Aircraft

[Kermit 0]

Am I the only one that finds the planes impossible to fly, even with a joystick? Am I doing something wrong? In Real Life, an A-10 can easily pull a ninety degree bank without dropping like a manhole cover.

Is there anything I can do to be able to actually hit a tank with the Avenger cannon?

[PitViper 0]

try the A10 in AaronAsh's realism pack

and also "setviewdistance 1500" or higher

[LordZach 0]

good luck killing anything with the 30mm in OFP, it's balanced so you can mostly only take out light targets unless you want to use 75% of your ammo supply to take out a T-80

[Tex -USMC- 0]

What version of OFP are you running?

[advocatexxx 0]

The 30mm Vulcan mounted on the A-10 Thunderbolt will not, I repeat WILL NOT penetrate the armor of a battle tank.

A typical combat load for the GAU-8 would include 1,100 rounds of 30mm high explosive or armor piercing ammunition. The 30mm API is mixed with 30mm High Explosive Incendiary (HEI) at the factory and is called Combat Mix Ammunition. The ratio of API to HEI rounds in the Combat Mix is 4:1. Combat mix is a sequential mixture of DU and HEI rounds in which 1 HEI round followed by 4 DU rounds are fired by the AN/GAU-8 gatling gun. DU is the primary munition for the A/OA-10 in a combat environment.

Armor penetration: 69mm at 500 meters, 38mm at 1,000 meters.

Just so you know, Tank armor is thicker than 69mm at any part of its hull/turret.

[grey 0]

your geeky facts about armour amount to nothing in the operation flashpoint world !

rest assured if u hit a tank with the 30mm cannon long enough it will blow up

just like if u hit a tank enough with the shilka or bradley 25mm cannon it will die too

[Aculaud 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (grey @ June 02 2002,00:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">your geeky facts about armour amount to nothing in the operation flashpoint world !<span id='postcolor'>

LMAO!!! Its so true. Here we all are, bitching and moaning about whats realistic and whats not, and all the while, it doesnt change anything. We're at the mercy of OFP physics

[advocatexxx 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (grey @ June 02 2002,03:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">your geeky facts about armour amount to nothing in the operation flashpoint world !

rest assured if u hit a tank with the 30mm cannon long enough it will blow up

just like if u hit a tank enough with the shilka or bradley 25mm cannon it will die too<span id='postcolor'>

Geez you're a genius, thanks for reminding me of that.

I was merely pointing out just how unrealistic and flawed the damage engine in Flashpoint is. One can destroy an Abrams with MP5 if he shoots it for long enough.

I don't know why BIS couldn't have gone another step and classify weapons into maybe 3 different classes.

[SKULLS_Viper 0]

The rudder, seems to be bugged, or has it been fixed?

[Satchel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (advocatexxx @ June 02 2002,08:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The 30mm Vulcan mounted on the A-10 Thunderbolt will not, I repeat WILL NOT penetrate the armor of a battle tank.  

Just so you know, Tank armor is thicker than 69mm at any part of its hull/turret.<span id='postcolor'>

Of course it will,

as a tanks armor rating isn´t consistent, did you take into account that the upper hemisphere of the ground target gets also hit on an strafing runs?

Ever heard of cluster ammunition like the MK20 Rockeye? if you would put the penetration value of a single shaped charge warhead submunition against the front turret HEAT RHA rating of an T-80, it looks pathetic, but it´s unlikley that this is the area where the charge hits, it´s top attack munition and it will penetrate the top armor regardless.

You have to know that MBT´s have only a minimum protection to the rear, top and hull sides, also on exposed parts like treads, wheels, suspension.

Rear armor of modern russian MBT´s like the T-90 is about 40mm Rolled steel. The plain side hull of an T-90 offers about 60mm, lower side hull around the wheels only 20mm protection. Top armor should be somewhere around 30mm-60mm.

The GAU-8/A has a high rate of fire, the sheer amount and concentration of bullets put down will cause structural damage even to the hardest armored parts stressing and weakening it, so follow up hits could eventually overcome even those areas, as the GAU-8/A is pretty accurate for a gatling cannon; 5mil, 80 percent, meaning that 80 percent of rounds fired at 1,800m will hit within an area of 6.1m radius. Distance to target when firing the cannon is considerably less, so you can figure.

