Tips for firing the M136 AT-4 in ArmA

[Maddmatt 1]

Is it just me or does the AT-4 only "scratch" T-72s? I do a close in shot, in the back of the vehicle and it only seems to annoy it...

3 rounds does it - but you would think that 1 would put a hole in the back of T-72 surely?

One rocket in the tracks is enough to make the crew bail. So that's where you should aim if possible.

[rundll.exe 12]

most disturbing AI reaction is when You fire and get killed by same vehicle WHILE your AT projectile is on way to that AI vehicle ...

prolly caused by firing AT cause AI detect You and insta kill only solution so far is either be far far away or hidden partly by e.g. building

another solution is some dispersion on AI so they miss you with first salve ...

this little problem applies to use of both M136 and RPG versus APC, MG mounted jeeps and full crew tanks ...

Verry true. IMO there should be at least some delay to simlate the "thinking" of the AI.

And there should be a lot more dispersion for all weapons in ArmA btw...

[Kwato 0]

Another thing that hasn't been mentioned, is to have the other members of the squad move away from the AT-4 shooter, to minimize the effect of return fire.

It's also a good idea to have 2 shooters firing from 2 separate positions with one ready to fire in case the first one misses.

Just my 2 cents.

Too bad the backblast isn't modeled.

[frederf 0]

most disturbing AI reaction is when You fire and get killed by same vehicle WHILE your AT projectile is on way to that AI vehicle ..

That's real life for you. That's why a Javelin team moves their asses and displaces after taking a shot because a good tank crew can engage the Javelin shooters BEFORE the round even impacts the tank. They've got launch sensors, laser designate sensors and such to do that. I don't know if the old BMP2s and T-72s have it, but some do.

Quote[/b] ] - Frederf you forgot to mention not to attempt a second shot from the same cover and place, always move to different side of the wall or cover as this is where everyone will be looking.

Very good thing to mention. Normally that's covered by "don't attack with the enemy's barrel pointed directly at you" but not attacking from the same place assures that enough time has passed for the enemy to forget about you.

Quote[/b] ]Another thing that hasn't been mentioned, is to have the other members of the squad move away from the AT-4 shooter, to minimize the effect of return fire.

Very good!

[4 IN 1 0]

....

also when enhanced config mod like ACE starts kickin in backblast features, its a good choose to stay far enought from AT soldiers

[Heatseeker 0]

There is a bug with the M136 where in some circunstances it wont damage BRDM's too.. already reported at the BTS..

[Dwarden 1125]

most disturbing AI reaction is when You fire and get killed by same vehicle WHILE your AT projectile is on way to that AI vehicle ..

That's real life for you. That's why a Javelin team moves their asses and displaces after taking a shot because a good tank crew can engage the Javelin shooters BEFORE the round even impacts the tank. They've got launch sensors, laser designate sensors and such to do that. I don't know if the old BMP2s and T-72s have it, but some do.

Quote[/b] ] - Frederf you forgot to mention not to attempt a second shot from the same cover and place, always move to different side of the wall or cover as this is where everyone will be looking.

Very good thing to mention. Normally that's covered by "don't attack with the enemy's barrel pointed directly at you" but not attacking from the same place assures that enough time has passed for the enemy to forget about you.

Quote[/b] ]Another thing that hasn't been mentioned, is to have the other members of the squad move away from the AT-4 shooter, to minimize the effect of return fire.

Very good!

fred you don't understand ...

any vehicle with mounted mg , gunner is turned AWAY from you ...

you aim the vehicle and fire , in same moment AI gunner turns 180 degrees and you dead ...

then your rocket hit the vehicle ...

got nothing with "sensors" as this we speak about weapon w/o any laser tag ...

try calculate time needed for M136 or RPG to hit 50-300m target and then think if it's even possible to react to kill attacker while his rocket is still on way to You

(i think it's possible such system exists today but i'm not aware of theirs wider use)

exclude please defense like Trophy ...

[max power 21]

....

also when enhanced config mod like ACE starts kickin in backblast features, its a good choose to stay far enought from AT soldiers

I don't know if they will mod that in. WGL didn't have it. It's difficult to get your AI to use that stuff intelligently. I can imagine that such a feature would frequently result in AI and player deaths at the hands of careless AI AT specialists.

