RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

[Damian90 697]

Im all for realism,but it seems to me these days its actually the russian economy,which is fairing better than the american one

No, Russian economy do not fair good at all, and Russian army budget is limited. Do not listen that propaganda stuff from Russian MoD. Russian army have even problems maintaining most of their current vehicle fleet. Did you seen in what shape most T-90 tanks are? They need complete overhaul, which is expensive, and it does not help that Uralvagonzavod is corrupt company demanding too much money for production or service for existing platforms, this is why instead of ordering T-90A's or T-90AM's, Russian MoD order cheap T-72B3 which is nothing else than a cheap and relatively simple modernization of T-72B, UVZ developed a more advanced model of T-72B, codenamed T-72B2 under "Rogatka" program, but it was still too expensive for Russian MoD.

MoD have hopes that for example new MBT on "Armata" platform will be worth the prize UVZ demands, but people deep in the topic, says that at best, if production will start, it will be slow and vehicle batches will be small, so no more than ~300 to 2020.

On the other hand US DoD even when facing cuts, fares much better. I closely observe the situation and it is interesting, for example sequestration of Pentagon budget is not needed any more, it is kept so Obama can take that money and waste it on his useless welfare programs. There is many people in Washington openly saying that sequestration should be ended, because it can cause harm to not only military and arms industry but also economy.

I strongly recommend to read what US Army and Pentagon officials says, for example the ground combat vehicle despite media hype and hysteria was not cancelled, however because of sequestration, it was put on low priority and renamed as future fighting vehicle program. Funny thing because GCV program was on schedule and below costs, also both GDLS and BAE was able to reduce the base weight of their vehicles to 40 tons.

GCV can be called an equivalent to Russian "Armata" program, tough it is a bit different, as the intent was to use only common components within all vehicles intended to be designed within the program, first vehicle of course was heavy infantry fighting vehicle as replacement for M2. There were also mentioned new self propelled howitzer and so called secondary vehicle, but this not matured enough before program hit the low priority phase. But both GDLS and BAE are still working on their designs.

In the mean time, US Army decided that funds saved on GCV should be used elsewhere, this is who Engineering Change Proposal modernization programs started for existing platforms.

M1 tank ECP1 is currently reaching it's final R&D phase and production should start perhaps in 2016, 9 prototypes are currently tested by US Army, and also work on ECP2 should start in next years.

M2 infantry fighting vehicle is currently receiving it's ECP1 upgrades, ECP2 upgrades are also nearly ready for vehicles integration and ECP3 is in early development stage. Also new specialist variants of M2 are in development to replace M113.

M1120 platform (Stryker) also will soon start to receive ECP1 upgrades.

The M109 and M992 platforms also recieve their "ECP" codenamed PIM, the turrets of M109A6 will be taken off their existing hulls, modernized, and placed on new hull that are based on M2 components, M922A1/A2 will be phased out, their usefull parts taken off them, and installed inside new M992A3 ammunition carrier also based on M2 components.

So in the end US Army's armored brigade combat teams (which are stronger, evolved versions of heavy brigade combat teams) will operate only two platforms, and stryker brigade combat teams will operate single modernized platforms.

ABCT combat platforms:

M1 Abrams Family of Vehicles (M1A1SA/M1A2SEPv1/v2 MBT, M88A2 ARV and M1150 ABV).

M2 Bradley Family of Vehicles (M2A2/M2A3 IFV, M2 based replacement for M113, M109A7 SPH and M992A3 FAASV).

SBCT combat platforms:

M1120 Stryker Family of Vehicles.

Of course there is more investment in creating more FoV's inside US Army, we have HMMWV FoV, FMTV FoV, JLTV FoV, HEMTT FoV and so on. So there is a lot of investment in US Army, but they keep it quiet mostly.

Also take a note that US Armed Forces have the largest, active tank fleet on this planet. Based on avaiable sources I calculated that US have:

~2000 M1A2SEPv1/v2 in US Army ABCT's and reserve of high readiness.

~2000 M1A1SA in ARNG ABCT's and reserve of high readiness.

~442 M1A1FEP in USMC tank battalions and reserve of high readiness.

~3000+ M1 tanks in various variants kept in long term storage facilities like Sierra Army Depot or Anniston Army Depot.

