Mk 45 Hammer as NGS needs the artillery computer

[goose4291 11]

Currently, the Mk 45 Hammer is not usable as an artillery piece via the artillery computer.

 

I feel it would be better suited to its role if this was available.

 

Many thanks.

[Hampter 1]

I agree, it would give help with the idea of the ship being a support platform.

[the_one_and_only_Venator 163]

Also a larger max zeroing distance than 2000m would be nice. Something like 4000m since the vehicles sensors have that range and AI will start shooting anyways.

Like the T-140 has.

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

The Mk45 simply isn't an artillery gun, it lacks the necessary elevation (20° max if I remember),

it's just a direct fire backup weapon for the rocket artillery, which should be your go-to solution for problem solving.

 

Cheers

[martin_lee 33]

17 minutes ago, Grumpy Old Man said:

which should be your go-to solution for problem solving.

 

hm... I can't seem to solve the Mk45 issue with the missile artillery

 

Joke aside, I think in the WWII the firing solution is calculated, amongst other things, by inputing the range and bearing into mechanical computer (My secret identity is Captain Obvious, whose rank is less obviously not captain) This is done by some observers with those big weird binoculars (were they called gunlayers?). But then again, for shore bombardment, you just need a map and your location, and then you will have the range and bearing.

That wasn't quite unlike a firing computer, and it was able to do some indirect fire. It is not as good as a dedicated artillery due to low terrain clearance and shallow angle.

 

I am unsure of modern naval guns, however, since, as GrumpyOldMan pointed out, missiles filled those roles and have much greater range. Those guns are really now for close range protection I would assume.

[BadHabitz 235]

4 hours ago, Grumpy Old Man said:

The Mk45 simply isn't an artillery gun, it lacks the necessary elevation (20° max if I remember),

it's just a direct fire backup weapon for the rocket artillery, which should be your go-to solution for problem solving.

 

Cheers

 

The 120mm Mk45 is almost 5 inches (7mm short). From personal experience I can tell you that USN 5 inch weapon systems are indeed used as an artillery gun, and I'd assume the A3 version is patterned after the Mk45 Naval Gun System.

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

3 minutes ago, BadHabitz said:

 

The 120mm Mk45 is almost 5 inches (7mm short). From personal experience I can tell you that USN 5 inch weapon systems are indeed used as an artillery gun, and I'd assume the A3 version is patterned after the Mk45 Naval Gun System.

On which ship would the US Navy use 5 inch cannons as artillery guns? Destroyers? Don't know of any, cruisers have better suited weapon system 8"+.

Maybe I've missed something, but I know not a single US navy destroyer (which the liberty is supposed to be) that's using 5" guns for artillery, rather than as a backup weapon.

 

Cheers

[BadHabitz 235]

Just now, Grumpy Old Man said:

On which ship would the US Navy use 5 inch cannons as artillery guns? Destroyers? Don't know of any, cruisers have better suited weapon system 8"+.

Maybe I've missed something, but I know not a single US navy destroyer (which the liberty is supposed to be) that's using 5" guns for artillery, rather than as a backup weapon.

 

Cheers

 

Destroyers (Arleigh Burke), yes. Cruisers (Ticonderoga), yes. Both use the same 127mm gun mounts from the Mk45 gun system. From the wiki page: "The gun is designed for use against surface warships, anti-aircraft and shore bombardment to support amphibious operations". 

 

Besides that, I have personal experience spending hours and hours on a Spruance destroyer (which used the same guns) sitting next to the Gunners Mates and Fire Controlmen watching them and listening to their comms with the Marine Forward Observers coordinating fire orders, shelling the beaches of Vieques, Puerto Rico.

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

8 minutes ago, BadHabitz said:

 

Destroyers (Arleigh Burke), yes. Cruisers (Ticonderoga), yes. Both use the same 127mm gun mounts from the Mk45 gun system. From the wiki page: "The gun is designed for use against surface warships, anti-aircraft and shore bombardment to support amphibious operations". 

 

Besides that, I have personal experience spending hours and hours on a Spruance destroyer (which used the same guns) sitting next to the Gunners Mates and Fire Controlmen watching them and listening to their comms with the Marine Forward Observers coordinating fire orders, shelling the beaches of Vieques, Puerto Rico.

