NATO-Pact Realism Mod

[olds 15]

In between work on the

Real Armor Mod, I'm in the planning stages of a much bigger effort:



NATO-Pact Realism Mod (aka "NAPALM")

("No more obscure & future crap! Tried-and-true equipment for the big guys!")

I'll keep this initial post updated with an outline of planned features. Your thoughts are welcome as always. And if there are any NATO-Pact-history-types out there, fire away with obscure historical data now!

Summary: the feature set will be along the lines of Iron Front... lite: updated vehicles, factions/squads, and weapons. Initially just realistic versions of A2 ports. My interest is more with realism than re-skinning. I will do the later as there is time, but the former comes first. The target time period is 1985: so equipment and doctrine will reflect what was in use from the late 1970's-1985* in the European theater (i.e. not today's equipment). Everything will be sourced and documented with a minimum of arbitrary crap. The mod will also incorporate and improve on the armor/weapon realism enabled by the Real Armor Mod ("RAM").

I'll start small and hopefully build in layers from there. If you'd like to speed things along by helping out, PM me!

ETA: months... this post is totally premature :rolleyes:, there's been nothing more than planning and laying the groundwork with RAM so far.*8

Planned Features: (WIP obviously...)

1. Factions & Squads:
   
   1. 
      
   2. Correct squad composition and armament for US, Soviet, FRG, UK, NL mechanized squads and tank platoons.
      
   3. A template mission with tank & mech companies arrayed for each faction (for use in your own missions or ALiVE).
      
   4. Stretch Goals: add/enhance other NATO nationalities (France?, etc.).
      

[*]Vehicles

1. Convert A2 vehicle ports to realistically-armored historically-accurate variants (using RAM standards).
   
2. Stretch Goals:
   

   [*]Weapons

   1. All weapons will have the correct historical ammo (especially important for tank rounds and ATGMs).
      
   2. Stretch Goals: add proper handling of HEAT weapons (ATGMS, etc.) to the armor system.
      

   [*]Misc.

   1. ALiVE compatibility of course!
      
   2. Integration with the Community Upgrade Project
      

   Detailed Features! Browse and comment! Still being updated!

   1. Factions & Squads
      
      
   2. Soviet/Pact
      
      
   3. MRR BMP & BTR Squads
      
      
   4. BMP-2 or BTR-60PB (in place of BTR-70)
      
   5. 7 dismounts: AK-74/RPK-74/RPG-7V
      
   6. Sniper variants (replace 1xAK-74 w/SVD)
      

   [*]MRR BMP& BTR MG Squads

   1. BMP-2 or BTR-60PB (in place of BTR-70)
      
   2. 6 dismounts: AK-74/PKM
      

   [*]MRR BTR ATGM Squad

   1. BTR-60PB (in place of BTR-70)
      
   2. 6 dismounts: AK-74/AT-7
      

   [*]Airborne BMD Squad

   1. (BMD-1P)
      
   2. 5 dismounts: AKS-74/RPKS-74/RPG-16
      

   [*]TR 3-tank platoons: T-80, T-72

   [*]MRR 4-tank platoons: T-80, T-72

   [*]NATO US

   1. Mech Squad M2
      
      
   2. 6 dismounts: M16A1/M60/LAW/Dragon
      

   [*]NATO FRG

   1. Mech Squad Marder
      
      
   2. 8 dismounts: G3/MG3/Carl Gustav
      

   [*]NATO UK

   1. Mech Squad FV432 (SLR = FN-FAL)
      
      
   2. 8 dismounts: FN-FAL/FN-MAG/Carl Gustav
      

   [*]NATO NL

   1. Mech Squad YPR-765
      
      
   2. 7 dismounts: FN-FAL/FN-MAG/Carl Gustav
      

   [*]NATO Tank Platoons

   1. 4-tank platoons: M1, M1(IP), (M60A3), (Leo1A4), (Leo2), (Leo2A1,) (Chf-Mk10), (Ch-1)
      

   [*]Vehicles

   1. Soviet/Pact: T-80A, T-72A, BMP-2, BTR-60PB, (T-64B), (ERA variants for MBT's), ZSU-23-4, (2S6-2K22)
      
   2. NATO US: M1, M1(IP), M2, M113A2, (M60A3)
      
   3. NATO FRG: (Leo1A4, Leo2, Leo2A1, Marder-1A1)
      
   4. NATO UK: (Chf-Mk10, Ch-1, FV432)
      

   [*]Weapons/Ammo

   1. Soviet/Pact
      
      
   2. Tank rounds
      
      
   3. 125mm 2A46: 3BM22, 3BM29
      

   [*]ATGMs

   [*]NATO US

   1. Tank rounds
      

      :) I'm stoked! Thanks in advance for your feedback!

