Rpg/law effectiveness

[Veovis 0]

I am curious. Could a modern RPG (16?) actually damage a Bradley, and likewise, a LAW to a BMP? I think the damage inflicted in flashpoint is a bit ridiculous, although by now I'm so used to it that I'm not sure if I could get used to a more realistic system.

[llauma 0]

The LAW/RPG's are made to be able to take out APC's.

If the APC armour is increased the rockets will get more powerful.

[Heatseeker 0]

Well.. one smaw at round can disable but not destroy a BMP3, you just need the right addons .

[Veovis 0]

Heatseeker I was asking about real life. I know the damage they do in flashpoint.

[EiZei 0]

BMPs armor equals pretty much wet cardboard but still dont think a LAW could kill everybody within 8 meter radius.

[bmgarcangel 0]

Honestly, an RPG-7 and probably 16 and take out a Abrams tank. In fact they say it probably has already more than once. You hit an abrams in the rear part of the turret or the top, bottom, or engine compartment...boom

Bradley, of course it can take it out, depending of course where it hits. It can hit in certian places and because of the Armor it can sometimes bounce right off. Other times it can completely destroy it. Than again, other times it has made holes inside the vehicle with it still being operational though.

M113 though, one hit, most likely...boom

LAWS where made for one thing, and their name signifies that. After the Korean War need for larger anti tank and anti vehicle rockets weren't in great need. Soldiers wanted something light weight that they could carry around without it being too bulky. The LAW ( Light Anti Armor Weapon ) was the answer. Now, its ment for light armored vehicles, not heavily armored vehicles like a T72, T80, or T90. And I really hate the BIS made it so that they could reload and reload and reload those LAW bitches. That makes me really mad.

I know there was versions made of the law which made it so that you could actually reload the Launcher and there is still those versions around, but the LAW today is becoming slowly and maturally the obsolete Anti Armor vehicle. These days more troops carry AT-4's, SMAWS, and other AT weapons.

~Bmgarcangel

[Vognsen 0]

I once took out an undamaged abrams with a single rpg in ofp... It was a cti mp game.

[svendejong 0]

Quote[/b] ] took out

Took out as in: it exploded or took out as in killed the driver/gunner??

The first option seems pretty impossible to me.

(but i could be wrong)

[bn880 5]

Well I do find it frustrating in OFP that when a vehicle like a BMP or bus is hit with an RPG everyone inside pretty much automatically dies. It's ok for the vehicle to be disabled but not everyone should automatically die.

[engen 0]

From what i've been trained for, we were instructed that one Patrol (6 men) takes out ONE Armoured vehicle, in terms of a IFV/APC. For tanks, call in artillery, or dig deep and pray.

We were equipped with 3-4 Pskott M/86's(AT4 M136) per patrol. For a BMP, to guarantee that it was taken out we should for example fire 3 AT4's. All the "one AT4/LAW/RPG can take out a tank" are pure lucky hits. And you don't want to be counting on luck if there's a 20-ton AFV heading towards you, HOPING that you'll perhaps disable it with that one übar shot. ;)

There's a difference in disabling an AFV, and knocking it out fully.

Cheers.

[benreeper 0]

There is no doubt that the OFP rpg power is VERY high but it was done for single gameplay reasons. There are plenty of times, in a mission, that you have to take out an armored vehicle and you don't want to be shooting at thing 3 times. If you did, you wouldn't have a chance and that part of the game would be harder. This rpg power is not needed in MP.

--Ben

[Heatseeker 0]

Well I do find it frustrating in OFP that when a vehicle like a BMP or  bus is hit with an RPG everyone inside pretty much automatically dies.  It's ok for the vehicle to be disabled but not everyone should automatically die.  

It would be better if the law/ rpg would simply disable the apc, but then everyone would disembark in panic only to be blow up sky high by another loaded rocket, it sux to have reloadable laws and for them to be so powerfull, noboby takes chance in using APC's for what they should be used cause they are too fragile to these unrealistic unbalanced weapons, one shot=apc kill+crew+in cargo troops, meh .

