Arma 3 is not going far enough with Technology

[Maio 293]

Well maybe OPFOR even got somehow a high-energy laser weapon system capable of providing air defence and Blufor can't do much against it unless its deactivated? IIRC such prototypes and their capabilities were shown last year. Just curious why BIS didn't show the H&K G11 - revamped for A3? :D

That being said, I wonder if BI considered adding some kind of anti missile/mortar/artilery defense system like the Iron Dome.

[Kamov 1]

That being said, I wonder if BI considered adding some kind of anti missile/mortar/artilery defense system like the Iron Dome.

they probably didn't because it can be easily overwhelmed and its unlikely it could intercept extremely fast moving A2G missiles.

[Tonci87 163]

Well I hope for systems such as Trophy to be installed on tanks. Mission makers will just have to make sure that there are enough RPG Soldiers to take down the tanks.

[scrim 1]

I wonder how the Trophy system will fare in the future? I mean, how can it cope with a top attack system? Or for that matter, one that is designed to detonate before it can be intercepted, like an EFP? After all, it's designed to destroy the projectile, so it's hardly up to stopping melted copper.

[Tonci87 163]

I wonder how the Trophy system will fare in the future? I mean, how can it cope with a top attack system? Or for that matter, one that is designed to detonate before it can be intercepted, like an EFP? After all, it's designed to destroy the projectile, so it's hardly up to stopping melted copper.

I guess that top attack systems can be disabled by a system that also scans the area above the tank and has countermeassures pointed upwards. How far away from a tank does a EFP charge detonate? How is it delivered?

I doubt that this system is able to intercept Sadarm or CBU-97 submunitions since their velocity is to high.

[scrim 1]

Honestly, I'm not quite sure about the distances for EFPs and Trophy and Quick Kill. I reckon the latter two would be classified, and that the range of an EFP would depend on how it's built. However, what I do know is that EFPs can be detonated from quite a distance compared to other explosive weapons that rely on shrapnel. I do believe that the systems would be able to intercept both SADARM and CBU-97s, since they both rely on parachute suspended munitions in the last stage of the attack, and the parachutes deploy around 100m up in the air at least, so they ought to be pretty easy targets.

[instagoat 133]

Honestly, I'm not quite sure about the distances for EFPs and Trophy and Quick Kill. I reckon the latter two would be classified, and that the range of an EFP would depend on how it's built. However, what I do know is that EFPs can be detonated from quite a distance compared to other explosive weapons that rely on shrapnel. I do believe that the systems would be able to intercept both SADARM and CBU-97s, since they both rely on parachute suspended munitions in the last stage of the attack, and the parachutes deploy around 100m up in the air at least, so they ought to be pretty easy targets.

The developer of Trophy claims that it can intercept APFSDS rounds (which are about the fastest travelling projectiles on the battlefield). The distance at which it intercepts seems rather large, from the grainy test footage of these systems that can be found around the web, apparently around 5 - 10 meters. Technically one could calculate the maximum theoretical distance for an EFP, since the equations should by now be available in public. I guess it would necessarily have to be within the kill range. However, russia is already developing weapons to defeat Systems like Trophy, using the "downtime" after an interception as a window to punch in with their projectile. They basically fire alight precursor round at a set distance in front of the actual round, and the Trophy intercepts the precursor, and while it resets (a timeframe of milliseconds, apparently) the main round strikes the target.

Also, for the F-35 vs Sukhoi drama: The problem isn´t that the F-35 is american, the problem is that it sucks. And the reason it sucks is the laws of nature. The best policy for the US would be to ditch it, and instead return to the much better F-22, which is about the best Fighter in the world right now.

[Tonci87 163]

The developer of Trophy claims that it can intercept APFSDS rounds (which are about the fastest travelling projectiles on the battlefield). The distance at which it intercepts seems rather large, from the grainy test footage of these systems that can be found around the web, apparently around 5 - 10 meters. Technically one could calculate the maximum theoretical distance for an EFP, since the equations should by now be available in public. I guess it would necessarily have to be within the kill range. However, russia is already developing weapons to defeat Systems like Trophy, using the "downtime" after an interception as a window to punch in with their projectile. They basically fire alight precursor round at a set distance in front of the actual round, and the Trophy intercepts the precursor, and while it resets (a timeframe of milliseconds, apparently) the main round strikes the target.

Also, for the F-35 vs Sukhoi drama: The problem isn´t that the F-35 is american, the problem is that it sucks. And the reason it sucks is the laws of nature. The best policy for the US would be to ditch it, and instead return to the much better F-22, which is about the best Fighter in the world right now.