Most likely because the spruance destroyer isn't a LCS. Those ships are from different eras for different roles, the spruance has vastly greater anti ship capabilities than the LCS.

Maybe one of the devs can chime in to further enlighten us why the Mk45 doesn't have an artillery mode.

If it was for me I'd mount 18" triple cannons on a ship and call it a day.

 

Cheers

[BadHabitz 235]

29 minutes ago, Grumpy Old Man said:

Most likely because the spruance destroyer isn't a LCS. Those ships are from different eras for different roles, the spruance has vastly greater anti ship capabilities than the LCS.

Maybe one of the devs can chime in to further enlighten us why the Mk45 doesn't have an artillery mode.

If it was for me I'd mount 18" triple cannons on a ship and call it a day.

 

Cheers

 

It has less to do with the platform and more to do with the weapon system, as the role of the ship doesn't determine the actual use of the ship, it's the capabilities of the weapon systems.

 

Case in point; prior to 1992 the Sea Sparrow Anti-Air missile was, by doctrine, only used against air targets. Then in October the USS America accidentally fired two Sea Sparrows at a Turkish destroyer, hitting the bridge. After that, Sea Sparrows became a dual threat weapon system, and their use as an anti-ship weapon was trained to the surface warfare community.

 

If they don't have the artillery mode in the released version I will work on a mod to add it, but it really should be in there from the start.

[dragon01 902]

Do note that with the current system, at least, it's either-or with regards to arty and direct fire. CUP managed to jury-rig a dual mode weapon on their frigate, but it doesn't work with AI.

 

What I proposed would be an alternate variant of the gun (using the same model) with artillery functionality. At 120mm it wouldn't be a very powerful gun compared to 155mm, but still a nice thing to have as far as naval fire support goes.

[Janez 530]

Really? You could use D30 and M119 as both in Armed Assault iirc. Maybe that was only cleaver scripting in Warfare but it worked great with AI too. Animations worked as expected as well.

[dragon01 902]

Artillery computer (and, presumably, the current handling) was introduced in A2:OA. Right now, the AI won't use artillery-enabled howitzers for direct fire, and those setup for dual mode will fire into the ground (cf. CUP frigate) if used with the artillery modules. At least, last time I checked. The old scripting solution might still work, but the point is for it to be usable with standard arty support modules.

[martin_lee 33]

Right now when we use the sight on a mortar, we can get firing solution on targets with direct line of sight. If they make it so that it auto elevates instead of manually adjusting like we do now, that will practically make it dual mode. Well, for players at least

[dragon01 902]

This wouldn't work, the gun needs actual direct fire (mortar fire is always indirect). Arty firing solutions you see in ArmA are always for indirect fire.

[joostsidy 685]

On 6/28/2018 at 9:15 AM, martin_lee said:

This is done by some observers with those big weird binoculars (were they called gunlayers?). But then again, for shore bombardment, you just need a map and your location, and then you will have the range and bearing.

The instruments with 'eyes' far apart are called rangefinders.

[joostsidy 685]

On 6/29/2018 at 8:05 PM, dragon01 said:

This wouldn't work, the gun needs actual direct fire (mortar fire is always indirect). 

Mortar in direct fire mode, aka hip shot:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cB-r352j2FI

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

28 minutes ago, joostsidy said:

Mortar in direct fire mode, aka hip shot:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cB-r352j2FI

Same accuracy as a hand-held M134 I assume...

 

Cheers

[dragon01 902]

Or that guy with dual M249s on full auto ("this look unsafe" indeed). Sure, it can be done and, marines being marines, it has been done. :) Doesn't mean it's of any use for anything other than looking macho. 

[pils 49]

On 27.6.2018 at 11:01 PM, goose4291 said:

Currently, the Mk 45 Hammer is not usable as an artillery piece via the artillery computer.

 

I feel it would be better suited to its role if this was available.

 

Many thanks.

100% agree.

