Small Arms in Armed Assault

[Second 0]

T-80s have autoloader in which shells are positioned upwards as in T-72 they are sideways... What i mean by easily destructible is that T-80s shells are more likely to be damaged (and then exploding) if armor of tank is penetrated... as they are bigger targets than if they were sideways. If i recall correctly this was one weakness that was corrected to T-90 (shells are again sideways).

So ukraineboy please not jump on my toes... I'm trained to destroy tanks and T-80 is my main target... Russia has thousands of them still.

[echo1 0]

I think that the easiness to destroy tanks with autoloaders comes from having a large number of exposed shells in the turret. Theoretically, this leads to a vulnerability to spall hitting the shells and causing a catastrophic ammo explosion.

I also heard that, due to cramped accomodations, the majority of the injuries in the T-72 have not been due to enemy action- they have been caused by the autoloader mangling the arms of the gunners!

The amunition stowage is a major problem with Russian tanks. Someone was saying on another thread that the Russians have improved this on the T-80 and T-90, but Im not too sure about this.

Yeah, the autoloader on the T-64 was notorious for injuring the crew (read my post on last page)

[martinovic 0]

In western tanks the ammo is stored safely (relatively) behind thick armor plates, so if the ammo inside blows up the crew can still survive. In russian MBTs the ammo is bellow the turret and kills the crew instantly if it cooks off.

[max power 21]

The amunition stowage is a major problem with Russian tanks. Someone was saying on another thread that the Russians have improved this on the T-80 and T-90, but Im not too sure about this.

Yeah, the autoloader on the T-64 was notorious for injuring the crew (read my post on last page)

I read that. I'm not sure what it has to do with my little bit of trivia, though. It seems like more of a comment on the innaccuracy of the modelling of certain anti tank systems.

[t80 0]

Well in T-80U/UK and T-90S you have a option...

Gun ammunition can be fed manually or  with automatic carousel loader ensuring 7-9 rounds/min rate of fire(T-80)

Ammunition allowance, rounds: T-80U/UK    

125mm gun 45 (including 28  in carousel loader)

Missile firing range, m 100 ... 5,000

so you dont have to have somthing in the carousel....

And some more info...

The T-80U is also equipped with automatic fire-extingnishing and  NBC protection systems. Removable mine sweeper is mounted to make passes in minefields.

smokeless engine exhaust(somting for modders)

[dreday 1]

I also heard that, due to cramped accomodations, the majority of the injuries in the T-72 have not been due to enemy action- they have been caused by the autoloader mangling the arms of the gunners!

This is one of the more popular Cold War myths that was cultivated by the "experts" who have never even stood close to a real T-72. Since the end of Cold War these horror tales have been disproved on numerous occasions. Any one who has sat inside a T-72 will tell you that it is almost impossible to get your hand inside an autoloader. There are quite a few cons to having an autoloader, but this is simply not one of them...

BTW, I think a lot of people don't realize that this is actually a very common injury for the crews of manually loaded tanks.

Peace,

DreDay

[dreday 1]

Well in T-80U/UK and T-90S you have a option...

Gun ammunition can be fed manually or  with automatic carousel loader ensuring 7-9 rounds/min rate of fire(T-80)

You are misreading this quote. Every T-64/T-72/T-80/T-90 can be loaded manually in case of a malfunctioning autoloader. This does not mean that any of them are produced without the autoloader and with the provisions for the human loader.

Peace,

DreDay

[t80 0]

thes was just some info that you dont have to put youre

hand´s inside the auto loader if you are scared off it

Also find some interesting stuff that even a T-55A can fire missiles, range 5000m Penetration behind

reactive armour, mm 650-700.

[max power 21]

This is one of the more popular Cold War myths that was cultivated by the "experts" who have never even stood close to a real T-72. Since the end of Cold War these horror tales have been disproved on numerous occasions. Any one who has sat inside a T-72 will tell you that it is almost impossible to get your hand inside an autoloader. There are quite a few cons to having an autoloader, but this is simply not one of them...

BTW, I think a lot of people don't realize that this is actually a very common injury for the crews of manually loaded tanks.

Peace,

DreDay

Not to be confrontational, but this seems like the standard boiler plate response to anything anyone has heard. I'm not saying that I believe that what I heard was true, but so far I just have two people saying two different things. It is more interesting to believe the former, in the absense of any real evidence

[Ukraineboy 0]

Enough! I'll admit it was mostly my fault for replying to t80, but he was gracious enough to go back ontopic when I asked (thanks).

Now, everyone back ontopic. What Small Arms implementations are people interested in.

[nyles 11]

I would prefer if the northern forces would not use the AK74, but AK47 instead. The '74 is almost exclusively in use with former Soviet Bloc nations and even in the Warsaw Pact satellites, the '74 never really came around much. Having an AKM or some other (maybe chinese?) '47 variant would make the scenario a lot more believable. Combine this with further AK versions (grenadelauncher, weaponsights, etc.) RPD, RPK and PKM squad machineguns, RPG-18/22, RPO-A and RPG-7 launcher-based systems and support weapons like SVD and AGS-17 and I will be pretty happy about the opposing forces. Add some BTR60/70/80 on top and I am absolutely satisfied about the North.