Intercepting an APFSDS round? I think the system would need a very sensitive radar with a quite long range to do that. APFSDS rounds are really fast and the countermeasures need time to deploy. Detecting the projectile-> tracking it to get speed and vector->computing CM solution->launching CM->deploying CM->hopefully hitting the projectile. I know that takes only a few milliseconds, but a few milliseconds is a long time if something is coming at you with 1400-1800 m/s

[scrim 1]

I honestly doubt it is capable of intercepting APFSDS rounds. I mean, it can intercept RPG7s are about 5-10m as you say, but APFSDS round travel much faster than RPGs. Also, the problem with intercepting an EFP is that it isn't a projectile itself most of the time now a days, it's a large lump of very hot molten copper traveling at a high speed. Even if it can be intercepted, it's just going to stop a bit of it, and most of it will go on to hit the vehicle. In these days, EFPs are mostly found in IEDs and mines, meaning that there's no actual projectile that can be stopped.

More fields about the F-35s capabilities that some have called themselves experts about are classified, and it's a plane that isn't even completed yet. And on another note, continuing with the F-22 might be a bad idea. Russia and China are nowhere close to building them, so would the US Airforce really want the only two possible opponents in this field being able to model their planes after the F-22 for about two decades?

[Tonci87 163]

I honestly doubt it is capable of intercepting APFSDS rounds. I mean, it can intercept RPG7s are about 5-10m as you say, but APFSDS round travel much faster than RPGs. Also, the problem with intercepting an EFP is that it isn't a projectile itself most of the time now a days, it's a large lump of very hot molten copper traveling at a high speed. Even if it can be intercepted, it's just going to stop a bit of it, and most of it will go on to hit the vehicle. In these days, EFPs are mostly found in IEDs and mines, meaning that there's no actual projectile that can be stopped.

More fields about the F-35s capabilities that some have called themselves experts about are classified, and it's a plane that isn't even completed yet. And on another note, continuing with the F-22 might be a bad idea. Russia and China are nowhere close to building them, so would the US Airforce really want the only two possible opponents in this field being able to model their planes after the F-22 for about two decades?

The F-35 is a money sink. As you said it, it´s not even ready yet and it never will. You can compare it to the new Berlin Airport. Google it if you wan´t to see how to spend tax money big-time.

EFPs might get stopped by hardkill systems if the system is able to react fast enough (I doubt it)

[NoRailgunner 0]

How important are air superiority (F-22, Su-27/30MKI/30MKK) and multirole fighters (F-35/SU-35/Eurofighter Typhoon) in A3 or Armaverse at all? How many people will enjoy for how long BVR/WVR "dogfights" with modern/stealthy aircrafts?? Highly doubt that BIS is so much interested to turn A3 into a proper modern flightsim and/or tank sim.

[instagoat 133]

The F-35 is a money sink. As you said it, it´s not even ready yet and it never will. You can compare it to the new Berlin Airport. Google it if you wan´t to see how to spend tax money big-time.

EFPs might get stopped by hardkill systems if the system is able to react fast enough (I doubt it)

Oh yes, our great new Airport. It is magnificient (I live in the area, flew from the old portion of it to England last year). It is the most magnificient building site you´ve ever seen. Perfectly planned and executed, on schedule and on budget.... not.

EFP's are actually intercepted by hard-kill systems prior to detonating. The standoff distance for most EFPs is really short (just look at the distance of the ballistic cages around Vehicles like the Stryker from the hull.) compared to the range of hard-kill systems. I am unsure about the APFSDS claims too, but these people need to look impressive to sell their products, and I am sure they have the numbers to back up their claims at least on paper.

Trophy has been used in Combat, and has intercepted missiles of unstated type on Israeli Merkavas in the Gaza strip, according to Wikipedia. Hezbollah has been known to use Metis missiles along with locally produced RPG-2s and imported RPG-7s with various types of warhead (I suspect pretty much everything that was in service in the SU up to the point of its disassembly can be found in the hands of insurgents in the region). So far, no Tank with an active protection system had to defend itself against fire from other Tanks, outside of (likely classified or otherwise undisclosed) static range tests on the lab-ranges of the developing Companies.

I wonder how and how well these relatively new systems will be implemented in Arma. We don´t know much about their combat history, and getting info about their reliabillity is seriously difficult it seems, especially because only a scant few have ever been used in conditions actually resembling combat. As far as I know, only Trophy has actually defeated battlefield munitions fired against it in anger.

[scrim 1]

Now, the thing about EFPs is this: They're rarely used in projectiles these days. They're mostly used as mines or IEDs.