[Cpt. FrostBite 0]

Several abrams tank were taken out with RPG's in Iraq during tha war and lately I believe at least two were completely lost this way. No tank is invincible to them and the bullet will alway be stronger than the armor (as they saying goes)

But the armor is there to protect the crew and that has been done well. The crew in both tanks were able to get out and are still alive. One guy will have to miss an eye, but he isen't dead. His tank took at least one direct his with an rpg, so that's not too bad (although it's bad enough that the tank was lost, people are still dying and that the war is still going on while it should have been long over)

[jakerod 254]

When I first started playing OFP I heard something similar to this somewhere...

The reason you are able to reload a LAW is because in real life one soldier could easily carry 3 Law Launchers. However it wouldve been hard to make animations for taking 3 different LAWs off your back so they just made it reloadable which would represent the amount of time it takes to get off your back.

In real life I have no idea if that is true but I heard that somewhere.

[norsu 180]

That is true.

[Cpt. FrostBite 0]

true, in nam law-soldiers often carried two/three with them. Due to their light weight many could be carried by a squad.

[Rishon 0]

Several abrams tank were taken out with RPG's in Iraq during tha war and lately I believe at least two were completely lost this way. No tank is invincible to them and the bullet will alway be stronger than the armor (as they saying goes)

But the armor is there to protect the crew and that has been done well. The crew in both tanks were able to get out and are still alive. One guy will have to miss an eye, but he isen't dead. His tank took at least one direct his with an rpg, so that's not too bad (although it's bad enough that the tank was lost, people are still dying and that the war is still going on while it should have been long over)

Those were top Turret or Cupola hits, the Abrams (M1A2) can take a direct hit from a Hellfire and keep moving, even though seriously damaged. I seriously doubt an RPG-7 can destroy an Abrams unless it hits top of the tank.

I agree with you on the Armor bit though. Armor can only Deter harm not stop it completely. You can't hide behind something forever. Armor is there to save the people on the inside, the ones who matter. Now, you don't nessecarily want to lose a few hundred thousand or more dollars of technology either, so that increases the priority.

[NavyEEL 0]

Several abrams tank were taken out with RPG's in Iraq during tha war and lately I believe at least two were completely lost this way. No tank is invincible to them and the bullet will alway be stronger than the armor (as they saying goes)

But the armor is there to protect the crew and that has been done well. The crew in both tanks were able to get out and are still alive. One guy will have to miss an eye, but he isen't dead. His tank took at least one direct his with an rpg, so that's not too bad (although it's bad enough that the tank was lost, people are still dying and that the war is still going on while it should have been long over)

Those were top Turret or Cupola hits, the Abrams (M1A2) can take a direct hit from a Hellfire and keep moving, even though seriously damaged. I seriously doubt an RPG-7 can destroy an Abrams unless it hits top of the tank.

I agree with you on the Armor bit though. Armor can only Deter harm not stop it completely. You can't hide behind something forever. Armor is there to save the people on the inside, the ones who matter. Now, you don't nessecarily want to lose a few hundred thousand or more dollars of technology either, so that increases the priority.  

Sorry, but there is no tank in existence today that can survive a hellfire missile. I don't mean to prove you wrong or anything, but I must stand up for the main weapon of my beloved (AH-64 Apache).

[stgn 39]

Several abrams tank were taken out with RPG's in Iraq during tha war and lately I believe at least two were completely lost this way. No tank is invincible to them and the bullet will alway be stronger than the armor (as they saying goes)

But the armor is there to protect the crew and that has been done well. The crew in both tanks were able to get out and are still alive. One guy will have to miss an eye, but he isen't dead. His tank took at least one direct his with an rpg, so that's not too bad (although it's bad enough that the tank was lost, people are still dying and that the war is still going on while it should have been long over)

Those were top Turret or Cupola hits, the Abrams (M1A2) can take a direct hit from a Hellfire and keep moving, even though seriously damaged. I seriously doubt an RPG-7 can destroy an Abrams unless it hits top of the tank.

I agree with you on the Armor bit though. Armor can only Deter harm not stop it completely. You can't hide behind something forever. Armor is there to save the people on the inside, the ones who matter. Now, you don't nessecarily want to lose a few hundred thousand or more dollars of technology either, so that increases the priority.  