      * I'll consider post-1985 equipment on a case by case basis: there's an argument to be made that the odd equipment upgrade might have been accelerated (particularly in the cash-strapped Pact) if a real shooting war was actually being planned.

      ** And spreadsheets of historical data...lots and lots of spreadsheets.

   
   
3. L7-105mm: DM23, M833
   

[*]ATGMs

[*]NATO FRG

1. Tank rounds?
   
2. ATGMs
   

[*]NATO UK

1. Tank rounds?
   
2. ATGMs
   

Add key equipment not in Arma 2: Leopard 2, Chieftain Mk10, Challenger 1, M60A3, T-64B, AH-1F Cobra, Marder 1A1
Add ERA & composite armor handling to the armor system.
Edited February 20, 2014 by Olds

[PVT Watt.J 14]

Very exciting!

[zio sam 77]

Very ambitious.i will follow this project

[Ortikon 10]

I had just google searched for something like this, and it looks like you only posted this thread moments ago.

I'll be keeping a close eye on the progress.

Good luck on the project!

[mwnciboo 11]

This is exactly my period, if you need any help from a historical point get in touch, I have a lot of contacts. Here is my Cold War 1986 Wargaming Blog. I have alot of vehicles and details within the PDF's Orbats on my Blog, I also have alot of other details to help you out and share information to get the realism you desire.

http://stoppingtheredtide.blogspot.co.uk/

Also a mate of mine Andy, has alot of stuff here.

http://coldwargamer.blogspot.co.uk/

Would love the see the BAOR with Chieftains and FV432's, I know those models exist in A2.

Edited February 18, 2014 by mwnciboo

[olds 15]

This is exactly my period, if you need any help from a historical point get in touch, I have a lot of contacts.

Delighted to hear it! I will happily take you up on that.

Here is my Cold War 1986 Wargaming Blog. I have alot of vehicles and details within the PDF's Orbats on my Blog

Ah vehicle details and orbats--both will be most welcome!

Would love the see the BAOR with Chieftains and FV432's, I know those models exist in A2.

Absolutely. I have barely begun to tickle the A2 assets (I never played A2). But AFAIK the "BAF" expansion set was rather tiny and included neither Chieftains nor FV432's(?) Were these community-made addons?

(Trying to get-hold-of/use people's random addons is a dubious proposition. I'd be happy if someone wants to add their work to the cause, as long as everything goes through a rigorous process of standardization).

[serjames 357]

Yep lots of BOAR mods were released before BAF I think... Some were better than others... (kinda like the real vehicles :) )

See here for some examples....

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=14679

Lots more in there, but ARMAHOLIC is on a go slow for some reason at the moment ?

SJ

[kilroy the nerd 14]

Sounds great. Any maps, or will we pretend Altis was a member of NATO attacked by a Warsaw Pact garrison on Stratis. Though the constant knocking of the "obscure future crap" gets a bit old, especially when plenty of it isn't that obscure. Good luck with the project, hope it can get going full speed still.

I notice you don't list any transport aircraft of the era, however. What's with that?

[near_blind_sniper 10]

Very cool! The later period of the Cold War has always been interest to me. I'll be keeping an eye on this for sure.

[olds 15]

@Kilroy: no maps or non-armored vehicles are planned. There's other people working on those. The best approach, I think, would be to just fold in those other mods as each person sees fit. This mod should work fine with them, and the RAM improvements have little or nothing to offer in those areas anyway. Just need to focus on what makes the most impact with my limited resources.

The emphasis here is on ground-level combined arms: basically a detailed look at tanks, APC's and ATGM's -- along with proper OOB of course. I agree ported A2 maps like Chernarus would fit much better with presumed German terrain, and I'll be happy to use map ports like that when someone does a decent job there. I'd like to do more if there's time, and maybe other people will join in the effort, but better not to over-promise. :)

Edited February 20, 2014 by Olds

[LykosMactire 298]

@Kilroy: no maps or non-armored vehicles are planned. There's other people working on those. The best approach, I think, would be to just fold in those other mods as each person sees fit. This mod should work fine with them, and the RAM improvements have little or nothing to offer in those areas anyway. Just need to focus on what makes the most impact with my limited resources.

