Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Kornet-E vs Abrams front turret armor - 2:0

442301_original.jpg

 

442473_original.jpg

 

441949_original.jpg

 

 

Like the last time hit in the front of turret.
ATGM  penetrate the front armor of the turret, armor fences and detonate ammunition in a niche of the turret.
Warhead power(Kornet-E - export version(!)) is impressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll wait Damian impression on those pics.Last time they were a clear fake.

BTW can't say if the vehicle was an abrams or anything else.The photo is unclear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can one tell that that's an Abrams? Could be any tank.... Just a mesh of pixels from my perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can one tell that that's an Abrams? Could be any tank.... Just a mesh of pixels from my perspective.

its an abrams, you can only see the turret, its clearer in the on fire picture 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is Iraqi M1A1M.

 

However to explain something.

 

1) Iraqi or in general export variants for Arab states, have different, and weaker armor than tanks used by US Armed Forces and Australian Armed Forces. The Arab states use so called Export Armor Package, while US ones uses so called Heavy Armor Package (generations 1st, 2nd and 3rd), while Australian ones uses armor package specially designed for them.

 

There is also difference in weight of these vehicles. Export M1 variants for Arab states weight 68 short tons or 61.8 metric tons, US and Australian M1's are heavier, weighting 70 short tons or 63.5 metric tons, and that weight difference cames only from armor, it means that US and Australian ones have 1.7 metric tons more armor weight, this is a lot.

 

Also there is a difference in materials. Export Armor Package is probably simpler, uses steel and ceramics, Heavy Armor Package is more complex, uses combination of arious armor steel types, ceramics, depleted uranium alloy and other fancy stuff like graphite coating.

 

2) We have our own estimations of vehicles armor and penetration capabilities of various types of ammunition, we put in to that research long hours of work, and a lot of headaches.

 

If you ask us to weaken Abrams armor, then nope, we won't do it. Mainly because we recreate vehicles and their variants used by the US military, which are vastly different than their export variants, besides this we put in to this research so much time and effort to be realistic, that we know very well what is closer to truth and what is not.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yo RHS guys and gals or it's just guys? I've been working with Blastcore tracers addon and I would like to make RHS compatibility option. In order to make RHS: Escalation to work with Blastcore tracers, I need from you people. Class names of all your bullets, I presume it's something like "rhs_762x39_ball". Now if you please post the list here or send me in the PM, that would be great.

 

Cheers

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=29359

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yo RHS guys and gals or it's just guys? I've been working with Blastcore tracers addon and I would like to make RHS compatibility option. In order to make RHS: Escalation to work with Blastcore tracers, I need from you people. Class names of all your bullets, I presume it's something like "rhs_762x39_ball". Now if you please post the list here or send me in the PM, that would be great.

 

Hey FoxFort, here you have all RHS' classnames for anything you may need (ordered by category). And they are updated automatically when new classes are added.  :)

BTW in our team you can find both guys and gals  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

since asdg joint rails got introduced with newest CBA update do we have to load now the asdg join trails RHS compatibility patch "asdg_jr_rhs036_v2"

every time we use RHS ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey FoxFort, here you have all RHS' classnames for anything you may need (ordered by category). And they are updated automatically when new classes are added.  :)

BTW in our team you can find both guys and gals  ;)

OK thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maquez: Compatibility patches are not affected by the inclusion of JR into CBA. To avoid comp. patches you need to include the code directly into the mod. Since this hasn't been done in a public release of RHS and probably won't be since RHS policy is to not have required dependencies I doubt this will be done. But that's just me guessing ofc :)

So, the only change is that instead of loading two mods (JR and CBA) when starting the game or server, you just need to load one mod, CBA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gues it is bug, but maybe it should be like this idk so I will ask you.

1. When you have BMP-3 ord BMD-4 (both up armored), for me both can be destroied by one RPG-7 hit. I know BMP`s are not super armored but when you have additional armor plates on side, and normal RPG round just fuck up whole vehicle after hit from 100m or more. For me it is something wrong.

2. Again BMP-3 and BMD-4 have atni-tank rocket 9M117 and this rocket are quite useless aginst armor, T-72 with no ERA and aditional armor can take 2 side hits and nothing happend, not even track it damaged.

 

Both "bugs" make this 2 amazing vehicles quite useless in game for players. Since they can be destroied by one rpg and in case of armor can`t do anything about it, where I think this vehicles should be able to destroy basic T-72. I don`t use option "excented armor" in game. I know that you are including your own damage system for armored vehicles, but as far as I known it is still WIP, so is there way to disable it while it is not finished?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gues it is bug, but maybe it should be like this idk so I will ask you.

1. When you have BMP-3 ord BMD-4 (both up armored), for me both can be destroied by one RPG-7 hit. I know BMP`s are not super armored but when you have additional armor plates on side, and normal RPG round just fuck up whole vehicle after hit from 100m or more. For me it is something wrong.

2. Again BMP-3 and BMD-4 have atni-tank rocket 9M117 and this rocket are quite useless aginst armor, T-72 with no ERA and aditional armor can take 2 side hits and nothing happend, not even track it damaged.

