T-90... Vulnerable to Javelin... why?

[vitaliy0001 10]

The T-90, being impossible to target by anything relying on IR, is invulnerable to all such ATGMs... which includes Javelin...

And, should unguided ATM be used... it will be shot down by the Arena system...

Hence, it is disappointing that it can be targeted in game...

[That guy 10]

I was under the impression that the t90 featured only a "soft kill" system that blinded IR guided and laser guided munitions, but could not actually destroy incoming munitions. But, I am no expert

Unfortunately that is something that BIS just did not have the time/resources to do.

there are some technical reasons behind it probably, as it seems that all guided AT weapons in game are not differentiated (no diff between IR, radar, etc) sothere is no easy way to tell a particular weapon that it cannot track a particular type of target, or a target to defend its self.

there were some really spiffy mods for ArmA 1 that featured countermesures such as that, hopefully they will be ported over some day

[Lhowon 10]

I'd be interested to know how true those claims are. I'm not knowledgeable at all regarding this sort of thing, but it strikes me as a bit optimistic to claim the Javelin simply couldn't target a T-90?

[tcp 10]

Every country claims to have "forcefield" technology. None of it has been field-tested and it requires too much power.

[Sertorius21 10]

Err, a T-90 is a big block of metal with a large engine in it. Such things generally generate infrared signatures. As for ARENA, well, tcp said it best. ARENA has not been tested in a major combat situation against missiles like Javelin. Also, to my knowledge at least, the Russian anti-missile systems have been traditionally limited to engaging missiles at roughly the same level as the tank, and a top-down missile might zip right through the "hole" in the top of an ARENA system's coverage.

[Gladius 10]

Active protection systems have nothing to do with "force fields".

They increase the protection, but they don't make a tank invulnerable against missiles and rockets. Especially top-attack weapons like the Javelin are still effective against ARENA equipped tanks, because ARENA provides protection to the sides, but not on top.

The T-90 model in Arma2 simply doesn't have the ARENA system. You can see this by the lack of the radar sensor shown on top of this turret:

And even in the Russian army is not every T-90 equipped with ARENA.

[Sertorius21 10]

"Active protection systems have nothing to do with "force fields"."

I think that was sarcasm on tcp's part. He did have a point; It seems like every country either claims that their tank has a super-defense system, or has super-invincible armor. One example that comes to mind is the Challenger 2, it was often said to have super-armor right up until insurgents started shooting holes in them with late-model RPGs.

[dayglow 2]

Just read up on the system. It is designed to counter ir guided semi active line of sight missiles such as TOW. Basically a TOW is guided by an ir flare on the rear of the

missile, the sight compares the position of the missile to the center of the sight and flies

to where ever the sight is pointed. The T90 system uses ir 'dazzlers' to blind the sight so it can't see the flare. This would be useless on a FLIR style seeker that is much more complex.

[Gladius 10]

It's the old race between the sword and the shield.

Of course there is no armour that can't be penetrated. That's why the developement of active protection is the modern trend. But active protection just works under certain circumstances and should't been seen as 100% effective.

Sensors can be shot by snipers. When friendly infantery is nearby, then such systems have to be switched off.

[heklos 0]

Since the Javelin uses a Passive IR targeting method the T90 would still be able to be targeted.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/javelin.htm

[Apocal 10]

The T-90, being impossible to target by anything relying on IR, is invulnerable to all such ATGMs... which includes Javelin...

I'm curious as to what means is used to detect and prevent passive detection using IR.

[Baff1 0]

A few different ones including radar and laser dectection, light detection of rocket flares and gunflashes also.

IR jamming is acheived by use of an IR proof smoke screen I expect.

It's own passive IR should be good for spotting missiles one would have thought.

Here are some fun youtubes.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyXY7sfajS8&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyXY7sfajS8&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

This one is a pretty informative.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmEeLrlioPI&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmEeLrlioPI&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

This shows a top down attacking missile.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJz1QSZ-sRw&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJz1QSZ-sRw&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Edited October 21, 2009 by Baff1

[Apocal 10]

A few different ones including radar and laser dectection, light detection of rocket flares and gunflashes also.

IR jamming is acheived by use of an IR proof smoke screen I expect.

Let me rephrase: how does the tank know it is being acquired by a passive IR system? Remember, passive means the system does not emit a signal, it only receives.

[Baff1 0]

It doesn't need to. It just needs to know when a missile is flying towards it.

[tcp 10]

This isn't Star Trek. I didn't mean an actual forcefield. What I meant was that they are trying to imitate that level of protection with increasingly more complicated and quicker response implementations when all they effectively can do is detonate small missiles. They are trying to protect against incidental strikes by strapping on expensive tech which you probably can't have on all the time or it would quickly suck up batteries and fuel.