The emphasis here is on ground-level combined arms: basically a detailed look at tanks, APC's and ATGM's -- along with proper OOB of course. I agree ported A2 maps like Chernarus would fit much better with presumed German terrain, and I'll be happy to use map ports like that when someone does a decent job there. I'd like to do more if there's time, and maybe other people will join in the effort, but better not to over-promise. :)

theres A3MP?

[serjames 357]

There are also quite a few good European style maps. i.e. West Germany...

Try http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=16585 for instance... But there are LOTS more to look through here.

http://www.armaholic.com/list.php?c=arma2_oa_files_addons_islands&s=title&w=asc&d=0

(90% of which work fine in A3 along with either AiA or the A3MP maps pack).

SJ

[kilroy the nerd 14]

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?161223-Koplic-Arma-3-Island&highlight=koplic

Here's a map made for Arma 3 that would probably work. Wasn't someone making a mod off some Danish island, Tuno or something like that? That would probably be good too.

[PuFu 4600]

very, very ambitious mod here (especially in terms of size and content)..wish you good luck olds!

[olds 15]

very, very ambitious mod here (especially in terms of size and content)..wish you good luck olds!

Thank you PuFu.

The more Arma-2-port modders contribute to the Community Upgrade Project, the faster the work will go. :)

[olds 15]

The upcoming RAM feature expansion is really going to make this era of vehicles shine!

• M1's with working "Chobham" armor? Check!
  
• Soviet ERA* and composite armors? Check!
  
• Real RPG & ATGM penetration values? Check!
  

*(non-depleting so far--oh well, you can't have it all)

[Damian90 697]

@Olds did you received my PM to you?

[olds 15]

Research armor values for Cold Ware era Soviet T-64 MBT's and you will come up with a rather bewildering array of contradictory values. Some turret values are as high as 600mm, some as low as 330. (We are speaking here of actual thickness, not the effective thickness compared to standard steel armor, "RHAe").

What the heck is going on? Which value is correct? The answer is 'they all are, depending on the variant'.¹ The T-64 was in production for a long time--from the mid-60's to the mid-80's. (It was never exported in Soviet times and has since been phased out of Russian service, although a few variants survive in Soviet successor states--notably Ukraine²). Russian sources suggest that--while early stages of T-64 development used a traditional cast steel turret--an "aluminum alloy" filler material was soon introduced which increased the frontal thickness to 600mm. This composite was abandoned due to the space required and problems in the filler casting process. (Soviet tanks emphasized strict weight and size limits compared to western designs). A subsequent version used high-hardness steel plates which reduced the frontal thickness to ~400mm. Finally in 1975, came the "corundum" composite filler of embedded ceramic spheres, with a total turret thickness somewhere between the prior two (mid-400's). (The 330 value possibly refers to the area around the gun mantlet--a typical weak zone for many tanks).

--Mod Notes--

If we get that far, the mod will likely use the T-64B variant: corundum turret armor, AT-8 Cobra GLM (probably the 9M112M2 version), as well as the Kontakt-1 ERA variant (T-64BV as Damian pointed out).

[1-Tarasenko, "History of Russian Tank Development in the Postwar Period"]

[2-English & Russian language Wikipedia entries on "T-64"]

Edited March 24, 2014 by Olds

[CameronMcDonald 146]

I'd use Jane's.

The turret is also of the multilayer type and consists of armoured steel, aluminium alloy and armoured steel with a maximum total thickness of 600 mm.

This is for non-ERA versions, of course.

For the T-64A:

...with increased armour protection for the turret...

No further info given.

T-64B:

This was a major redesign of the T-64A, under the designation Obiekt 447A SOSNA, to incorporate a new hull and turret armour which was not as bulky as the first-generation Combination K armour on the T-64A, but which offered the same or better protection.

The article goes on to specify that the T-64B usually totes ERA, too.

Edited March 24, 2014 by CameronMcDonald

[Damian90 697]

I'd use Jane's.

I strongly advise to be carefull with Jane's, sometimes they tend to write not correct informations. ;)

The article goes on to specify that the T-64B usually totes ERA, too.

No.

The only tanks designed in Soviet Union with ERA in mind were T-72B, T-80U and T-80UD, not counting different prototypes.

Other tanks were not designed with ERA as integral element of their protection, but it was added later as addon. Thus these vehicles receive additional suffix V for Vzrivnoi = Explosive.