 

Both "bugs" make this 2 amazing vehicles quite useless in game for players. Since they can be destroied by one rpg and in case of armor can`t do anything about it, where I think this vehicles should be able to destroy basic T-72. I don`t use option "excented armor" in game. I know that you are including your own damage system for armored vehicles, but as far as I known it is still WIP, so is there way to disable it while it is not finished?

if you consider it a bug: http://feedback.rhsmods.org/view_all_bug_page.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and normal RPG round just fuck up whole vehicle after hit from 100m or more.

just saying, as far as I'm aware, the damage an RPG causes isnt affected by range, only its accuracy is affected

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gues it is bug, but maybe it should be like this idk so I will ask you.

1. When you have BMP-3 ord BMD-4 (both up armored), for me both can be destroied by one RPG-7 hit. I know BMP`s are not super armored but when you have additional armor plates on side, and normal RPG round just fuck up whole vehicle after hit from 100m or more. For me it is something wrong.

2. Again BMP-3 and BMD-4 have atni-tank rocket 9M117 and this rocket are quite useless aginst armor, T-72 with no ERA and aditional armor can take 2 side hits and nothing happend, not even track it damaged.

 

Both "bugs" make this 2 amazing vehicles quite useless in game for players. Since they can be destroied by one rpg and in case of armor can`t do anything about it, where I think this vehicles should be able to destroy basic T-72. I don`t use option "excented armor" in game. I know that you are including your own damage system for armored vehicles, but as far as I known it is still WIP, so is there way to disable it while it is not finished?

 

1. Any and all RPG variants can penetrate BMP-3 and BMD-4 armor. Both are aluminium infantry fighting vehicles, not tanks. Also range has no affect on HEAT damage.

2. The 9M117 Bastion ATGM is meant to be used against older tanks and light vehicles, its 100mm warhead severely limits its damage and penetration potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clear something, non of BMD or BMP variants in our mod have addon armor capable to protect against even smallest RPG's, all these addon plates increase protection only against heavy machine guns fire.

 

Yes, these vehicles, are literally, as Bakerman said, small, lightweight, aluminium boxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I know that BMP and BMD don`t have super armor, so this BMP-3 should be easy to kill

92F8B06BBDE96638022156E96EE4924682D7C2B5

 

but this one have additonal armor

2E597A3E34B2A5D87EF28000DCBBD70787034F83

 

so this big armor plates on side only protect from bullets? so RPG can one shoot kill it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes as damian said, those are inert armor plates for additional side protection against ballistic threats.

 

That's not the 4S24 ERA kit, which is probably what you had in mind. That kit is not in service nor in RHS, it looks like this http://i.imgur.com/LCtJdbU.jpg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To add what Bakerman said, these additional plates on BMP-3 are actually hollow inside as they act as additional buoyancy elements, besides increasing side protection against 12,7mm heavy machine guns fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To RHS team,

Will you guys make (M252 or M224) Mortar, because we miss it a lot in MP missions, NATO one looks not so good and it is used by both US ARMY amd USMC

 

Flickr_-_The_U.S._Army_-_Securing_Barge_USMC_mortarmen_in_Helmand_province_Afgha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To RHS team,

Will you guys make (M252 or M224) Mortar, because we miss it a lot in MP missions, NATO one looks not so good and it is used by both US ARMY amd USMC

It's something we have been talking lately. I mean, both of them will be made for sure; but I can't tell you when are they going to be released.  -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the thought of the M224 will we be seeing the ability for infantry to fire it by hand? 

60mm-mortar.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's something we have been talking lately. I mean, both of them will be made for sure; but I can't tell you when are they going to be released.  -_-

 

Thanks  Mistyronin for the info.   :)  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To add what Bakerman said, these additional plates on BMP-3 are actually hollow inside as they act as additional buoyancy elements, besides increasing side protection against 12,7mm heavy machine guns fire.

"  The BMP-3's armour is arguably the best out of all IFVs in its weight class and perhaps even beyond it. It should be noted that during the selection process for the successor to the BMP-2, the existence of highly effective American 25mm APDS ammunition played a significant role. In fact, it directly led to Kurganmashzavod suggesting to base the new IFV on the light tank chassis of Obyekt 685. Overall, the argon-welded aluminium hull of the vehicle provides guaranteed protection from ground-level 155mm shell splinters and small arms fire, which is a definitive trait of all IFVs. Early BMP-3's are often observed with "smooth" and plain hulls, though it can have bolt-on steel overlays attached to the hull.

  The BMP-3 employs spaced bimetallic armour with an integrated liquid medium package, which is a fancy way of saying that it has aluminium armour augmented with a spaced hard steel wave breaker, backed by a specially designed fuel tank which also acts as armour. Baseline BMP-3s are stated to have sufficient armour to resist 30mm shells frontally from a distance of 200m. Overall, the BMP-3 offers 1.7 times better protection from small arms fire when compared to the BMP-1, and much greater protection against HEAT warheads frontally. The addition of steel overlays over the roof of the hull and turret grants the vehicle complete protection from airbursting 155mm artillery shells.

The fuel tank located immediately behind the frontal hull armour is immensely well-thought out. It gives the BMP-3 the ability to resist 35mm APFSDS shells without increasing its weight - an outstanding feat all on its own. Thanks to the self-sealing nature of the fuel tank, perforation will not cause ignition, and fuel leakage is minimized."

And more - source (worth to read):

http://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.com/2014/10/bmp-3-underappreciated-prodigy.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×