Is Arma 3 authentic?

[Corvinus 35]

[Offtop] My favorite flamebait: AK, M-16 and StG 44! Let us follow the history of creation of various weapons by their appearance:

Of course, it makes no difference that one of the rifles above have a long-stroke piston, another have a short-stroke and the third have a direct impingement. Looks! That's what matters! Oh no! According to my careful research of this picture M-16 is but a copy of StG 44! What a twist!

[/Offtop]

In this video at 3.30 mark there is Merkava named "Slammer M2A1". It's clearly NATO designation, i.e. it's NATO MBT, so your argument of Iranians using Israeli technology is invalid.

Dixi.

[Maio 293]

In this video at 3.30 mark there is Merkava named "Slammer M2A1". It's clearly NATO designation, i.e. it's NATO MBT, so your argument of Iranians using Israeli technology is invalid.

Dixi.

Corvinus mate, I think you posted in the wrong thread :) Anyway: http://www.arma3.com/full/wp-content/gallery/imagery/scr09.jpg

Take a good look at the tank commander. Does the helmet look familiar?

[PuFu 4591]

why BI doesn't simply implement the real MI28 instead ?

maybe because they got fucking bored to tears with recreating in detail something that it's already out there, with almost 0 creativity, just technical skill?

if the developers start to take the liberty of implementing fictive stuffs (not even prototypes) it can tend to open the pandora's box for the rest.

what rest? addon makers? in that case i really hope that happens.

Edited May 7, 2012 by PuFu

[paecmaker 23]

/delete this postt.

Edited May 7, 2012 by paecmaker

[max power 21]

Speaking of Iran and their military industry, they have copied and altered several NATO designs. One quite interesting is the Panha 2091 which is a mashup of different cobras. Also from Panha, is the 2061, which is a reverse engineered Bell 206. They also have copied and upgraded the TOW system to be a laser beam riding missile, they have copied the M-47 Dragon, and several other systems. I think we can see that their culture of copying and improving captured equipment has been well established for decades.

[Corvinus 35]

Anyway: http://www.arma3.com/full/wp-content/gallery/imagery/scr09.jpg

Yeah, those guys are Iranians and camo is Iranian, but then again, I don't think Iranians would name their tank "M2A1", let alone "Slammer". But I guess, the complicated relationships of NATO and Iran and their equipment and names of their equipment and alimony and who should inherit grandma's silver cutlery is just another sinister secret of Arma 3, which will be unraveled only after release.

[Black Cat 10]

I have been trying to get this point across for ages!

The Mi-48 is an unlicensed "upgrade" of the Mi-28.

The Merkava/M-ATV/Namer/TAR-21 are either stolen, conquered, or just downright duplicated.

It all makes sense!

[daellis94 1]

Speaking of Iran and their military industry, they have copied and altered several NATO designs. One quite interesting is the Panha 2091 which is a mashup of different cobras. Also from Panha, is the 2061, which is a reverse engineered Bell 206. They also have copied and upgraded the TOW system to be a laser beam riding missile, they have copied the M-47 Dragon, and several other systems. I think we can see that their culture of copying and improving captured equipment has been well established for decades.

Iran has copied many things, but never replicated with almost exact precision, nor has it particularly improved on any Western designs It has always lacked the resources, how could it improve on Western designs?

More, though, I think the argument is Iranian use of actual Israeli gear, not just ripoffs of Israeli gear.

---------- Post added at 19:50 ---------- Previous post was at 19:43 ----------

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/spacegunconvent.php#id--Kinetic_Kill_Weapons--Railguns Projectrho on railguns. Also has a power calculation for the shell, to give you an Idea of range and damage, as well as power consumption.

The rails suffer from massive abrasion due to the shell´s sabot being in contact with them. The energy flows trough the sabot and pushes it forward trough lorentz force. So the rails get rubbed down with each shot, and they get -very hot- due to inefficiency issues and friction. (I would imagine if the efficiency limit for a perfect railgun is similar to that of a perfect laser, total efficiency would be around 50% or something. That means half of the energy fed into the weapons system would be turned into waste heat.)

Problem is energy, obviously. The Navy´s proposed weapon has an energy on target of 32MJ (Being fed by 64MJ of energy), with a range of 200+ nautical miles. Such ranges aren´t needed for a tank projectile, 5 ish kilometers would suffice.