So T-64B with addon ERA is T-64BV, T-80B with ERA is T-80BV, T-55AM with ERA is T-55AMV and so on.

However from all these tanks, T-64BV had the best, most efficent ERA coverage, ERA was even protecting rear of their turrets in some cases.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Other tanks were not designed with ERA as integral element of their protection, but it was added later as addon. Thus these vehicles receive additional suffix V for Vzrivnoi = Explosive.

So T-64B with addon ERA is T-64BV, T-80B with ERA is T-80BV, T-55AM with ERA is T-55AMV and so on.

However from all these tanks, T-64BV had the best, most efficent ERA coverage, ERA was even protecting rear of their turrets in some cases.

Yeah, fair enough - I missed two lines in there. Here are the offenders, the first being a bit confusing:

The T-64B has a laser range-finder for improved first round hit probability, ERA and strengthened turret hatch protection.

T-64BV - This is the designation for the T-64B fitted with ERA. It was first seen in 1984.

[Damian90 697]

By the way.

http://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/5662.html

Here is article from Andrei Tarasenko blog, which compares T-64BV and T-72B and their ERA placement. Translator needed for people not knowing russian.

[olds 15]

Most countries produce one frontline tank at a time. But the Soviets had three in simultaneous production during the 1970's & 80's: the T-64, T-72, and T-80. The reasons for this are complex but it appears that politics and economics were at least as influential--if not more so--than military necessity.

The T-64 was the first Soviet MBT ("main battle tank"). All major tank-building nations made this transition at some point around the 1960's. They stopped differentiating between heavy and medium tanks when they realized that the heavy tank of WW2 vintage had become obsolete, and a universal medium tank would fit the bill just as well.

But this transition was an uneasy one for the Soviet Union. The T-64 was very advanced for its time. But this made it rather expensive for a country whose doctrine required large numbers of tanks on multiple fronts. And its numerous innovations came at the expense of reliability. Rather than modifying the "idiosyncratic" T-64, a different tank--simpler and cheaper--was pursued and eventually arrived in the form of the T-72. The T-80 was a later development of the T-64, with better mobility--being the first MBT fielded with a gas turbine engine. While it shared many of the advanced components of the T-64, the T-80 was even more expensive, and was logistically problematic owing to its gas-guzzling engine. While it became progressively more capable, the T-72 was not seen as the best rival for the new generation of NATO tanks in the 1980's (M1, Leopard 2). So frontline tank divisions in Europe tended to be armed with the "premium" T-64 & T-80 tanks, while other divisions--including the Warsaw Pact allies--used the T-72. (Downgraded versions of the T-72 also became the Soviets only export tank).

All three of these tanks were fairly similar in firepower, armor, and mobility--they were all MBT's, after all. This was odd for a country that prided itself--in theory anyway--on simplicity and cost-effectiveness in military design. Personal and political ambition helped initiate the process of multiple tank development. Additionally--for economic and political reasons--the Soviets proved unwilling to idle a tank factory producing one tank in favor of a different factory producing another. The Soviet Union was not a terribly wealthy country, and yet--fueled largely by it's success in WW2--it found itself in a position of global influence and fielding a huge tank army. Could it have gotten by with a single MBT (perhaps with significantly different variants)? Maybe, maybe not. But it's hard to see how building three different MBT's was the most efficient approach to Soviet military doctrine.

[sources: wikipedia, A. Tarasenko "History of Russian Tank Development in the Postwar period", Stephen Sewell "Why Three Tanks?"]

---Mod Notes---

The mod will start out with the T-72, as that is the only tank of the 3 available to port from Arma 2 assets. Time permitting, the T-64 & T-80 will follow. The focus will be on early to mid 80's variants (T-72A model 1984, T-64BM, T-80B). That being said, using the T-72A or B as a generic Soviet tank of the 1980's is not terribly unrealistic--particularly since differences between its FCS and the more advanced T-64/80 versions are largely lost on Arma's simplistic FCS modeling.

Edited March 30, 2014 by Olds

[zimms 22]

Love your fun facts, keep them coming.

[serjames 357]

Olds have you seen this thread ?

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?148154-my-addons-(Vilas)-upcoming-to-Arma3/page4

Vila's mods are some of the best available and he has models and themes covering your EXACT field of interest.

I also think someone of your credibility may be the right person to work with Vilas to preserve and best present his kit to the world ?

What do you think ?

SJ