Military Discussion Thread

[HyperU2 11]

osprey looks like a big expensive not very usefull project.AKA wast of money..

Always has. lol I don't even use them in ARMA 2.

[max power 21]

A British sniper has broken the record for the longest range kill in combat. CoH Craig Harrison bested the previous record, held by Canadian Master Corporal Rob Furlong, by 45 m (49 yd). Previous to that, American Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock's record held for 35 years. The new best is 2,502.4 m. CoH Harrison used a L115A3 Long Range Rifle chambered in .338 Lapua to achieve the feat.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1270414/British-sniper-sets-new-sharpshooting-record-1-54-mile-double-Taliban-kill.html#ixzz0mtlCW3jo

[ProfTournesol 956]

Mmmm...i'm happy for him...

[max power 21]

I tried to emulate the Canadian's shot of 2.4 km in ArmA using the Barret and NWD's ballistics mod. The sight couldn't zero to that range and the grouping at that range was larger than a man! The descending (tracer) rounds looked like they were falling out of the sky vertically.

[maturin 12]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmJmSh7VnnI

Here's the infamous javelin demonstration video. Now, I thought that the missile and everything except the planted explosive was legit, but look at 0:24.

You can see what I thought was the explosively formed penetrator emerging from the side of the hull after passing through the turret, but the missile hasn't exploded yet! It has just barely touched the top of the hull. Doesn't a HEAT warhead need the entire charge to go off in order to fuses the copper (or whatever) material into a jet? I know it's a tandem warhead, but isn't the preliminary HEAT only sufficient to set off ERA?

So is this part of the video doctored too? Is it the implanted charge going off via remote control? Is it a digitally-added effect?

[dm 9]

Oh lawds, conspiracy-tastic.

Theres enough footage of Javelins fucking shit up from Iraq and Afghanistan to not have to worry about whether some semi-promotional video was doctored or not.

For the record, the purple bit you see at 24s is most likely lens flare from the explosion. I experienced the same thing when filming some rifle fire a few weeks ago - the muzzle flash produces a flare on the lens even if the camera does not manage to catch the full flash of the explosion its self. Bear in mind that the camera is probably recording at 29, 30 or 60 fps, and the explosion happens in a few thousandths of a second.

[NoRailgunner 0]

have a look at this video and the explosions

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqUb23XCTCY&hl=de_DE&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqUb23XCTCY&hl=de_DE&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

or watch this

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D35iEJLIyEw&hl=de_DE&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D35iEJLIyEw&hl=de_DE&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[dm 9]

I dont doubt that the target in the "disputed" video is packed with extra explosives. Its the claims of extra doctoring I'm disputing.

Although, again, most of the targets you see engaged in those two videos are "inert" - hard targets on a range or buildings in A-stan. Neither of which have ~1000l of fuel and 40 rounds of 125mm ammo on board.

[HyperU2 11]

I think the target in the video in question was just loaded to simulate fuel and ammo. Most targets on military ranges are just empty shells, so you don't often see that effect.

[maturin 12]

I dont doubt that the target in the "disputed" video is packed with extra explosives. Its the claims of extra doctoring I'm disputing.

Although, again, most of the targets you see engaged in those two videos are "inert" - hard targets on a range or buildings in A-stan. Neither of which have ~1000l of fuel and 40 rounds of 125mm ammo on board.

T-72s blow up their ammo all the time, and the turret flies off, whether you're talking about ACE or all the tanks the Georgians sabotaged when they were retreating. But in that video the engine block flew 50m into the air. No way.

And it's not the doctoring I was curious about, but the purple glow. Because I haven't been able to find any slow-motion footage of the penetrator from a shaped charge forming or moving through the air. I wonder if you were behind a wall that got hit with an RPG, would there be a spray of molten metal coming through ahead of the rest of the explosion?

Edited May 6, 2010 by maturin

[dm 9]

but the purple glow. Because I haven't been able to find any slow-motion footage of the penetrator from a shaped charge forming or moving through the air.

the purple bit you see at 24s is most likely lens flare from the explosion. I experienced the same thing when filming some rifle fire a few weeks ago - the muzzle flash produces a flare on the lens even if the camera does not manage to catch the full flash of the explosion its self.

10 chars of :j:

[maturin 12]

Yeah I read that part, thanks. I was responding to "oh lawds conspiracy-tastic" and I wasn't wildly condemning the evil American propaganda video. Although as far as additional doctoring goes, they added their own sound too.

[TangoRomeo 10]

While i found the video not being informative on the Javelin, or ATGM´s in general, it's testament to what ~150lbs C4 can do when detonated remotely inside confined spaces, i.e. the fighting compartment of an MBT. If i remember correctly the authors admitted to that some time ago.

For comparison. Bill-2 ATGM catastrophic kill on a remote controlled, combat loaded, Centurion Tank. Munition cooking off, turret is almost blown.