This is an exerpt from the airforce museum:

"

The contracted specifications directed the gun be capable of destroying a wide variety of targets expected to be encountered during a Close Air Support mission: light, medium and heavy tanks, amored personnel carriers, and fixed or mobile artillery. The specifications also called for the gun to be capable of destroying hardened targets like bunkers and equipment within revetments.

"

[dayglow 2]

What's the armour value of a M60 tank? I've seen a picture of a old one that was straft by an A-10. It was absalutly blown to shit. Had 10 penitrating hits and only 1 is needed to disable the tank. The amount of kinetic energy would cause the heat to rise within the tank to the level where the crew would be killed. Kinda sickning really.

COLINMAN

[Satchel 0]

Yepp, i´ve seen it too sometime back, there was also a video about this, actually i was searching for it to include it with the post. Couldn´t find it anymore.

About armor values of russian tanks or general information; this is the best source i could find on the net:

http://armor.vif2.ru/

Maybe BIS could take a look to spicen up the armor ratings of vehicles a bit.

[Aaron Kane 0]

Satchel for president!

[Renagade 0]

I just wish u werent a cripple when u have the rpg out when ur infantry as its not exactly heavy

[advocatexxx 0]

GAU-8/A-Avenger's API rounds are devastating if they hit a proper portion of a tank at the right angle.  Let's take into account that this gun fires in bursts, and requires cool periods for the barrels (contrary to how the A-10 in Flashpoint works).

A-10 assaults its targets from low altitudes and slow speeds when possible.  After recognizing a hostile target such as a tank, the aircraft turns around and prepares for the assault.  Unless the tank position has been supplied to the pilot prior to the fly-by, he cannot single-handily approach an unknown target, identify it and assault it in one run (unless he has telescopic vision).  Thus once he has flown by the enemy tank, they have no doubt heard the jet as well, and would very likely turn head on (if they're not too busy doing something else) to let the frontal armor absorb the rounds.

It would also require 2 or more bursts for the pilot of our A-10 to actually figure a proper aim.  GAU-8/A-Avenger is a bloody accurate weapon whose bullets carry much power, though the aim will still be affected by many factors.

The GAU-8/A-Avenger relies on close-range combat (1,000 meters or less) and a good number of bullets sprayed over area to achieve a hit, and even if an API round penetrates the top of the tank, it may not prove "devastating".

Though it is possible to disable a tank crew and the tank itself even with one fly-by assault, considering that the pilot is well experienced.

I get the feeling that majority of you think that MBTs are a piece-of-cake-to-destroy. They are bloody 60 ton pieces of machinery designed to take a hell of a punishment. I wish you viewed them with a little more respect. Even when a round penetrates its armor the tank is not immediately "annihilated" as you often say. Unless the round hits a vital system, or the crew then the tank will be just fine, having only obtained a hole in its armor.

[Satchel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (advocatexxx @ June 03 2002,00:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I get the feeling that majority of you think that MBTs are a piece-of-cake-to-destroy.  They are bloody 60 ton pieces of machinery designed to take a hell of a punishment.  I wish you viewed them with a little more respect.  Even when a round penetrates its armor the tank is not immediately "annihilated" as you often say.  Unless the round hits a vital system, or the crew then the tank will be just fine, having only obtained a hole in its armor.<span id='postcolor'>

You don´t have to forget that a tank (at least the ones we got now, not FCS ) are operated by humans. What happens if an AP round successfully penetrates the armor is that extreme high pressure and heat is entering the tank, along with metal fragments, caused by bursting armor located on the inside of the vehicle and projectile leftovers, spraying into the combat compartment or other locations.

Even if there is a chance of munition or systems inside the vehicle not immediately being destroyed, the crew located in the area under/behind the hit location is affected very negatively by this, to say it gentle.

Make no mistake, we are not talking about some "miniguns" as seen in Blackhawk down or 20mm Vulcans, but the GAU-8/A!