Technically, we have yet to achieve 50% efficiency on those rail guns. We are fairly far below 50% actually. I think the figure is around 20% efficiency, which is, as you say, the main problem. Also, keep in mind the weapons we use today suffer from wear due to barrel friction. Though, I will concede not as much as a rail gun, but barrel wear isn't the biggest issue. Also, for a tank, you would still want to have muzzle energies beyond 25 MJ to justify a rail gun mounted on a tank (ETC could easily and much, much more practically take care of anything between 15 and 25 MJ), even for shooting upward of 5 klicks (approximate maximum LOS range anyway), which means each shot would consume around 100-130 MJ to account for waste heat, and that is just not a practical thing to try and store on a tank. It's also not practical to generate it on a tank with any power generation technology currently available or predicted for the near future.

[max power 21]

Iran has copied many things, but never replicated with almost exact precision, nor has it particularly improved on any Western designs It has always lacked the resources, how could it improve on Western designs?

More, though, I think the argument is Iranian use of actual Israeli gear, not just ripoffs of Israeli gear.

Why would they develop the Panha 2091 if it was not an improvement on the Ah-1T? I think you think I was saying that they are making better equipment than the west. That is not true. Modernizing designs from the 70s would categorically be considered an improvement, however.

[Black Cat 10]

Well, I added to my original post here, and my theory is that Iran has all this gear directly from Israel and NATO as supplies for their revolution, in a way similar to the Taliban, the CIA, and the Soviets in Afghanistan.

So by ending an evil, NATO unintentionally created a bigger one.

[daellis94 1]

Why would they develop the Panha 2091 if it was not an improvement on the Ah-1T? I think you think I was saying that they are making better equipment than the west. That is not true. Modernizing designs from the 70s would categorically be considered an improvement, however.

Well, technically they copy it just so they can manufacture something similar. They are not like to be able to engineer and then produce equipment to NATO standards, unless, as you say, they are modernizing gear that is many decades old, though in some more specific cases I may resist that analysis even still.

Again, as I have said above, Iran would likely not just take the Merkava anyway. It's not a tank designed to fit what would appear to be Iranian armored doctrine. Iran's tanks are already designed to fit different criteria. Bottom line, I would go with and/or prefer the suggestion that Iran simply has this captured Israeli gear as a supplement to proper Iranian weaponry, though whether BIS will abide by that preference we have yet to see. Though, technically, we do know their plan is to have a different Iranian tank, as the Merkava is just a placeholder. Along similar lines, I really hope they add a more appropriate NATO MBT, something like the M-1A4 Abrams maybe, or the Leopard 3. Preferably something actually from NATO and fitting of NATO armies.

---------- Post added at 23:55 ---------- Previous post was at 23:51 ----------

Well, I added to my original post here, and my theory is that Iran has all this gear directly from Israel and NATO as supplies for their revolution, in a way similar to the Taliban, the CIA, and the Soviets in Afghanistan.

So by ending an evil, NATO unintentionally created a bigger one.

What do you mean by that? The US never backed the revolution in 1979. It was a revolution decidedly against our interests.

Another thing I have to be pedantic about, and forgive me for this but I see this mentioned far too often that I can rarely resist responding to it, if the Taliban is seen using large numbers of Soviet RPG-7D anti-tank rockets and AKM rifles, then they weren't armed largely by the United States. What the US gave the Mujaheddin (the Taliban is not strictly the same group, it rose after the Soviet war) was mainly training, I think communications abilities, funding, and Stinger missiles. When funding is cut, you don't really have money anymore, unless you are a very frugal resistance movement, and most of their front line gear is Soviet in origin, since that is very suitable in a region where well trained men are hard to come by, and where Soviet weapons and ammunition are abundant to keep supplied.

[max power 21]

Well, technically they copy it just so they can manufacture something similar. They are not like to be able to engineer and then produce equipment to NATO standards, unless, as you say, they are modernizing gear that is many decades old, though in some more specific cases I may resist that analysis even still.

These facts are easily varifiable. In the time it took you to post your reservations you could have easily looked it up for yourself.

Again, as I have said above, Iran would likely not just take the Merkava anyway. It's not a tank designed to fit what would appear to be Iranian armored doctrine. Iran's tanks are already designed to fit different criteria. Bottom line, I would go with and/or prefer the suggestion that Iran simply has this captured Israeli gear as a supplement to proper Iranian weaponry, though whether BIS will abide by that preference we have yet to see. Though, technically, we do know their plan is to have a different Iranian tank, as the Merkava is just a placeholder. Along similar lines, I really hope they add a more appropriate NATO MBT, something like the M-1A4 Abrams maybe, or the Leopard 3. Preferably something actually from NATO and fitting of NATO armies.