8ARjuTKdiIk

After the Centurion stopped burning and exploding, it could most probably still be identified as a Centurion. Not so in the "Javelin viral ad", with the T-72 instantaneously disintegrated like a plastic toy. Fun to watch, but Hollywood antics.

The aftermath of ATGM/HEAT attacks not resulting in ignition of stored munition and fuel, are rather unspectacular (exterior) to observe; burned paint and armor perforation. Interior is a different topic.

Exterior Damage

APFSDS

vs.

HEAT

[Baff1 0]

Is that really a Centurion tank?

The turret has a much squarer profle than I am used to.

A South African tank maybe?

[krzychuzokecia 706]

Hi! I have a question about equipment of Libyan Army: I want to know what types of trucks and cars they use. UAZ's, URAL's, ZIL's or maybe something from Europe or South Africa? Or something completely different? And what kind of firearms they use? I couldn't find it in the net, all I know is what tanks and apc's they use, but nothing about trucks, cars and rifles.

[jakerod 254]

Hi! I have a question about equipment of Libyan Army: I want to know what types of trucks and cars they use. UAZ's, URAL's, ZIL's or maybe something from Europe or South Africa? Or something completely different? And what kind of firearms they use? I couldn't find it in the net, all I know is what tanks and apc's they use, but nothing about trucks, cars and rifles.

Global Security

My best guess after looking at that would be Urals since BM-21s are mounted on a ural chasis. I would imagine though it would be a mix of things. They might even use pick-up trucks. I know toyotas were used quite effectively against their military so maybe they got a few after that.

[Tonci87 163]

This site doesn´t have anything about croatia....

[krzychuzokecia 706]

Global Security

My best guess after looking at that would be Urals since BM-21s are mounted on a ural chasis. I would imagine though it would be a mix of things. They might even use pick-up trucks. I know toyotas were used quite effectively against their military so maybe they got a few after that.

I've already looked at this site, but, oh well, at least you tried... Maybe they use their own secret stealth trucks? :D

But, then again, what about rifles and pistols? I know that they use 7,62mm AK's, and FN's (FAL and F2000 since 2009) in special forces... But I'm interested in their GPMG's and sniper rifles. What type they use? Globalsecurity has nothing about this...

[Colossus 2]

Here is something I wasn't aware of until today. Apparently the new roundel for the Russian Air Force went official in March 2010.

The basic star shape is still there, but they've added a blue star shape between the core and the outer white star shape (with the red thin stroke).

New Russian roundel (Wiki)

Press Release (Goverment.ru) "English translation"

News article (Rian.ru) "English translation"

Better get to work and change those roundels, BI. :p

Edited May 20, 2010 by colossus

[Laqueesha 474]

Here is something I wasn't aware of until today. Apparently the new roundel for the Russian Air Force went official in March 2010.

The basic star shape is still there, but they've added a blue star shape between the core and the outer white star shape (with the red thin stroke).Better get to work and change those roundels, BI. :p

Meh, it looks decent, that's for sure; a little tacky, though. Any reason as to why they changed it? Sounds odd to me, as I'm a strong believer in the old adage of: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Better get to work and change those roundels, BI. :p

This. ^ Maybe in an upcoming patch or beta release?

[NoRailgunner 0]

colossus there are more important things for RF than re-painting the roundels on all vehicles and aircrafts with this new one. Guess you will still see the well-known red star in 10 years on some of them. ;)

Something from Russian 5th gen fighter PAK-FA

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-as2sooJU&hl=de_DE&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-as2sooJU&hl=de_DE&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[Laqueesha 474]

An F-22/F-35 rip-off if I've ever seen one. Well, at least it's not as bad as the Buran, that's for sure. I mean, come on! :D

[vektorboson 8]

An F-22/F-35 rip-off if I've ever seen one. Well, at least it's not as bad as the Buran, that's for sure. I mean, come on! :D

To me it actually looks more like the child of the YF-23 and Su-27.

[Colossus 2]

colossus there are more important things for RF than re-painting the roundels on all vehicles and aircrafts with this new one.

A joke, NoRailgunner. Hence the :p. ;)

No, I can't possibly imagine neither BI or any real-life division in the Russian Air Force got time, money or any sort of priority with this. A micro detail at the most.

[*LK1* 10]

A British sniper has broken the record for the longest range kill in combat. CoH Craig Harrison bested the previous record, held by Canadian Master Corporal Rob Furlong, by 45 m (49 yd). Previous to that, American Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock's record held for 35 years. The new best is 2,502.4 m. CoH Harrison used a L115A3 Long Range Rifle chambered in .338 Lapua to achieve the feat.

mmm coool i would be so happy if....

however,since you guys have talk about the javelin,i saw years ago a video about the javelin and is obviously a fake...you can never imagine how many times i've flammed with self-proclaimed wannabe weapon expert...there is alot of people thinking a javelin can have this effect on a t-72...

TDDxq-3UTZE

lol....plastic tank.