[killaalf 0]

There's no such thing as a launch warning system for MBT's/APC's that I know of. (Battlefield 2 does not count :P) How would that work anyway, you're not painting the target with laser/radar, even Javelin uses image recognition which is a passive system.

Let me quote a bit out of the Steelbeast Pro PE manual, the most realistic tank simulation you can lay your grubby little fingers on:

Both ATGM and artillery submunitions are 'unfair' in two common aspects: In most cases you won't notice that they're threatening to kill you in a few seconds, and you have very little chances to survive the impact. Some other tank simulators for PCs have shown ATGMs as small rockets with big exhaust fumes. Well, that's been a trick to give the player the chance to react (e.g. by throwing smoke, and back up - bold natures will try to kill the ATGM enemy on the fly). Unfortunately, in reality guided missiles produce very little exhaust. They're nearly invisible. You might notice a dust cloud emerging from the attacker in the moment of ignition, but after that: Ten seconds of nothing but fear.

[4 IN 1 0]

its the same for the smaller unguided luncher i think

anyway, its the part that the AIs in ArmA really need to change

[max power 21]

There's no such thing as a launch warning system for MBT's/APC's that I know of. (Battlefield 2 does not count :P) How would that work anyway, you're not painting the target with laser/radar, even Javelin uses image recognition which is a passive system.

Let me quote a bit out of the Steelbeast Pro PE manual, the most realistic tank simulation you can lay your grubby little fingers on:

Both ATGM and artillery submunitions are 'unfair' in two common aspects: In most cases you won't notice that they're threatening to kill you in a few seconds, and you have very little chances to survive the impact. Some other tank simulators for PCs have shown ATGMs as small rockets with big exhaust fumes. Well, that's been a trick to give the player the chance to react (e.g. by throwing smoke, and back up - bold natures will try to kill the ATGM enemy on the fly). Unfortunately, in reality guided missiles produce very little exhaust. They're nearly invisible. You might notice a dust cloud emerging from the attacker in the moment of ignition, but after that: Ten seconds of nothing but fear.

Well, there's no system that only warns of a launch. There are active protection systems using milimeter wave radar which detect incoming atgms and engage them with some kind of projectile. Russia has had them since the 70s.

Having a launch warning system that did nothing but tell you about incoming missiles would be like having "You're dead. You're dead. You're dead." piping through the vehicle coms.

If anyone has an interest in this stuff, this is a good overview:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/3aps98.pdf

Also you can google the names of the systems. For Russia there's Drozd, Shtora-1, and Arena. The french invented one called GALIX, and that link has the names of many more.

[frederf 0]

fred you don't understand ...

any vehicle with mounted mg , gunner is turned AWAY from you ...

you aim the vehicle and fire , in same moment AI gunner turns 180 degrees and you dead ...

then your rocket hit the vehicle ...

got nothing with "sensors" as this we speak about weapon w/o any laser tag ...

try calculate time needed for M136 or RPG to hit 50-300m target and then think if it's even possible to react to kill attacker while his rocket is still on way to You

(i think it's possible such system exists today but i'm not aware of theirs wider use)

exclude please defense like Trophy ...

Rgr you are of course correct that ArmA just has silly AI that can target you in an instant rather than modeling some fancy pants radar system.

What I'm getting at is that there is no safety in having fired your weapon. Right after firing is the most dangerous time to be an AT soldier.

[killaalf 0]

Well, there's no system that only warns of a launch.  There are active protection systems using milimeter wave radar which detect incoming atgms and engage them with some kind of projectile.  Russia has had them since the 70s.

Having a launch warning system that did nothing but tell you about incoming missiles would be like having "You're dead.  You're dead.  You're dead." piping through the vehicle coms.

If anyone has an interest in this stuff, this is a good overview:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/3aps98.pdf

Also you can google the names of the systems.  For Russia there's Drozd, Shtora-1, and Arena.  The french invented one called GALIX, and that link has the names of many more.

I know about these systems, plaintiff1, but they're not what Frederf proposed. The crew of the tank still has no warning that a missile is about to impact their vehicle and therefore can not engage the attacker.