I am not talking about something fictional or arguing about something that may have happened. I am talking about actual reality. They have reverse engineered many weapon systems and currently produce them in new forms, period.

[instagoat 133]

What do you mean by that? The US never backed the revolution in 1979. It was a revolution decidedly against our interests.

Another thing I have to be pedantic about, and forgive me for this but I see this mentioned far too often that I can rarely resist responding to it, if the Taliban is seen using large numbers of Soviet RPG-7D anti-tank rockets and AKM rifles, then they weren't armed largely by the United States. What the US gave the Mujaheddin (the Taliban is not strictly the same group, it rose after the Soviet war) was mainly training, I think communications abilities, funding, and Stinger missiles. When funding is cut, you don't really have money anymore, unless you are a very frugal resistance movement, and most of their front line gear is Soviet in origin, since that is very suitable in a region where well trained men are hard to come by, and where Soviet weapons and ammunition are abundant to keep supplied.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossadeqh#Operation_Ajax

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

tl;dr: The US (trough the CIA) desposed the freely and democratically elected government of Mohammad Mossadeqh (so much for defender of freedom), and established the dictatorial rule of the Shah (Pahlavi). Cue establishment of secret police (SAVAK), oppression, destruction of cultural values of the iranian people in favour of westernization.

This is the reason why the Iranian military has so much US and NATO built equipment (Including F-14s, F-4s, F-5s, G3 rifles, UH-1 and CH-47s, etc, etc, etc). Or how else do you think the Islamic Republic of Iran got hold of then top-tier US Military aircraft? They certainly didn´t just copy them.

This is what Black Cat is referring to, specifically. Not the Islamic Revolution. Didn´t you have a history class in school?

Edit: Ditto for the army of chile after Pinochet deposed the (freely and democratically elected) socialist Allende government (again with the help of the CIA. Durr hurr do I see a pattern here?). Most of their equipment was supplanted by, again, top-tier NATO built equipment, mostly from germany and france.

Edited May 8, 2012 by InstaGoat

[MissionCreep 12]

What the US gave the Mujaheddin (the Taliban is not strictly the same group, it rose after the Soviet war) was mainly training, I think communications abilities, funding, and Stinger missiles. When funding is cut, you don't really have money anymore, unless you are a very frugal resistance movement, and most of their front line gear is Soviet in origin, since that is very suitable in a region where well trained men are hard to come by, and where Soviet weapons and ammunition are abundant to keep supplied.

The Muj were supplied with Soviet weapons bought with US, Saudi and Pakistan funds. There are many reasons Soviet weapons are used. Among them, large black market/aftermarket supplies, easy availability of spare parts in that part of the world, Eastern bloc weapons tend to be relatively inexpensive, require less training to use, fewer specialized skills to operate, maintain and repair.

The US still supplies the Iraqi and Afghan national armies with Eastern Bloc weapons to this day.

Edited May 8, 2012 by MissionCreep

[daellis94 1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossadeqh#Operation_Ajax

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

tl;dr: The US (trough the CIA) desposed the freely and democratically elected government of Mohammad Mossadeqh (so much for defender of freedom), and established the dictatorial rule of the Shah (Pahlavi). Cue establishment of secret police (SAVAK), oppression, destruction of cultural values of the iranian people in favour of westernization.

This is the reason why the Iranian military has so much US and NATO built equipment (Including F-14s, F-4s, F-5s, G3 rifles, UH-1 and CH-47s, etc, etc, etc). Or how else do you think the Islamic Republic of Iran got hold of then top-tier US Military aircraft? They certainly didn´t just copy them.

This is what Black Cat is referring to, specifically. Not the Islamic Revolution. Didn´t you have a history class in school?

Edit: Ditto for the army of chile after Pinochet deposed the (freely and democratically elected) socialist Allende government (again with the help of the CIA. Durr hurr do I see a pattern here?). Most of their equipment was supplanted by, again, top-tier NATO built equipment, mostly from germany and france.

Yes, we have a history class, but I misunderstood, as talking about a revolution in Iran typically means the Islamic Revolution of 1979, not the act of the CIA and British groups putting the Shah back in power, or rather the son of the former Shah who was deposed by the Allies in 1941 for not allowing supplies to pass through to the Soviet Union.

---------- Post added at 14:01 ---------- Previous post was at 13:51 ----------

These facts are easily varifiable. In the time it took you to post your reservations you could have easily looked it up for yourself.

I am not talking about something fictional or arguing about something that may have happened. I am talking about actual reality. They have reverse engineered many weapon systems and currently produce them in new forms, period.