I think meany of the rpg's used on abrams have modified warheads which works like a sabot and is intented to be used against composide amor, and when used against the weak spots on the abrams(depende on version) will penetrade but are not sure to kill the crew. I saw a picture of a abrams A1 which had been hit in the right side it had penetraded but the crew members interceptor(body amor) had stoped it.    

STGN

[Lucretius 0]

RPG's were proven ineffective against the challenger II in Iraq

However the Abram was shown to be highly vulnerable

[Cpt. FrostBite 0]

RPG's were proven ineffective against the challenger II in Iraq

However the Abram was shown to be highly vulnerable

This had several reasons

-most of them were attacked from above; a place no tank (not even the challenger2) has good protection against RPG's

-The others were hit on the engine (from above); also a place almost no tank can take a hit.

-some were hit on the back of the turret, doing little damage, but setting the bags and pack alight that are stored on the back. The fire than leaked into the engineblock and destroyed the tank. One lesson than could be learned is that the crews need to find another place to store their stuff.

An RPG can go through 500mm of armor so not even the mighty challenger can take a direct hit. Most often it won't actually penetrate, though, but do some serious damage anyway.

Very interesting are the stories of Bradley crews about RPG's bouncing of their vehicle because of the sloped armor. Scary!. Also interesting is to see a lot of Bradleys in Iraq now bieng equiped with ERA amor. On an APC for crying out loud!! That's like killing everyone who's close to the vehicle.

[stgn 39]

Very interesting are the stories of Bradley crews about RPG's bouncing of their vehicle because of the sloped armor. Scary!. Also interesting is to see a lot of Bradleys in Iraq now bieng equiped with ERA amor. On an APC for crying out loud!! That's like killing everyone who's close to the vehicle.

Does ERA realy explode that much??

And wouldent the RPG do the samme only also kill the APC also, now we are talking about aint a Bradly a IFV(Infantry Fighting Vehicle) which mean that it is suppose to fight along side the infantry and not just protected it??

STGN

[Lucretius 0]

RPG's were proven ineffective against the challenger II in Iraq

However the Abram was shown to be highly vulnerable

This had several reasons

-most of them were attacked from above; a place no tank (not even the challenger2) has good protection against RPG's

-The others were hit on the engine (from above); also a place almost no tank can take a hit.

-some were hit on the back of the turret, doing little damage, but setting the bags and pack alight that are stored on the back. The fire than leaked into the engineblock and destroyed the tank. One lesson than could be learned is that the crews need to find another place to store their stuff.

An RPG can go through 500mm of armor so not even the mighty challenger can take a direct hit. Most often it won't actually penetrate, though, but do some serious damage anyway.

Very interesting are the stories of Bradley crews about RPG's bouncing of their vehicle because of the sloped armor. Scary!. Also interesting is to see a lot of Bradleys in Iraq now bieng equiped with ERA amor. On an APC for crying out loud!! That's like killing everyone who's close to the vehicle.

true the abrams were unlucky most of the time, however it still uses antiquated 1st gen chobham.

No challengers have been lost or disabled in iraq to enemy fire, although there are numerous reports of multiple hits by RPG's.

You could of course counter and say... well the US has more abrams in iraq so there is a higher chance of losing one.

that still does not change the fact that it is outdated and due a replacement unfortnately

[Comradesniper 0]

so if we didnt invade iraq in the first place the coalition wouldnt lose any tanks at all :P

anyway, more on topic...

i find the RPG too powerful in OFP. the damage it does to the larger tanks like the T-80 is a little unrealistic. Maybe its jsut me... bit it really pisses me off when 1/2 my tank platoon get wiped by a few hidden RPG soldiers.

[stgn 39]

so if we didnt invade iraq in the first place the coalition wouldnt lose any tanks at all :P

anyway, more on topic...

i find the RPG too powerful in OFP. the damage it does to the larger tanks like the T-80 is a little unrealistic. Maybe its jsut me... bit it really pisses me off when 1/2 my tank platoon get wiped by a few hidden RPG soldiers.

1. child logic ey

2. The truth of the modern battle field you are not imortal just because your driving a tank, scout and use infantry to take out RPG's/LAW's(I usualy ride turnet out in my abrams cause it give me a better view of the batlte field and turn in if I see somthing suspicios) I don't know wheter they are too powerfull or not cause I have never used one.

STGN