RHS: Armed Forces of the Russian Federation 0.1.6 Released!(Updated)

[vasmkd 12]

great work looking forward to next release,what are those vehicles those?

I will say one is a APC and the other is a tank

clue is the number 80:p

[Damian90 696]

Probably BTR-80 and T-80's update with T-80U and T-80UD. Still I hope for T-64's. ;)

[spooky lynx 73]

0.2 will probably have twice as much content as 0.1 has on release. Content which has never been seen before ;)

But... But... I saw that screenshots with T-55/-62!... Oh am I wrong?

[Gedis 0]

But... But... I saw that screenshots with T-55/-62!... Oh am I wrong?

nor wrong nor right (for your life's sakes) :)

It's sad those screenshots got released, I hoped it'll be heart stopping surprise when released without notifying, but x-mas is x-mas, so it's excusable soul :D

[spooky lynx 73]

Hey that would be surprise for me exactly, no matter of that 'ancient' screenshot I've seen months ago.

[[ha]boris 49]

probably btr-80

btr-80a!

[fingolfin 1972]

I love you guys! Keep up the great work! :)

[Vilman 10]

Yes, BTR-80A with the 30mm autocannon ! Well, dear Bradley crews, here comes the pain... :D

[NeuroFunker 11]

mmmm, tasty!

[Gedis 0]

Yes, BTR-80A with the 30mm autocannon ! Well, dear Bradley crews, here comes the pain... :D

lol, you are comparing Bradley IFV vs. APC... but i like the idea. On the other hand M1A1 Abramses with M829A1s should get their pay back. :D

[Kamov 1]

lol, you are comparing Bradley IFV vs. APC... but i like the idea. On the other hand M1A1 Abramses with M829A1s should get their pay back. :D

30mm autocannon isn't something to be fucked with.

[Damian90 696]

I don't want to be an ass but. Russian 30mm autocannons fire mostly APBC and APDS ammunition, which do not have a good performance, and the M2A2 as well as M2A3 are mostly immune... at least at typical engagement ranges. AFAIK no APFSDS ammunition was developed in Russia for 2A42 and 2A72.

But then again, T-80U! Now this will be a formidable enemy to fight with! :bounce3:

[Kamov 1]

I don't want to be an ass but. Russian 30mm autocannons fire mostly APBC and APDS ammunition, which do not have a good performance, and the M2A2 as well as M2A3 are mostly immune... at least at typical engagement ranges. AFAIK no APFSDS ammunition was developed in Russia for 2A42 and 2A72.

But then again, T-80U! Now this will be a formidable enemy to fight with! :bounce3:

nonsense, all glorious russian technology is superior in performance.

[Damian90 696]

Well I hope this is ironic, is it?

[zenith777 0]

30mm autocannon isn't something to be fucked with.

BMP-2s of FDF have had huge problems with being able to damage CV9030s even from sides with KASI-simulating systems during military training exercises when engagement ranges have been more than 200 meters. Most of the damage they have been able to produce is damaging weapon systems and communication systems.

[Vilman 10]

Guys, do not judge only upon lexical knowledge. Try to substitute it into different situations. That's what ArmA is all about.

There is no need to blow up a Bradley (or any other vehicle) to take it out of service.

Do not speak like keyboard-gunners... :ok:

Merry Christmas !

[archbishop lazarus 24]

Damian90:

Actually, you only need a 12.7mm HMG to damage an M2/M3. It happened quite frequently in wars with iraq :) Bradleys are poorly armored.

Vilman:

Jó látni itt egyre több magyart! :)

[Damian90 696]

Actually, you only need a 12.7mm HMG to damage an M2/M3. It happened quite frequently in wars with iraq Bradleys are poorly armored.

You better change your sources, as they seems to be someones fantasy. I had access to the US Army vehicle damage reports via my contacts. 90-95% of all vehicle casualties in Iraq were from IED's and EFP's. RPG's were minority, no ATGM's, damage from 12,7mm and 14,5mm heavy machine guns was cosmetic. The original M2, M2A1, M3 and M3A1 were designed to protect against 14,5mm weapons over their front and side protection. The M2A2 and M2A3 have improved armor protection against 30mm 3UBR6 and 3URB8 for their frontal and side projections I even seen photos of M2's hit by RPG's and without ERA, that survived hits in preaty well condition.

What is important to say, if you are interested in the subject of AFV's analisis you need to have proper sources, mostly it includes official documentation, sometimes this documentation is not classified but difficult to obtain. I have this luck I have a good contacts, so from time to time something will be shown to me. However most so called "sources" in the internet, are nothing more than some fanboys fantasy, which I am do to my more proffesional approach against. But it is immposible to fight with fantasy spreading like disease with resonable arguments and knowledge gained through hard work.

But this is not this kind of forum where you can discuss such things openly.

So EOT.

BTW Hopefully new version of the mod will be released soon. :)

[Gedis 0]

Ok, if those reports included which rpg grenade was used, then they could be viable. Because it looks like this now: insurgents tryed to penetrate armour with OG-7V(fragmentation) or TBG-7V(thermobaric) grenades, that's why there were no penetrations...

It's the same stuff with iraqi downgraded T-72s and 1973 rounds...

So you are the same guy on mp.net, the pro abramser. T-80Us gonna love you then ;)

[scrim 1]

Considering the high number of Iraqis who were drafted to serve in the Iran-Iraq war, the first and the second Gulf wars, I think it's safe to say that the terrorists would know which rockets were which. I mean, they even have quite different shapes.

[Jastreb 69]

How about it? That tank looks really good.

Privet ;)

[Gedis 0]

yeah, some are really different some are almost the same, which makes hard for damage inspectors.

just some small variety of rockets here

[scrim 1]

And as is demonstrated there, the AP rockets are easily recognisable, so they would certainly not be mistaken for AT rockets and fired at AFVs. The Bradley can most certainly stand a hit fom an old RPG7.

Back to the topic: Looking forward to the new version.

[Damian90 696]

Ok, if those reports included which rpg grenade was used, then they could be viable. Because it looks like this now: insurgents tryed to penetrate armour with OG-7V(fragmentation) or TBG-7V(thermobaric) grenades, that's why there were no penetrations...

I do not consider here OG-7 and TBG-7 or other types of anti-personell and anti-structure granades for RPG-7. The general conclusion, whit which many of my Russian friends agree, is that RPG's were in generall not that effective as it is popularly spread. The general casualties would be much smaller if insurgency would not use IED's and EFP's.

It's the same stuff with iraqi downgraded T-72s and 1973 rounds...

I agree that downgraded export versions T-72 should not be taken as example of Soviet military technology quality. T-72 and UVZ-UKBTM products overall should not be considered as such, as UKBTM was allways second line designing bureau. Different story is with KMDB, KBTM and LKZ.

So you are the same guy on mp.net, the pro abramser. T-80Us gonna love you then

Yes I am the same guy, however I do not like the as you called it "pro abramser" term, give to me by some fanboys who are unable to discuss on civilized level and are unable to accept some facts.

And hey, I like T-80U as a design, though T-80UD was better, as a side note, I allways liked the approach to vehicle design taken by KMDB.

[Teflin 1]

What I really like to see though if you guys could make a replacement config for ACE, since the current one only replace vanilla units. If you guys don't support it, I humbly apologize for asking so...