And a warning system that told you "You're dead. You're dead. You're dead." would still be helpful inasmuch as it would give the crew time to pop smoke and get the hell out of dodge, which would be enough to defeat all unguided missiles at least.

[max power 21]

I know about these systems, plaintiff1, but they're not what Frederf proposed. The crew of the tank still has no warning that a missile is about to impact their vehicle and therefore can not engage the attacker.

And a warning system that told you "You're dead. You're dead. You're dead." would still be helpful inasmuch as it would give the crew time to pop smoke and get the hell out of dodge, which would be enough to defeat all unguided missiles at least.

I wasn't proposing that the alarm say, 'you're dead'. I was saying that a missile alarm would be as good as an alarm to tell you that you're about to die.

In real life, the rpg-7 has a rocket assist velocity of 294 meters per second. It will cross 100 meters in .6 seconds and 200 meters in .9 seconds. After that, you're already out to ranges where your first round hit probability is in the low 20th percentile. No warning would be any good to you to allow you to avoid a rocket. Even less so for the atgms. I wonder how ArmA compares... if a rocket warning is any good to you in ArmA, there's serious realism issues with regards to rockets.

[USM-75R.Hspd -XO- 0]

Generally IRL there is no early warning systems that I've ever heard of to let you know of a shoulder fired rocket coming your direction. Now the M-47 DRAGON Anti-Tank Guided Missile (used in BF2) that can produce a warning system cause it is radar guided. An early warning system for your standard inbound rocket would generally most likely become somewhat as effective as a car alarm in the sense that it would pick up any traveling rocket.

Anyway... what are you going to do anyway? run? I mean shit if a rocket is fired at you... you have only a second to exit the vehicle and run away... not possible.

[USM-75R.Hspd -XO- 0]

Something else I'd like to add. Since you all are on the topic of realism. Yes the rockets need to be faster, IRL they travel at supersonic speed. Produce a supersonic back blast with a supersonic sound. lol The back blast area is a 90 degree fan 100M to the rear anything within that fan stands a chance at becoming slightly well done. Also those AT4's let me tell you, they have one hell of a boom that can knock you on your ass if you aren't prepared, hence there should be a slight bit more recoil.

[killaalf 0]

I wasn't proposing that the alarm say, 'you're dead'.  I was saying that a missile alarm would be as good as an alarm to tell you that you're about to die.

In real life, the rpg-7 has a rocket assist velocity of 294 meters per second.  It will cross 100 meters in .6 seconds and 200 meters in .9 seconds.  After that, you're already out to ranges where your first round hit probability is in the low 20th percentile.  No warning would be any good to you to allow you to avoid a rocket.  Even less so for the atgms.  I wonder how ArmA compares... if a rocket warning is any good to you in ArmA, there's serious realism issues with regards to rockets.

Ok, I think I misunderstood then. And of course you're quite right, what with the engagement distances for unguided rockets this would obviously not work out to be any advantage at all. But why do you say it would be even less for ATGMs, they are usually fired from much farther away and are typically not that much faster (not taking Maverick/Hellfire into acount atm) than unguided missiles, so the flighttime could be anything from 10 seconds to 1 minute. Time enough for a warning system to have some use - if something like that existed, that is.

I don't think there is an issue with regards to rockets in ArmA, the issue is, as some have pointed out, the AI that instantly knows where from it is being fired at. If I'm in a tank and get hit by something, most of the times I don't even know if it was a rocket or a tank shell that hit me, let alone where exactly it was coming from. The AI has no such problems.

[rom_un 0]

a supersonic sound

nice one, i thought that sound travel at ... sound speed.(and faster than a AT4)

[frederf 0]

Something else I'd like to add. Since you all are on the topic of realism. Yes the rockets need to be faster, IRL they travel at supersonic speed. Produce a supersonic back blast with a supersonic sound. lol The back blast area is a 90 degree fan 100M to the rear anything within that fan stands a chance at becoming slightly well done. Also those AT4's let me tell you, they have one hell of a boom that can knock you on your ass if you aren't prepared, hence there should be a slight bit more recoil.