Compared to Volkswagen Beatle.

more:

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/attack/a6/a6-13.htm

The PGU-14/B Armor Piercing Incendiary DU penetrator ammunition:

Sizes:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They consist of a lightweight aluminum body, cast around a small 'penetrator' of smaller caliber than the shell. (The caliber is about 15mm.) It projects from the blunt body section, and the shell has a thin aluminum 'windscreen' to keep the shape aerodynamic. The penetrator is made of depleted uranium, a byproduct of the enrichment process used to make nuclear fuel. The material has an extremely high density, comprising roughly two-thirds of the projectile's weight.

The result is that two-thirds of the total impact energy is concentrated in the small-caliber penetrator: enough energy to lift a thirty-ton weight one-foot delivered instantly to a penny-sized area. Not only is this ammunition capable of penetrating the top and side armor of an MBT, but the depleted uranium ignites on impact, sending a jet of flame into the vehicle.

<span id='postcolor'>

Excerpt from "Tank-Plinking in the Gulf" article:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

Economics of Destruction

Essentially these figures show what happens when a poorly trained army with obsolete equipment ventures onto an electronic battlefield dominated by B-52s, Stealth aircraft, cruise missiles, and satellite intelligence. With Japan, Saudi Arabia, and Germany paying tens of billions of dollars in support, Iraq became a shooting gallery for advanced missiles. For example, 4,000 infrared-guided Hellfire missiles costing $40,000 each were fired in the Gulf at a total cost of $160 million. Complaints were voiced when it was found that over 100 Hellfires had been used on trucks and foot soldiers.

According to well-informed histories of the war, the Hellfires, TOWs, Mavericks, and other guided missiles destroyed 2,300 Iraqi tanks, or 62 percent of the total of 3,700 tanks eliminated by the Allies. Many of these were sitting empty in trenches when hit, and Brig. Gen. Richard Neal, operations officer for Desert Storm, has said that most were struck from the rear.

Another 1,400 Iraqi tanks were destroyed by two types of cannon: the 30 millimeter multibarrel gun in the nose of the A-10 Thunderbolt "tank-killer" aircraft, and the 120-millimeter main gun in the M1A1 Abrams tank. The A-10s fired 940,000 of their 30mm rounds in the Gulf, and 10,000 of the big 120mm rounds were fired by the M1A1 guns. The A-10s may seem to have expended their ammunition rather exorbitantly, but they were designed to do that: the firing rate of these guns is 3,900 rounds per minute, or 65 rounds per second. In the Gulf they were also used to shoot aircraft, bunkers, and small vehicles. A-10 pilots became so bored with their task that they began to speak of "plinking tanks," as if they were tin cans.

What makes these details significant is that the 30mm and 120mm rounds fired in the Gulf were made of depleted uranium (DU), a waste product stored in tens of thousands of drums at the plants where uranium has been enriched for warheads and reactor fuel since the Manhattan Project. As with the many high-tech weapons used in the Gulf for the first time, this was the first full battlefield test for DU armaments. Also being battle-tested was the DU armor plate on the Abrams tanks, which sustained only negligible damage from Iraqi guns even when hit at ranges as close as 400 meters. The total U.S. tank damage inflicted by Iraq's armed forces consisted of a few tanks disabled by mines.

<span id='postcolor'>

fas.org:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The 30mm x 173 GAU-8/A ammunition was among the most effective ammunition used in Operation Desert Storm with proven performance against all targets, including tanks, armored and light vehicles<span id='postcolor'>

Personally i wouldn´t stress my luck sitting in an M1A2 or any other latest generation tank, when a hail of some dozens of 30mm DU rounds would be knocking on the armor. Tanks , while having strong armor locations, always have respective weak locations, to keep within weight limits and therefore keeping mobility, what is highly essential.

They are far from being invincible, read yourself up about the chechnya conflict and what happened to T-80´s over there caused by inferior and obsolete RPG´s.

[Benze 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The 30mm Vulcan mounted on the A-10 Thunderbolt will not, I repeat WILL NOT penetrate the armor of a battle tank.<span id='postcolor'>

You would be advised to stop posting in this thread lest you embarrass yourself more.

GAU8 can penetrate ANY MBT EASILY. EASILY.

God help you, spewing a bunch of crap about something you have no idea about. And WHAT THE HELL, it's CALLED the AVENGER, not the VULCAN. Proves how much you know, eh?