You are talking about other weapons and vehicles. Iran neither possessed in the past nor possesses now the ability to replicate modern Western technology. They can't even keep their F-14's operational any more. How then could they take any design they want and just improve it or make it at all as good as the real version? I understand they have many vehicles whose designs are taken from the West, but unless the original vehicles are themselves outdated designs, the Iranians have not been able to make anything quite as good. When you say new... well, I would agree depending on your use of the term "new." Obviously, reworking captured designs to take old vehicles up to "modern" Iranian standards makes them new only in the sense that this newest incarnation of the design is the youngest. However, I would not say they are new in the sense that they can compete with other contemporary vehicle designs of nations such as Israel or the United States, or even Russia. To use the F-14 example again, they had more than 80 of those fighters in their own inventories but were not able to copy them. For all of Iran's interest in improving its own technologies using outside sources, it is only capable of so much.

As for the Merkava... Well, I don't know quite what you mean. The Merkava was never copied by Iran. Even so, my argument was not to suggest Iran could not make use of or make its own ripoffs of the Merkava design, especially if we are talking about 2035 Iran, which appears to be much more powerful than Iran in the real world. I am saying that even if Iran took over all of Israel and captured enough Merkavas to be able to replicate the design precisely, I doubt they would like it very much. The Merkava isn't necessarily better than what Iran could make at that point. It simply fits Israel's need extremely well, but obviously Iran will have different needs as a result of varying strategic and tactical concerns. I highly doubt Iran holds the survival of its manpower to such a high priority as Israel, coming down, of course, to a simple question of population. Therefore, most of the design features of the Merkava would be completely unnecessary for the 2035 Iranian armed forces, and in some ways counterproductive, because design features of the Merkava in some ways detract from the effectiveness of some designs of other comparable Western tanks (counting Israel as "Western" because its military is very much European in character).

---------- Post added at 14:05 ---------- Previous post was at 14:01 ----------

The Muj were supplied with Soviet weapons bought with US, Saudi and Pakistan funds. There are many reasons Soviet weapons are used. Among them, large black market/aftermarket supplies, easy availability of spare parts in that part of the world, Eastern bloc weapons tend to be relatively inexpensive, require less training to use, fewer specialized skills to operate, maintain and repair.

The US still supplies the Iraqi and Afghan national armies with Eastern Bloc weapons to this day.

I know, that's just a matter of their use of our funding to buy weapons on the black market. Legally, foreign weapons cannot be manufactured in the United States. For instance, the 120mm main gun on the M-1A2 Abrams is very much a German design. However, it is, technically speaking, not the same Rheintenmall 120mm gun found in Germany. It is, very formally, the M-256, manufactured in the United States, under license. In the same way, what may be "foreign" weapons built in the US are actually licensed versions of foreign designs. So, the US wouldn't actually have Kalashnikov rifles to give the Afghani fighters (assuming we are talking about their use of actual Soviet/Chinese AKM and Type-56 rifles, etc.), but obviously those funds would be put toward purchasing such weapons elsewhere.

I just try to point that out because too many people seem to think we directly gave them all the arms that we are facing today.

[max power 21]

You are talking about other weapons and vehicles. Iran neither possessed in the past nor possesses now the ability to replicate modern Western technology.

You are the only one who is talking about modern western technology, and I'm not sure where that came from. I said they have a history of copying and altering or improving weapons systems.

They can't even keep their F-14's operational any more. How then could they take any design they want and just improve it or make it at all as good as the real version?

Dude, why are you putting words into my mouth? How in hell did you get that I was saying they can copy or do whatever they want? Perhaps you read 'many' as 'any'?

I understand they have many vehicles whose designs are taken from the West, but unless the original vehicles are themselves outdated designs, the Iranians have not been able to make anything quite as good. When you say new... well, I would agree depending on your use of the term "new."

Laser beam riding TOW. Something that never existed before, ergo something new. I think that's pretty much the universal definition of new.

Obviously, reworking captured designs to take old vehicles up to "modern" Iranian standards makes them new only in the sense that this newest incarnation of the design is the youngest. However, I would not say they are new in the sense that they can compete with other contemporary vehicle designs of nations such as Israel or the United States, or even Russia. To use the F-14 example again, they had more than 80 of those fighters in their own inventories but were not able to copy them. For all of Iran's interest in improving its own technologies using outside sources, it is only capable of so much.

What's your point?

As for the Merkava... Well, I don't know quite what you mean. The Merkava was never copied by Iran.

No, I don't know what you mean. I never mentioned the Merkava at all.