This tank fleet actually dwarfes tank fleet of China which would have around ~4000 tanks that can be considered as battle worthy in total. I count there ZTZ-96 and ZTZ-99 series, Chinese clones of T-54/55 tanks can't be considered as modern, and their battle worthiness is pathethic. However Chinese Army due to their size have neither capability, neither money to replace old eqiupment in all their units, so you can still see photos and videos from many PRC Army units with vehicles from 50's and 60's.

Russian Army tank fleet is also much smaller, forget about stories of thousands of tanks kept in storage, most of them are obsolete junk that is scrapped due to various reasons like lack of spare parts or the fact that because many of tank design bureaus or manufacturers disappeared or are currently outside Russian borders so not logistic support for these designs exist, and their tank fleet will be smaller and smaller every year.

Of course Russian MoD try to fix the situation, for example they were claiming they would withdraw from service and scrap T-80 series, leaving only T-72's and T-90's, this didn't happen yet, perhaps they postponed decision. Even T-64's it appears were not fully withdrawn from stocks, as we could see that Russian army sended these tanks to Ukrainian separatists, so perhaps they keep them still in long time storage, however in modern battlefield these vehicles are in huge disadvantage.

[sandefend 11]

I shoot machinima-video, aircraft changes its color every round (su-25), what to do??

[Damian90 697]

I shoot machinima-video, aircraft changes its color every round (su-25), what to do??

http://doc.rhsmods.org/index.php/AFRF_Decals

No, aircrafts can't change their camouflage pattern, only decals change. Explanation should be in documentation how to keep single type of decals on aircrafts or other vehicles.

[sandefend 11]

http://doc.rhsmods.org/index.php/AFRF_Decals

No, aircrafts can't change their camouflage pattern, only decals change. Explanation should be in documentation how to keep single type of decals on aircrafts or other vehicles.

thanks you !!

---------- Post added at 12:58 ---------- Previous post was at 12:50 ----------

http://cs540108.vk.me/c624322/v624322868/d41e/HeAwnA0VekU.jpg graphics on medium settings. all right? It's bug ? Soap

[Stagler 39]

Within defence, high readiness units are considered to be at peer level to western military formations of the same size.

High readiness units issue out optics more so than rear echelon units. At the moment colimator optics are being added into the default loadout of some troops, and the magazine count is being increased to six.

For example here we have VDV soldiers in Crimea, equipped with colimator sights (and 1p29)on their weapons.

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1650216/thumbs/o-CRIMEA-570.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/03/article-2571799-1BF9C24800000578-536_470x619.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/03/article-2571799-1BF9C20900000578-982_964x915.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/03/article-2571799-1BF9C22300000578-82_964x882.jpg

I will look to see that the VDV faction are better equipped than their MSV peers. :)

[Damian90 697]

Within defence, high readiness units are considered to be at peer level to western military formations of the same size.

High readiness units issue out optics more so than rear echelon units. At the moment colimator optics are being added into the default loadout of some troops, and the magazine count is being increased to six.

For example here we have VDV soldiers in Crimea, equipped with colimator sights (and 1p29)on their weapons.

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1650216/thumbs/o-CRIMEA-570.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/03/article-2571799-1BF9C24800000578-536_470x619.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/03/article-2571799-1BF9C20900000578-982_964x915.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/03/article-2571799-1BF9C22300000578-82_964x882.jpg

I will look to see that the VDV faction are better equipped than their MSV peers. :)

Yeah VDV as high readiness troops probably will have optics contrary to regular troops and rear echelon.

[mistyronin 1181]

Yeah VDV as high readiness troops probably will have optics contrary to regular troops and rear echelon.

Unless they changed something this last year, technically after Georgia's war only one battalion for each VDV division is designed as "Rapid Reaction" ( high readiness ) with about 70% of professional soldiers.

So even in the VDV I'd assume proper equipment for one battalion per VDV division.

In Crimea Putin probably sent the 45th VDV recon.

Edited December 2, 2014 by MistyRonin

[blackadder 10]

is RHS going to model the V22 sniper silencer thing

[Kaxii 11]

Unless they changed something this last year, technically after Georgia's war only one battalion for each VDV division is designed as "Rapid Reaction" ( high readiness ) with about 70% of professional soldiers.

So even in the VDV I'd assume proper equipment for one battalion per VDV division.

In Crimea Putin probably sent the 45th VDV recon.