Here's a comparison between an RPG-7, and an EFP: The RPG-7 is a projectile which travels at a speed of 115m/s. If the projectile is hit, it won't damage the vehicle. An EFP, once detonated isn't a projectile, but a very large copper slug (meaning that there's not really anything the Trophy can destroy) travelling at a speed of 2000m/s. That's Mach 6, meaning that it's hypersonic.

True, the EFP has a shorter range than an RPG. But since they're mostly mines/IEDs, Trophy can't possibly detect them. Trophy detects moving projectiles, not stationary ones. If it did, it'd be triggered by just about any sort of metal it detects, including rifles and other vehicles. Once the EFP is detonated, it will be travelling from a distance around 1/10 the distance of the RPG, almost 20x faster, so I don't believe that the Trophy can possibly hope to stop it.

[Tonci87 163]

Now, the thing about EFPs is this: They're rarely used in projectiles these days. They're mostly used as mines or IEDs.

Here's a comparison between an RPG-7, and an EFP: The RPG-7 is a projectile which travels at a speed of 115m/s. If the projectile is hit, it won't damage the vehicle. An EFP, once detonated isn't a projectile, but a very large copper slug (meaning that there's not really anything the Trophy can destroy) travelling at a speed of 2000m/s. That's Mach 6, meaning that it's hypersonic.

True, the EFP has a shorter range than an RPG. But since they're mostly mines/IEDs, Trophy can't possibly detect them. Trophy detects moving projectiles, not stationary ones. If it did, it'd be triggered by just about any sort of metal it detects, including rifles and other vehicles. Once the EFP is detonated, it will be travelling from a distance around 1/10 the distance of the RPG, almost 20x faster, so I don't believe that the Trophy can possibly hope to stop it.

No it can´t stop it if it comes from an IED.

[scrim 1]

Yeah, sort of my point. It should of course be able to stop other EFP weapons, like SADARM, CBU-97s and such since they travel by parachute during the last stage. Provided that the Trophy system is ever configured to recognise those shapes, and mounted upwards, they ought to be ridicolously easy to intercept.

[instagoat 133]

Okay, in case of mines, the Idea really is that you jam or prematurely detonate them. RPGs also used shaped charge warheads, which are essentially explosively formed penetrators, aren´t they?

Same with gun launched and missile based HEAT rounds.

Hard-kill systems are against projectiles. Against IED/mine threats, you use detectors and jamming systems.

[Kamov 1]

Trophy like systems would be absolutely amazing, but I doubt they're going to implement it.

[Maio 293]

Trophy like systems would be absolutely amazing, but I doubt they're going to implement it.

Well the Live action trailer for A3 shows a tank surviving a direct hit from a missile fired from a Comanche. You cant see any signs of the missile being intercepted, but the tank moves from a cloud of smoke undamaged and then fires.

The A3 vehicles section also says "Main battle tanks usually provide additional active protection."

[instagoat 133]

Trophy like systems would be absolutely amazing, but I doubt they're going to implement it.

Well, the Merkavas have Trophy physically modelled, and active protection has been mentioned among the implemented features, and has been mentioned on the fluff on the website from the start. Plus the stuff maionaze mentioned.

I am pretty sure that Arma 3 will offer tons of new possibillities, I just hope the implementations are solid and sound, and not ad-hoc and tacked on like some other features were in the past.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Just look how current "APS" is done in A2OA: AI tank is just firing smoke but doesn't move/doesn't fire = sitting duck. Imo the whole damage and targeting (+ improved prioritizing for AI) system needs an overhaul for players and AI.

[Beagle 684]

Just look how current "APS" is done in A2OA: AI tank is just firing smoke but doesn't move/doesn't fire = sitting duck. Imo the whole damage and targeting (+ improved prioritizing for AI) system needs an overhaul for players and AI.

Additional the smoke in arma is purely cosmetical and does not hinder any further targeting or locking by laser or image recognition ( and in fact there is smoke with metallic compounds that can even block microwave radar good enough to break a safe lock.

[NoRailgunner 0]

How many particles and smoke one can have in CO without decreasing performance? ;)

[cadmium77 16]

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

I don't think that 2035 is far enough in the future to see radically different technology in terms of new vehicles. Systems within the vehicles themselves perhaps and probably new missile technologies but not the vehicle itself.

Someone mentioned earlier the Merlin, this is a chopper that has really only just begun it's service life. Same with the V-22. In fact the only vehicle I've seen so far that has made me question BIS's choices is the L-159 we've seen in some screenshots however this is a reasonably new type and may even represent some rebel faction within Arma 3.

[gibonez 18]

In 2035 we will see most of the current military vehicles being used today.

How long as the m2 50 cal been in service for again ?

How long has the b52 been in service ?