.50 cal rifle

[ran 0]

they weren't used anymore because they couldn't penetrate the schurzen additional armors and the armor of the new tanks

[caleb 0]

Barrett M82a1 is not the the bigger individual weapon. Croatian specials forces use the anti material rifle "RT20" (in croatian "Rucni Top 20"). It fires HS204 Hispano Suiza 20x110mm ammo! It was used in the war on the 90's to destroy APC and as a anti personal long range (2000m) weapon. V0:750 to 850m/s, E0:37689 joules far more than the Barrett but it was not used against MBT.

[DoubleTAP 1]

the sad thing is ya'll have been debating over things brought up by some poser who obviously doesn't know jack.

[Commander 598 0]

What you say about the Russian .50s during WWII I believe is correct and also applies to the rest of this debate.

.50 AT Rifles cannot take out MBTs but are able to punch through light armor(M113,BMP,LAV-25) possibly medium armor(M60 Patton,T55,T72).

MBTs have the best armor out there.

I think the M1A2 has a ceramic composite steel alloy for armor.(I think)

[Peekee 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (supah @ Jan. 31 2002,11:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Common logic would suggest that a .50 cant penetrate a MBT's armor. For instance lets look at a ww2 bazooka. It failed miserably in korea against the current russian build armour. So why would a .50 do it? if that was the case why didnt they just equip units with .50's. As a civilian i can see the bonusses of a .50 over a bazooka type weapon. Higher Sustained ROV is the first thing that comes to mind. Having heard stories from ppl on this forum about the m113's armour and how PK bullits appear to penetrate that under extremely favorable situations i supppose it could penetrate that. HOWEVER i have seen ppl shooting a .50 cal at tanks on discovery channel, but if my memory serves me well ( "the band" qoute   ) the bullits they used was a experimental AP round which could be steared due to a movable front section and was called something like "mini-SABOT". Seeing how that was a prototype large scale fielding of those rounds seems unlikely to me. Finally why in pete's sake are MBT fit with big guns when a mere .50 (or multiple one's)  would suffice. Modern day funding for armies being as they are and the price of a .50 and a modernday cannon in mind the idea of a .50 taking out modern MBT's seems ridiculous. if it could ever MBT would have it ..... and they dont. If you want to say it penetrates MBT's armour then explain me why MBT's have large guns and not .50's ?

Supah<span id='postcolor'>

firstly, here is a very interesting link...

http://www.snipercentral.com/caliber.htm

"Don’t bother using this rifle against human targets, focus on hard targets, its no problem to take out an APC a mile away (of course with proper ammo, only available to Law Enforcement and the Military)"

In WWII they lacked the ammo, although I think the Russians had some kind of large calibre anti-tank rifle... (cant remember details)

The reason tanks have guns "large guns" and not .50's is that there is a difference between being able to penatrate armour and being able to destroy a target.

[FlipeR 0]

I dont have time to read the whole topic, but if it wasnt said before - there already are M82A1 "light-fifty" addons for OFP! I know for 2 of them - you can get one of them at www.natosoldier.com! I'm also working on the model...more to come...

FlipeR

[AntiPasta 0]

well to get back on the subject of armor piercing, I was watching Band Of Brothers the other day (okay, maybe not a very reliable source), and there were two Allied soldiers trying to destroy an approaching German tank with a bazooka. The first two rockets were duds, the soldier seemed doomed, but then the tank climbed a slope. It's bottom (between the tracks) was exposed and it got hit by MG fire (.30, .40, .50BMG, dunno) and the thing blew up, IIRC

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FlipeR @ Feb. 28 2002,20:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I dont have time to read the whole topic, but if it wasnt said before - there already are M82A1 "light-fifty" addons for OFP! I know for 2 of them - you can get one of them at www.natosoldier.com!<span id='postcolor'>

I have thoroughly tested Toadlife's Barret addon and discover accuracy problems. Now I would like to test yours but I have some questions:

1. What are the small vertical lines for?

2. How do you compensate for bullet drop?

3. To what optimal distance is the fixed scope set to?

I also have a suggestion: change the unit name from sniperM82A1 to something that includes your name or initials, such as LWsniperM82A1. This is to avoid conflict with other addon makers wanting to use the exact same name and to distinguish the unit name from official OFP unit names.

[theavonlady 2]

I tested this Barret addon out and it's quite nice. It seems to hit dead on at around 1000+ meters. Like the sound. Took 3 shots to kill an armored Hummer.

Unlike Toadlife's Barret, the bullet path did not veer offcenter when shooting at a target on an incline.

It would be nice to get an adjustable scope on this. I mean, targets at 1500 are not really discernable with the current scope.

Pity Oxygen isn't being distributed publicly, so that we could get the Barret look.

Right now, this is the best Barret I've seen for OFP so far!

[digitalcenturion 20]

About the Javelin video.. Well the one i saw did not make the turret go very far but the engine ended up 65meters from its original point. However the video stated it was a fully tactical T72 so maybe the javelin blew up the fuel tank...?