Let me quote one of my posts I made in the dev branch section:

 

Quote

Oh by the way. Devs, it would be really cool if you could make the ship cannon a bit more realistic. It should have 127mm, get another magazine with armor piercing shells, have a much higher ammunition capacity, a much higher rate of fire and an artillery computer. (A longer barrel that features a hydraulic recoil dampening system would be cool, too.)

For example, the most used ship cannon in the world has all those stated features. It has a rate of fire of 32 round per minute. 

Alright, let's say the ship is American, so they will still use the inferior American made 5 inch (= 127mm as well) gun: Link.

Rate of fire: 20 rounds per minute. Number of different type of projectiles the magazine can store: 9. Total ammunition capacity in the Arleigh-Burke-Class destroyer: 680 rounds.

Mk 45 gun in action

 

Guys, never forget: "Form follows function."

No matter how pretty a new asset is and how cool it may look, if it lacks its real life function/features/properties, it's of no use for a game like Arma 3. (At least it should be as close to its real life counterpart as possible).

Most people who play Arma 3 seek authenticity and realism. Yes, the new destroyer looks awesome. But if you can defeat it with something as simple as a mortar and if its gun has nowhere near the features of a real life naval gun, the shiny new asset will add little to the most crucial aspect of the game: The gameplay.

 

[pils 49]

On 28.6.2018 at 7:50 AM, Grumpy Old Man said:

The Mk45 simply isn't an artillery gun, it lacks the necessary elevation (20° max if I remember),

it's just a direct fire backup weapon for the rocket artillery, which should be your go-to solution for problem solving.

 

Cheers

Here is a real life example of how the Mk 45 is being used for beyond the horizon fire. 

The direct competitor of the Mk 45, the Oto Melara 127/64 gun is actually specialized for the purpose of indirect fire. Oto Melara has introduced a new kind of guided ammunition with a range of more than 100 km. Way, way beyond the visual range.

The Mk 45 might not be as advanced, but as you can see in the video, they're working on it. In fact the latest version has a longer barrel and they're currently working on ammunition that comes with the same features as the Oto Melara "Volcano" ammuntion: Range >100 km and active guidance. 

We must not forget it's 2035 in Arma 3. By 2035, the Mk 45 will certainly be at least as capable as the Oto Melara 127/64 gun in 2018. 

 

Latest Mk 45 version used for indirect fire. Fire correction via surveillance drone.

 

Maximum elevation is 65° btw and maximum effective range >24 km. So, the gun could strike pretty much any target on Altis while the ship sitting somewhere off the coast.

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

1 hour ago, pils said:

Maximum elevation is 65° btw and maximum effective range >24 km. So, the gun could strike pretty much any target on Altis while the ship sitting somewhere off the coast.

 

I was talking about the in game model, as has been the point of discussion by the topic author until the thread derailed into comparing the current gun in game to its real life counterpart.

20° elevation (as the in game model had, last time I checked) would make classical high angle fire (which the AI is currently using) impossible.

 

Cheers

[pils 49]

On 23.7.2018 at 6:54 PM, Grumpy Old Man said:

 

I was talking about the in game model, as has been the point of discussion by the topic author until the thread derailed into comparing the current gun in game to its real life counterpart.

20° elevation (as the in game model had, last time I checked) would make classical high angle fire (which the AI is currently using) impossible.

 

Cheers

 

Ah I see. Alright, that should be an easy fix for the Devs.

Btw. I'm pretty sure if modern naval guns weren't able to be used as artillery guns, the author would have never asked for that feature. I wouldn't call that derail either. This is a mil sim after all, of course people are going to compare the assets to their real life counterparts. Plus, BIS has pointed out several times they are working with military advisors/experts in order to achieve a gameplay as authentic as possible.

 

(I wonder who these military experts are, since the 40mm GPR shells of the Marshall's cannon are lacking penetration for almost 5 years now ... but oh well, that's another issue ...)  

[John Spartan 89]

On ‎6‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 10:01 PM, goose4291 said:

Currently, the Mk 45 Hammer is not usable as an artillery piece via the artillery computer.

 

I feel it would be better suited to its role if this was available.

 

Many thanks.

Hi Goose,
your wish has been granted. Updated version on Development branch.

Spartan out.

[goose4291 11]

Excellent news.

 

Many thanks John Spartan.