M82 anti-material sniper rifle?

[Operative47 0]

In all the vids of ArmA that I've seen there is not a M82 sniper rifle, why? The M82 can shoot through tanks and hit targets at a Max Effective Range of 1800 meters. So Again how can this weapon not be in ArmA?

M82A3 .50cal

L115A1 .338 Lapua

Canadian LRSW SD .50cal

[fireship4 0]

I think it is in there, in one of the ammo boxes you can place in the editor, or something like it.

In real life it can't shoot through a tank though.

[rellikki 7]

Actually M82 IS in Armed Assault. Look for it in US Special weapon crate.

Hmm.. fireship4 was faster...

[Beagle 684]

...it's in the game, but it does not perform well as a anti-material rifle.

[Operative47 0]

Quote[/b] ]In real life it can't shoot through a tank though

50 caliber depleted uranium bullet can.

[Operative47 0]

Can someone plz post an in-game vid of the M82 in action?

[fireship4 0]

No, i dont think it can. Which tank are you talking about?

##i think one of the modern warfare vids has them in, look on youtube

[Beagle 684]

I think he means light armoured vehicles like APCs and armoured cars, not main battle tanks.

But a hole in the Armour often means nothing else than a hole.

[Dallas 9]

There's no M82 in ArmA. It's new designation is M107 and that's in ArmA.

[fasad 1]

Trying to bury this .50 calibre rifle through "tank armor" issue:

Quote[/b] ]It is not true, nor has the VPC ever claimed, that a 50 caliber round can penetrate the armor of a modern tank, despite occasional erroneous reports to that effect. What is true is that

the 50 caliber can force tank crews to “button up,†and well-placed shots could destroy or degrade certain external equipment and vision blocks on some tanks.

VPC.org = "Violence Policy Center"

Quote[/b] ]...the .50 cal SLAP (Saboted Light Armor Penetrator) round is specifically forbidden, as attempting to fire this round in the M107 will cause serious injury to personnel and damage to the weapon.

military.com

etc, etc

[Mabes 0]

There's no M82 in ArmA. It's new designation is M107 and that's in ArmA.

The M107 is the new official US Army Designation of the Barrett M82A1 AMR (Anti-Material Rifle). So its the same thing, still a 10-Round Semi-Automatic .50cal BMG Anti-Material Rifle made by Barrett.

[max power 21]

Quote[/b] ]In real life it can't shoot through a tank though

50 caliber depleted uranium bullet can.

No they can't.

If that was true, what's the point of a 120 mm depleted uranium sabot shell?

[4 IN 1 0]

i think he is talking about light armoured vehicales

[-CS-SOBR-1st-I-R- 0]

There's no M82 in ArmA. It's new designation is M107 and that's in ArmA.

The M107 is the new official US Army Designation of the Barrett M82A1 AMR (Anti-Material Rifle). So its the same thing, still a 10-Round Semi-Automatic .50cal BMG Anti-Material Rifle made by Barrett.

Nope, still M107 and M82 are two different sniper rifles.

They are made from the same manufacturer "barret" and may have the same caliber and magazine load but they look pretty much different

And no .50cals can not penetrate tanks (tanks=MBT) but with the circumstances given, APCs or IFVs.

By the way... why did you post a pic of the L115A1 ?

Its .338 and not .50cal ...

[fasad 1]

Quote[/b] ]What is the difference between an M107 and a Model 82A1?

Currently there are few differences. The M107 is issued with “spike feet†bipods and the 82A1 is issued with “smooth feet†bipods. The M107 is also issued with the monopod while the monopod is optional equipment on a Model 82A1.

Source : Barrett Rifles

[Dwarden 1125]

in ArmA is this .50 cal one

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM107/M107_Barrett_rifle

but who knows what future brings to us

[DaSquade 0]

One of the other differences between M82A3 and M107 is the front iron sight and top rail. Where the M82A3 had an integrated front ironsight versus the M107 witch has a shorter rail with front iron sight seperated from rail. But in the end who would ever use those iron sights on that kind of weapon i ask myself.

I'm not that familiar with the ammo and regarding high explosive rounds. In the end i suppose maximum damage they can do is disable soft armor vehicles (like jeeps trucks and other non armored vehicles) by shooting engine block or other vital parts, but not sure how much .50 (apperently non high explosive rounds) can do versus armor itself.

Recently read US navy EOD also uses the M107 to disable or trigger off IED's and stuff.

High explosive rounds on M107 or not, guess if it is really needed they still can bring out the M109 , but so far i have never seen or heard about any battlefield activity yet.

Offtopic bit:

Wonder how the trails with the silencers are going? Although Barret itself doesn't advice to use them (some civials are using them), apperently from what i heard the army (forgot what department though) was doing trails for a silenced version.

[Cpt. FrostBite 0]

There are a hell of a lot of armored vehicles that have such thin armor that a .50 round can penetrate it. The M113 for example can be easily penetrated with a .50 round.

The main advantage at the moment is that you can shoot trough a wall and still kill the guy behind it. In the urban warfare setting in Iraq this has become a big advantage. But still the most important feature of the .50 weapons are the incredible range at which you can target enemy soldiers.

[dirtylarrygb 0]

There are a hell of a lot of armored vehicles that have such thin armor that a .50 round can penetrate it. The M113 for example can be easily penetrated with a .50 round.

The main advantage at the moment is that you can shoot trough a wall and still kill the guy behind it. In the urban warfare setting in Iraq this has become a big advantage. But still the most important feature of the .50 weapons are the incredible range at which you can target enemy soldiers.

In arma DONT stand up and fire the 107.....

unless you enjoy looking at the sky.

The thing is evil I've made 1 shot kills at 1500 m, M24 starts to be a pain past 1 KM.

but the recoil means you have to go prone.

It alsos makes about the same noise as a tank, fire once and move or every human player WILL be looking for you.

[fireship4 0]

Thing is about the wall penetration, as far as I know all of the rifles in Arma should be able to penetrate through multiple brick walls anyway.

[Operative47 0]

Quote[/b] ]No they can't. If that was true, what's the point of a 120 mm depleted uranium sabot shell?

I thought I heard something about the M82 penetrating Iraqi tanks in the first gulf war, but i guess I was wrong.

Quote[/b] ]By the way... why did you post a pic of the L115A1 ?

Its .338 and not .50cal ...

I know it's not a .50cal

[Beagle 684]

Thing is about the wall penetration, as far as I know all of the rifles in Arma should be able to penetrate through multiple brick walls anyway.

No... I've tested this at home unintentionally while trying to clean my M96/38 6,5x55 rifle...a 24cm (9,5 inch) full brick wall will stop a full metal jacket projectile.

[USSRsniper 0]

lol To penetrate many APC you dont even need depleted uranium rounds.....

[dm 9]

No... I've tested this at home unintentionally while trying to clean my M96/38 6,5x55 rifle...a 24cm (9,5 inch) full brick wall will stop a full metal jacket projectile.

Probably not the best thing to admit

Whilst bricks, blocks or concrete will withstand the first few rounds, they will eventually give, and the results arent great for those hiding behind them.

Theres some good videos on youtube of USMC (I think) testing and evaluation of this, worth a watch

[BlackScorpion 0]

Yeah, the point where they get Ma Deuce is... well, you really need MANY bricks to be safe.

About the "M107 the tank killer" thingy... well I recall some (USMC?) snipers destroying a BMP with 2 shots, but I'm not sure whether even a DU penetrator could go through a fairly modern (past WW2) MBT, unless shot in a less armored spot, engine block mainly; BMP is made out of aluminum anyways and has only few inches of armor.