RPG? Yes | Small Missile? Yes | Tactical Strike? No | IED? No | Anti-tank Round? No

Insurgents primarily use IEDs, and the chance of them being in range or choosing to use an RPG is low. It's a kamikaze move, because it's not likely to disable the tank completely, not to mention the support they will have.

There are firefights in the Middle East. However, there will probably never be conventional warfare in a major conflict. Even if there were, tactical strikes would do most of the damage. The APS would be a moot point that would offer no tactical advantage. It's easily bypassed, and will probably never become advanced enough to where it can fend of repeated attacks of all types. When one side sufficiently disabled the other's tactical capabilities (probably would happen in less than an hour) and as long as no one was forced to or able to launch a nuke (screwing everybody) then it would return to a war against insurgents and the system would become semi-useful again.

Need I say more?

Oh and the jamming type protection systems are the least effective (easily bypassed).

[ARM505 0]

BIS has FAR more work to do to simulate armoured fighting vehicle combat before they start to get to active defense systems. One would think that to simulate armoured fighting vehicles, they may want to start with....well...armour? Bits of metal going through other bits of metal (or not), all of that? The hit point system cannot work for this. Worrying about things like Arena etc is putting the cart before the horse, IMHO.

[vilas 473]

I'd be interested to know how true those claims are. I'm not knowledgeable at all regarding this sort of thing, but it strikes me as a bit optimistic to claim the Javelin simply couldn't target a T-90?

you know, Arma , OFP have many many limits and differ from real life

modern warfare technology has a lot of "tricks"

look at most simple example:

bullet proof vest

how it work in real life ?

it stops bullet with low energy (for example Makarov) but i can't stop bullet with high energy (rifle)

while in game... you have no EVEN such thing as bulletproof materials

if you can't shot man with first shot, second shot will do it

ERA is not working here, a lot of thigs are not working here

modern Russian systems are very good and in game you will fire TOW/HOT/Millan/whatever LAW vs. such tank, while in real rocket or something like this can be destroyed by tank systems with given probability (i don't know what is such probability value)

it is general limitation of this engine, which in fact changed from OFP in very small percentage (i am talking about "military engine" not "graphical look")

and you know, talking about ARENA, while neither simple bulletproof vest nor ERA works is... like talking about buying Bentley while you have money for one tire

Edited October 21, 2009 by vilas

[icebreakr 3116]

As ARM505 said, BIS needs to get rid of 7 years old hitpoint system and incorporate simulation of armor first then go for defensive systems. But I'm somehow sceptical if all that will even be featured in A3 ;)

[Gladius 10]

Body armour can hold off rifle bullets depending on caliber and speed.

Level IV armour has ballistic plates:

http://www.bulletproofme.com/Ballistic_Protection_Levels.shtml

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/791/610xdf.jpg

[Apocal 10]

It doesn't need to. It just needs to know when a missile is flying towards it.

So how does it detect missile launch?

[Prydain 1]

The Javelin can engage a T90, there are no differences between the capability of the Javelin to engage a T90 or any other tank, object, soldier or boat.

[Helmut_AUT 0]

There will always be posters claiming superiority of one equipment piece over everything else. "Vitaliy" already points towards a Russian origin of our OP.

ARENA seems much better than I actually thought possible, but certainly not proof against Top Down flight paths.

[galzohar 31]

When it comes to "bullet proof vest" it really depends what kind you're talking about. There is a large variety of levels of body armor, from not even having a good chance to stop a 9mm all the way in to reliably stopping a 7.62 NATO round or more. It really depends on how heavy you want to be and how much you're willing to pay. Modern armies generally use level IV or at least III that are supposed to stop at least 1 7.62 NATO round and ~3 5.56 or 7.62 AK rounds if they don't hit the same spot. But yeah there are many kinds so saying "a bullet proof vest stops/doesn't stop a rifle round" is a pretty pointless statement.

[Lhowon 10]

So how does it detect missile launch?

It doesn't - if you'd watched the videos you'd see it has a radar system on top which constantly scans for projectiles within a (relatively) short distance around the vehicle. Once a projectile enters that area it sends a signal to the other equipment which then chooses the appropriate defence and attempts to destroy the projectile.

Obviously all that has to happen in an extremely short space of time.

[Dwarden 1124]

if you donate one working latest model fo T-90 with Arena onboard you may get the correct implementation ASAP

{j/jk} and btw. Areana isn't 100% it only increase survability of the vehicle on battlefield