Well dunno... Oh and there is _NOT_ dedicated .50BMG sniper ammo availiable, and THAT is the only thing holding it back, thus the .338 Lapua is prolly the most popular high power police/CT sniping cartridge now.

[DarkSoul 0]

barret is good sniper rifle, but this is real AMR (Anti-material rifle)

NTW-20 ANTI-MATERIAL RIFLE

[WKK Gimbal 0]

I would not have thought you could become an army ranger if you're colorblind.

[The Jub-Jub Bird 1]

I do not want to spark off the debate again, but assuming an AP .50 calibre round could penetrate a MBT's armour (which I am not saying it can), it would be unrealistic to have such rouds take out tanks in Operation Flashpoint. The reason they work against armour is by killing the occupants, not by destroying the vehicle (unless the bullet passes through the engine block), so to 'destroy' an armoured unit in the game realistically with such a weapon would mean you'd have to specifically shoot at the driver/ commander/ gunner.

Jubs

[Guest]

.50 calibre anti-armour weapons went out of fashion in the 1930's. If you really believe a .50 will do much harm to modern AFV/MBT's you're a very strange man.

[AdmiralKarlDonuts 0]

SEALs armed with Barett 50 cals can take out an M60 Patton tank at over 500 yards. I doubt the current-generation tanks (T80, M1A2) have much to wory about though.

Why do tanks need such big guns to fight other tanks? The answer lies in ERA, my friends. Explosive Reactive Armor.

The vehicle itself might be fine after getting hit with a 50 round, maybe a little hole in the side, but the crew sure aint. Imagine a round as big as a fifty cal rattling around inside something as cramped as a tank turret - the crew would get killed five times over by the same bullet. Use it on an MBT and you're not likely to hit anything important under all that armor. The crew is your target.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why do tanks need such big guns to fight other tanks? The answer lies in ERA, my friends. Explosive Reactive Armor.<span id='postcolor'>

ERA is designed to defend the tank about RPG type weapons that utilize Shape charges not the main guns of other tanks that use SABOT/Armour Piercing rounds.

.50 calibre bullet would never ever pierce the armour of an M60 turret. .50/12.7 has a maximum armour penetration value of 20MM at 500M's. M60 turret has 40MM + of armour all the way around. I've seen footage of US troops in training shooting T54's with barrets from under 300M's and the only effect was a little black spot on the side of the turret. No penetration.

By stating that a 50 calibre rifle is an effective anti-armour weapon you are pissing on 60 years of tank design.

[The Jub-Jub Bird 1]

Some of you may be interested to see this...

...that's FlipeR's work...cool aint it?

Jubs

[The Jub-Jub Bird 1]

...that is a Barret M82A1 'Light Fifty' by the way...

[Maldita Vecindad 1]

drool....

[Maldita Vecindad 1]

man Fliper is a GOD...check his model with textures.....

sweet!!!!

[Potatoman 0]

First off i've heard that it is possible for an m1 to blow the turret off a t-72 but it's due to the ammo and fuel exploding so the javelin video might not be a fake.

About the .50:

If it uses .50 BMG rounds then would that be the round used in the .50 mounted on hummers etc. If it is then i don't know how it can be banned for use on people (watch black hawk down . Also i've seen pictures of israeli snipers in the west bank with barretts. They obviously don't mind using it on palestinians.

[The Jub-Jub Bird 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Potatoman @ Mar. 08 2002,15:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i've seen pictures of israeli snipers in the west bank with barretts. They obviously don't mind using it on palestinians.<span id='postcolor'>

...well duh!

[Cpl Ryan 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Feb. 28 2002,21:03)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FlipeR @ Feb. 28 2002,20:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I dont have time to read the whole topic, but if it wasnt said before - there already are M82A1 "light-fifty" addons for OFP! I know for 2 of them - you can get one of them at www.natosoldier.com!<span id='postcolor'>

I have thoroughly tested Toadlife's Barret addon and discover accuracy problems. Now I would like to test yours but I have some questions:

1. What are the small vertical lines for?

2. How do you compensate for bullet drop?

3. To what optimal distance is the fixed scope set to?

I also have a suggestion: change the unit name from sniperM82A1 to something that includes your name or initials, such as LWsniperM82A1. This is to avoid conflict with other addon makers wanting to use the exact same name and to distinguish the unit name from official OFP unit names.<span id='postcolor'>

after testing this rifle, i tried to change weapons of another unit to this model of barret, you seem to have tested it well, do you know what the ammo was called? (as in ap addmagazine "ammo name" ) or does anyone for that matter know?

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote ([*UKSF*]Cpl Chris Ryan @ Mar. 10 2002,17:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">do you know what the ammo was called? (as in ap addmagazine "ammo name" ) or does anyone for that matter know?<span id='postcolor'>

The addon's magazine name is appropriately named M82A1.

You could determine this yourself by simply viewing the addon's PBO file and searching for "magazine".

[Cpl Ryan 1]

yeah, i tried, but i couldnt make much sense of it all, thanks for your help