[advocatexxx 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Benze @ June 02 2002,19:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The 30mm Vulcan mounted on the A-10 Thunderbolt will not, I repeat WILL NOT penetrate the armor of a battle tank.<span id='postcolor'>

You would be advised to stop posting in this thread lest you embarrass yourself more.

GAU8 can penetrate ANY MBT EASILY. EASILY.

God help you, spewing a bunch of crap about something you have no idea about. And WHAT THE HELL, it's CALLED the AVENGER, not the VULCAN. Proves how much you know, eh? <span id='postcolor'>

LOL!

I'm not the one making an "embarassment" out of myself, as you so cleverly put it bud - you are : )

First, and I'm sure Satchel will agree, the Gau-8/A will only prove worthy if shot on the less-armored parts of a tank from a close enough distance (preferrably 800 meters or less.  The closer the better the armor-piercing results) at the right angle.  You can shoot a 100mm armor, but if you shoot it from a 45* angle, it considerably thickens : )  Don't expect this gun to shred modern battle tanks into pieces in a single burst "bud" : )

Second, nowhere can I find myself mentioning this gatling gun as "Vulcan".  Satchel mentioned it in comparison for all I know.  Perhaps you've had one too many shots of whatever it is you're drinking, ey ?

Thanks for the reminder about my somewhat exaggerated statement though.  My apologies for that.

Now, now, doesn't it feel good to be embarassed : )

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

Hey Satchel, can you post a link about the chechnya conflict?

[Satchel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Hit_Sqd_Maximus @ June 03 2002,05:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hey Satchel, can you post a link about the chechnya conflict?<span id='postcolor'>

Here:Military Analyses Network (Fas.org) Chechnya

Many articles,internal /external  links and general information about the background and nature of the conflict.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/chechnya.htm

Here:Russian-Manufactured Armored Vehicle Vulnerability in Urban Combat: The Chechnya Experience

by Mr. Lester W. Grau, Foreign Military Studies Office, Fort Leavenworth, KS.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/docs/rusav.htm

Here:Why the Russian Military Failed in Chechnya

by MAJ Raymond C. Finch, III-older article about 1st Chechnya war.

http://call.army.mil/products/spc_sdy/98-16/russmil.htm

Here:The Most Powerful Enemy of a Main Battle Tank

Author unknown, but good reading.

http://babriet.tripod.com/articles/art_enemyofmbt.htm

Should do .

[SKULLS_Viper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">GAU8 can penetrate ANY MBT EASILY. EASILY.

<span id='postcolor'>

Well, no one actually tryied it on the M1A1 -A2 so so you cant be so shure.I mean, look at a iraq 125mm heat round, it didnt do nothing to a M1A1, so i dont think a 30mm would peirce the M1A1-A2 easily, all though i havent tryed it, nor have you, nor the US.

[advocatexxx 0]

The Iraquis used HEAT rounds against the American Abrams' ? Darn. Those guys never cease to amaze me.

[SKULLS_Viper 0]

Or what ever thoses T-72 125mm rounds, i cant remeber.

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

I thought HEAT was High Explosive Anti-Tank. So wouldnt that mean unlike OFP that a HEAT round is what you would want to use against a tank in RL?

[Kermit 0]

Yes, the rudder is fucked as of yet. I am using version one point four six.

Advocate, you did call it "thirty millimeter Vulcan." The Vulcan is twenty millimeter with six barrels, the Avanger cannon is thirty millimeter with seven barrels.

Some of you are forgetting that the Avenger cannon fires DPU armor piercing rounds. Those things can go through *anything*.

By the way, I'm pretty sure the A-10 often does its strafing runs inverted (upside down). This, I've heard, is to maximize the pilot's view of the ground. However, it does sort of render useless the two inch thick titanium armor around the pilot. Bullet proof glass won't even think about stopping anything above a rifle round.

By the way, it's VERY hard to shoot down an A-10. They can take massive amounts of damage, including a missing stabilizer and engine and the better part of the wing.

They don't call it "tank killer" for nothing. If, for some reason, the crew isn't killed on the first run, they better be prepared to run and clean the shit out of their pants - in that order. I would never take my chances against an A-10 in any tank ever made.

Tell you what - anyone who has faith in a tank, well, you take your tank, and I'll take my A-10. Guess who would win?