Even so, my argument was not to suggest Iran could not make use of or make its own ripoffs of the Merkava design, especially if we are talking about 2035 Iran, which appears to be much more powerful than Iran in the real world. I am saying that even if Iran took over all of Israel and captured enough Merkavas to be able to replicate the design precisely, I doubt they would like it very much. The Merkava isn't necessarily better than what Iran could make at that point. It simply fits Israel's need extremely well, but obviously Iran will have different needs as a result of varying strategic and tactical concerns. I highly doubt Iran holds the survival of its manpower to such a high priority as Israel, coming down, of course, to a simple question of population. Therefore, most of the design features of the Merkava would be completely unnecessary for the 2035 Iranian armed forces, and in some ways counterproductive, because design features of the Merkava in some ways detract from the effectiveness of some designs of other comparable Western tanks (counting Israel as "Western" because its military is very much European in character).

At this point we don't even know which side the Merkava is on. Again, I am not talking about anything from the game, just that their military industry does actually take existing things and copy them or alter them. They have even created a weird mash up of two (very similar) helicopters.

[slatts 1978]

cant we all have a little bit of fun with the railgun and stop bashing it? most of us know the pros and cons of having one...

[dm 9]

Laser beam riding TOW.

Isnt that, by definition, no longer TOW? :P

[max power 21]

Isnt that, by definition, no longer TOW? :P

I was thinking about that when I was writing it. I think it's not longer optically tracked, too. TLBR doesn't have the same ring to it, though.

[onlyrazor 11]

TLBR doesn't have the same ring to it, though.

Toolbar sounds kind of catchy, actually.

[cychou 11]

Yay, this again...

Does the cannon (looks like a GAU-19 or M197 to me) have verifiable specs? Yes

Do the missiles have verifiable specs? Yes

Do the rockets have verifiable specs? Yes

Will it have a specified fuel capacity? Yes (engine specs and rotor configuration dont matter in the ArmA series)

Will it have a specified top speed? Yes

it's the fact to addition existing weapons from diffferents choppers into only one chopper that make this MI48 unrealistic. this is fancy.

---------- Post added at 09:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:43 PM ----------

maybe because they got fucking bored to tears with recreating in detail something that it's already out there (MI28), with almost 0 creativity, just technical skill?

available MI28 as an addon is far to be finished in term of weaponry systems (missile guidance, FCS) bugs, textures, avionics, behaviours...etc

https://dev-heaven.net/projects/ericm-mi28

I would have preferred that B.I continue to develop this addon (to reach TOH level of detail) and officially introduce it in A3 instead of a fictive MI48 flying joke.

Hopefully ACE team will fix lot of these kind of fancy things and will stick with Realism in mind.

Edited May 9, 2012 by cychou

[slatts 1978]

it's the fact to addition existing weapons from diffferents choppers into only one chopper that make this MI48 unrealistic. this is fancy.

so you can safely say, without a shadow of doubt, that nothing like this CAN ever exist?

whats wrong with a little possible designs? something like this can fly and work if someone decided to make one in real life.

it might not be real, but if it was, it would work

[maddogx 13]

It seems that "zero imagination" is an incurable disease. Case in point: this thread.

Don't even bother trying.

[PuFu 4591]

it's the fact to addition existing weapons from diffferents choppers into only one chopper that make this MI48 unrealistic. this is fancy.

imag...wait for it

nation...

just not...

available MI28 as an addon is far to be finished in term of weaponry systems (missile guidance, FCS) bugs, textures, avionics, behaviours...etc

1. that is an open project. Have YOU tried to make it better?

2. i am certain someone might come up with a better one for A3..

I would have preferred that B.I continue to develop this addon (to reach TOH level of detail) and officially introduce it in A3 instead of a fictive MI48 flying joke.

I would have preferred everyone on this forums to have a certain decency in their thoughts, or at least the translation of those into posts. That's the real joke here.

[cychou 11]

I would have preferred everyone on this forums to have a certain decency in their thoughts, or at least the translation of those into posts. That's the real joke here.

to present MI48 as an authentic thing is not serious. :j:

so you can safely say, without a shadow of doubt, that nothing like this CAN ever exist?

whats wrong with a little possible designs? something like this can fly and work if someone decided to make one in real life.

it might not be real, but if it was, it would work

Sure it's pretty cool to use fictive stuffs giving you new abilities etc... but it's getting away from authentism (the exact copy of Real life).

Addon making and mods will allow to bring back official equipments of today's armies (like ACE 3). so it doesn't really matter guys. :cool:

Edited May 10, 2012 by cychou