[Cifu 0]

I would prefer if the northern forces would not use the AK74, but AK47 instead. The '74 is almost exclusively in use with former Soviet Bloc nations and even in the Warsaw Pact satellites, the '74 never really came around much. Having an AKM or some other (maybe chinese?) '47 variant would make the scenario a lot more believable. Combine this with further AK versions (grenadelauncher, weaponsights, etc.) RPD, RPK and PKM squad machineguns, RPG-18/22, RPO-A and RPG-7 launcher-based systems and support weapons like SVD and AGS-17 and I will be pretty happy about the opposing forces. Add some BTR60/70/80 on top and I am absolutely satisfied about the North.

Well sayed!

[Ukraineboy 0]

I would prefer if the northern forces would not use the AK74, but AK47 instead. The '74 is almost exclusively in use with former Soviet Bloc nations and even in the Warsaw Pact satellites, the '74 never really came around much. Having an AKM or some other (maybe chinese?) '47 variant would make the scenario a lot more believable. Combine this with further AK versions (grenadelauncher, weaponsights, etc.) RPD, RPK and PKM squad machineguns, RPG-18/22, RPO-A and RPG-7 launcher-based systems and support weapons like SVD and AGS-17 and I will be pretty happy about the opposing forces. Add some BTR60/70/80 on top and I am absolutely satisfied about the North.

Agreed! But by the pictures we see it's too late...

But, for the sake of "realism" We can assume that Sahrani forces bought the AK-74 after the fall of USSR, when they started to export them. Look at Venezuela, they bought some 100,000+ AK-103s. So it could be possible Sahrani bought them...

or they bought them on the black market. When USSR collapsed, or during the process, lots of black market sales were going on.

[SHWiiNG 0]

one thing still puzzles me, with all these videos out now, you still havent seen a reload animation yet.. i wonder what they are like

[NeMeSiS 11]

i wonder what they are like

WIP!

(Sorry, just had to.. )

[echo1 0]

But, for the sake of "realism" We can assume that Sahrani forces bought the AK-74 after the fall of USSR, when they started to export them. Look at Venezuela, they bought some 100,000+ AK-103s. So it could be possible Sahrani bought them...

The thing about the Ak-103 is that its just a good 'ol AKM in black (and with some slight improvements) It can take AKM ammunition and magazines. The reason why the AK74 never took off (IMHO) was that it fired the 5.45mm bullet, and it wasnt as popular because most countries had millions of 7.62mm bullets lying around, and there have been maany who have questioned the effectiveness of the 5.45mm round.

[Commando84 0]

i think it would be cool if the south army would have Fal rifles and mixed odd weapons togheter. That would make things varied and fun when it comes to hearing different weapon sounds

I think there will be all the weapons that was in Ofp resistance + some new ones i guess. Would be cool if they made infantery mines and not only tank mines

Like in say bf 2 the sniper class can plant 'em nasty claymore mines around... btw hate it when they mine the roof toops so i can't snipe tanks with my At weapon, cause it seriously sucks at ground level but when fired fropm a top position down towards the turret it can actaully kill the tank in 1 hit

[VISTREL 0]

I wanna see AKs outfitted with laser sights and stuff.

[EiZei 0]

I wanna see AKs outfitted with laser sights and stuff.

Sounds like standard piss-poor commie hermit kingdom issue to me.

[echo1 0]

Reminds me of that 'AK Sopmod' they were posting about on Offtopic. I think if most countries could afford all that fancy stuff, theyd get a more advanced rifle design (unless youre a country like Russia who makes AKs in the first place)

[ThePredator 0]

AKs are nice. Reliable as hell and the "pimped" rifles might give some advantage. However, the AK was not build for precision.

I hope they won't balance the guns and gear like in other FPS games for multiplayer "fairness". This is a military combat game (simulation), so weapons should be different. Advantages and disadvantages are part of any piece of equipment.

If the OpForces use AK-47 and east block weaponry, they should be like that.

The US will use western guns so they should be accurate but not as reliable (the M16 is a bitch to maintain and is the worst rifle for modern technology), same for roller delayed german rifles. The G36 might be accurate and reliable in most cases, but IF there is a malfunction, you have one hard time to find the issue. In the Bundeswehr, we had some trouble with those rifles, but most were due to poor maintenance by recruits.

Actually, BIS should include weapon jams. Not just the rifle, the ammunition should be considered a reason for a jam, too.

Jams won't occur alot, if you maintain and clean the rifle regulary, that is. I won't say there should be an option to clean the rifle (which would be nice, though **) but if you crawl alot, walk through water or in the rain, chances increase that there will be some jam.

If you drop a magazine to the ground the chance of weapon jams should increase too (magazine lips deformed, moist ammo etc).

This might be too hardcore, but it will make some difference in weapons you use. AK-47 are sturdy and hard to beat in reliability, M16 jams more often but is more accurate and so on.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Hmm... Maybe you'll be able to attach scopes and shit to any rifle

[Frantic 0]

i think there will be nough weapons to choose of!

i really hope that u can run in ArmA when ur holding a handgun like a revolver!

that was one of the strangest things in OFP, u run faster with a rifle in ur hand than without any.

[ThePredator 0]

Indeed, that was ridiculous.

Any info on nightvision improvements and/or thermal weapon scopes? would be nice to have modern sniper equipment like A/N PVS-10 or NV-80 for G36.

[echo1 0]

that was one of the strangest things in OFP, u run faster with a rifle in ur hand than without any.

That was one wierd-ass engine issue, I wonder what the reason for it was