false positive. Thus depleting the ammunition of the system.

Jamming would use both active electronic jamming and window type radar opaque materials to obscure and blind the tracking system.

All systems have a reload gap A tandem war head with a shot gun of bomblets would let the round get through. As would a system where multiple missiles where rippled on to target.

Saturation is simply firing enough projectiles and bomblets that you overwhelm a system via weight of fire. Either it runs out of ammo or once again you get through the reload gap.

One real problem with a Trophy type system is that if it was running too fast you would have the trophy system start to self detonate eg Previous round exploding the next round out then on and on until it blows itself up.

The final problem you will have is reload jamming. It is mechanical and once the dust dirt and shrapnel or real war start to impinge on the system it will break down. And a solution as simple as a round that sprays super glue or hot lead or gunk and grease would gum up such a mechanical system. Heck you could do it with remote controlled paint guns. Or a round that sprays paint gun style glue pellets.

Kind Regards walker

Edited June 17, 2011 by walker

[maturin 12]

Even if you got all those methods down to a science, the fact that engaging a tank would involve all the extra time, munitions and rigamarole of house repair would mean that the system was doing its job.

[Rebel44 10]

Even if you got all those methods down to a science, the fact that engaging a tank would involve all the extra time, munitions and rigamarole of house repair would mean that the system was doing its job.

Also danger that while he is shooting glue at tank, crew of that tank can ruin his entire day by MG fire or 120mm round.

Overcomplicated ways to resolve problem on real battlefield can be very unreliable (true for both sides).

[max power 21]

The company that made this video probably though they needed something cool looking to get people's attention. They figured it would be totally "rad" to have a heat haze effect marking the trail of the fired shell. It was either the exaggerated heat haze or exaggerated smoke/flash coming out of the barrel. They probably wanted to go with both, but the smoke/flash obscured the cool looking heat haze effect. So they got rid of the exaggerated smoke/flash effect and went with just the exaggerated heat haze.

And when ArmA 3 comes out and it turns out there are railgun tanks, I'll eat my hat... And my shoe! :p

A smokeless tank gun...

[Big Dawg KS 6]

It's just a trailer, and it's not ingame footage. Don't take so much meaning out of it...