I saw a video of a Javelin being fired less than a km and it seemed like a really long time in the air, like 10 seconds at least. I was surprised it was so slow.

Quote[/b] ]The M136 AT4 is the Army's primary light anti-tank weapon. The M136 AT4 is a recoilless rifle used primarily by Infantry Forces for engagement and defeat of light armor. The recoilless rifle design permits accurate delivery of an 84mm High Explosive Anti-Armor warhead, with negligible recoil.

--source FAS.org

RPGs and AT4s in game aren't really modeled right. They look like missiles in game but they're really like guns. A big pop on launch and then it flys through the air (really fast in the case of the AT4) and hits with a big bang. There's no rocket motor burning for the duration of the flight like in ArmA, nor is there a white smoke trail.

[Sergei_Q 0]

I always have to "cover" the target with my at4 sight meaning I put the pin on the target (between mainbody and turret) then raise the sight so the main bottom iron part covers my target and I got no way to see the target, but it hits. Am I the only one strugling with this?

That's exactly what I have to do but it does not cause me too much of an issue.

Only for longer distances, since the sights are zeroed for a specific distance and if your target is further away than said distance the rocket will drop below where you're aiming. Rockets aren't, afterall, uneffected by gravity.

KyleSarnik, that is not the issue being discussed. Anyone understands that an AT shell (not rocket - there is no rocket motor, just an explosive propellant) flies in a ballistic arc, so the further the target, the higher you have to aim. Rather, the problem is that the sights should be zeroed in for 200-300 meters, but in the game you can't hit a vehicle 30 meters in front of you. It really ought to be this simple:

But for those who experience this you have to raise the sight so that you don't even see that BMP.

That's a confirmed and reported bug, the report is here. http://bugs.armed-assault.net/view.php?id=2187 . What is confusing is that for some users it doesn't appear, but for some it does. Apparently it is related to these other similar issues: http://bugs.armed-assault.net/view.php?id=2493

[Sergei_Q 0]

RPGs and AT4s in game aren't really modeled right. They look like missiles in game but they're really like guns. A big pop on launch and then it flys through the air (really fast in the case of the AT4) and hits with a big bang. There's no rocket motor burning for the duration of the flight like in ArmA, nor is there a white smoke trail.

That's right.

[max power 21]

Ok, I think I misunderstood then. And of course you're quite right, what with the engagement distances for unguided rockets this would obviously not work out to be any advantage at all. But why do you say it would be even less for ATGMs, they are usually fired from much farther away and are typically not that much faster (not taking Maverick/Hellfire into acount atm) than unguided missiles, so the flighttime could be anything from 10 seconds to 1 minute. Time enough for a warning system to have some use - if something like that existed, that is.

Well, that depends on your criteria for a missile launch warning. Like, what will you be detecting, and a what range, and how? Top attack missiles aren't even heading towards the target before their terminal homing phase...

I'm not sure what the typical engagement range for a TOW is, or the capabilities of a mm wave radar. In 9 seconds a TOW can travel 2 km. Depending on when the radar actually decides when it's under threat, I don't know if you'd have much time to do anything. You could accellerate away, and if you're in an urban environment, maybe you could drive behind some building or something, but out in the open you'd be a rolling can of chunky salsa instead of a stationary one.

[JagdPanther101 0]

I haven't really had any problems with firing the M-136 yet.

Of course, I don't use iron sights. The iron sights are really annoying. The definition is so bad (and I have high settings) that I can't tell where I'm actually aiming. I just use the little white recticle when zoomed out and fire. Much better chance of hitting.

Playing the first Single Mission (Destroy the Convoy), I was highly aggravated by my inability to hit the BMPs with the iron sights of the M136. So now I just use the sights when zoomed out. No problems now.

[frederf 0]

Our server doesn't play with any white crosshairs (or tags, GPS, map info, etc) so the iron sights are all we get.

[=jps=sgtrock 4]

OK, iron sights only I can understand. But no maps, tags, or GPSes? Now you're putting yourself at an even greater disadvantage than real soldiers.

BTW, I'm one of the guys who are stuck having to completely cover the target when firing the M136. It's been true out to about 350 meters. I don't think I've tried a longer shot.