Yep this, because their are still plenty of soldiers in Crimea who either ha no scopes or privately bought ones (aimpoints or Eotechs etc). And even in VDV military exercises the majority of them seem to not be using scopes, and considering the importance of Crimea when it happened, Putin would probably of sent the more "elite" as the soldiers to be shown the most to back up his vision of making the Russian army more modern.

[nikiforos 450]

Yep this, because their are still plenty of soldiers in Crimea who either ha no scopes or privately bought ones (aimpoints or Eotechs etc). And even in VDV military exercises the majority of them seem to not be using scopes, and considering the importance of Crimea when it happened, Putin would probably of sent the more "elite" as the soldiers to be shown the most to back up his vision of making the Russian army more modern.

When it happened and if russian troops actually entered Crimea during the crisis I'm sure he wanted his troops to look like rebells instead of hightech forces that anyone could see miles away they were regular russian units. I think it was more of a strategy or tactic by the russians.

[Damian90 697]

When it happened and if russian troops actually entered Crimea during the crisis I'm sure he wanted his troops to look like rebells instead of hightech forces that anyone could see miles away they were regular russian units. I think it was more of a strategy or tactic by the russians.

Nope, actually when they get the troops outside barracks (Russian troops where there whole time due to Russia-Ukraine agreements prior conflict), they didn't hide their identity. Neither they hide their presence in Donbas.

[Kaxii 11]

When it happened and if russian troops actually entered Crimea during the crisis I'm sure he wanted his troops to look like rebells instead of hightech forces that anyone could see miles away they were regular russian units. I think it was more of a strategy or tactic by the russians.

As said above yes they didnt try to hide their identity much, while they didn't wear the Russian flag nor did they tell anyone who asked that they were Russians, it was very obvious they were and any other country would know straight away due to the fact they were all pretty uniform wearing the then pretty new EMR, with a lot of the latest equipment or standard issue equipment (Ak-74m's which you wouldn't normally see in rebels) and even on Red-alliance they were saying how that the Russians looked better equipped/modern than they expected.

[miketim 20]

I tried to sort of replicate loosley the look of those troops with the rhs stuff earlier today when taking screenshots : http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=350320153

I used an Ak-12 though, and I am not sure thats even the correct helmet. :) lol

[HaZZarD 2]

Hey guys, is there a virtual vehicle spawner for RHS ?

[soul_assassin 1750]

I tried to sort of replicate loosley the look of those troops with the rhs stuff earlier today when taking screenshots : http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=350320153

I used an Ak-12 though, and I am not sure thats even the correct helmet. :) lol

AK-12s are not fielded at all yet. The helmet is fine or you can also use 6B27, also to have the straps nicely with the balaclava use the helmets with built in face masks.

[Damian90 697]

And to add a bit more, it is not certain if AK-12 will be purchased by Russian Army at all, or it's competitor a modified AEK-971, designated if I am not mistake as A-545, Russian Army might end up with modernized AK-74M.

[Dorak 11]

I transfer 20$ right now to whoever is responsible for the weapons in RHS to do a VKS.

[Fennek1661 10]

Hey RHS team. Really really great work so far! Just amazing!

By the way i got a question: Are there some landing boats in the planning? :)

[Kaxii 11]

I transfer 20$ right now to whoever is responsible for the weapons in RHS to do a VKS.

http://www.rtba.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/DSC_1149.jpg

It doesn't work like that

[Stagler 39]

Hey RHS team. Really really great work so far! Just amazing!

By the way i got a question: Are there some landing boats in the planning? :)

Maybe.

[kgino1045 12]

Is there any site to see some WIP picture or video? if there is, i would like to know

[bakerman 247]

Is there any site to see some WIP picture or video? if there is, i would like to know

https://www.facebook.com/redhammerstudios

[Kaxii 11]

I'm not sure if it's a bug (or if it has been reported already) but some of the T-80U destroyed parts are textured as not being destroyed:

http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/52119598854672257/885F716F0EC89EC8FBC04978BF23BC2BCF68252C/1024x640.resizedimage (184 kB)

(The one at the front)

[samyg 3]

I know that a custom modeled M249 and M240B is in the works to replace the Arma 2 placeholders, but are the M4s set? My question would be, are we going to see anymore versions of the M4s, maybe versions with rail covers? or M4s with the polymer handguard?

[mistyronin 1181]

I'm not sure if it's a bug (or if it has been reported already) but some of the T-80U destroyed parts are textured as not being destroyed

I don't think we were aware of it. Thank you for the report :)