Armed Assault weapon ballistics

[max power 21]

well the ingame trajectory of the RPG and AT-4 is very flat. Kronzky's graph shows that well (just don't get confused by the scaling of the axes).

Here is a vid I made to show how flat it actually is.

Wow, you can really see it dip and come back up in that video... at least that's what it appears to do from here.

[4 IN 1 0]

blahhhahhah{Col. O'neill confused mode on}

so, is the ballistic of each type of rounds correct or not? the RPG one seems to be really unrealistic

[frederf 0]

A 630m RPG shot should be next to impossible. You hit dead center on the M1A1!

[Donnervogel 0]

let's put it this way. If the terrain wasn't totally flat and if there would be crosswinds and if I didn't aim about 2-3 meters above the m1 (yes that did bit is pretty much above the turret on 630m) the round has just splashed into the ground But the point was not to show my 1337 RPG skills but rather to show how the courve in Kronzkys plot looks "in real" so I had do stretch it out to a similar distance that he used.

Also I am in no way an expert on RPGs but with enough initial thrust a fin stabilised projectile can easily travel a flat courve over 630m.

[Second 0]

I didn't found info of anykind about RPG-7's trajectory. Looking at optic's picture in plaintiff1's link tells to me something like this:

-For 400 meters: if 300 meter's line of sights are in turret of MBT, it might still hit tracks.

-For 500 meters sight's 300 meters line has to be very high above MBT.

But these as just rough estimates... Nothing solid.

[max power 21]

With some mathematical modelling you'd be able to find the answers.