archbishop lazarus

It is actually rather expensive, if you take into account that T-72B3 is already hopelessly obsolete... You know, UVZ needs money! :D

Well, that still doesnt explain. My estimate is: Hull front is 25mm AL + 30mm steel at 60 deg = ~90mm Sides are 25mm AL + 30mm steel up to 2/3-3/4 height = ~45mm. The remaining 1/3 - 1/4 is a bit angled, and seems to be partially reinforced with around 5-10mm steel, so ~55-60mm. So sides are definitely 3UBR6 proof, but I wouldnt be sure about 3UBR8, especially the lower 2/3-3/4 of the hull, which is still a very big target. BTW, what about the rear ramp? That is the only part that seems REALLY thick.

My estimates are about 10% lower for front, (so almost the same) but sides arent a bit too optimistic? I think they arent more than 55-60mm max. Do you know the effectiveness of ERA? Can we give them about +300-400mm VS CE? (vs single warhead only)

Well, BMPs may be tin cans, but Bradleys are tin cans too! Dont forget that their protection was essentially the same as BMPs, until the M2A2 variant, around 30mm RHA. SLAP wont change anything, because BMPs are still invulnerable to it in the frontal sector. Sides and rear are already penetrable with conventional ammo.

Im really skeptical about M2/M3 shooting down planes.* Helicopters, thats perfectly fine. Its AA sight is designed for engaging them, not aircraft. Even the BMP-2, which has better AA sight, is only able to shoot down helicopters. The following is from Steel Beasts wiki: "The two vertical "funnels" passing through AP/HE/Coax reticle are the Air Defense Reticles used to engage hovering frontal or closing helicopter targets. The longer funnel is for HE rounds, while the shorter is for AP. To utilize the ADR sight the gunner manually inputs a range of 1800 meters, then "chokes" the fuselage of the enemy helicopter within the appropriate funnel and fires a continuous burst of 20 to 25 rounds (high rate), using the TOT (tracer on target) technique to adjust the rounds. " This is rather ineffective vs fixed wing aircraft (except Cessna for example). Same goes for BMP-2. Also, dont forget that M242 has very low rate of fire, this wont help you too. *wasnt that confused with the M6 Linebacker? Its Stingers are perfectly good vs aircraft.

Well, what was shown on the video is not just simply luck, its absolutely impossible. The Su-25 was flying at ~3000m altitude. Even a real Shilka would be unable to shoot it down! It has a maximum target altitude of 1500m (not to be confused with slant range, which is 2500m max.) Anyway, on steel beasts wiki, you can read that the Bradley's AA sight can be used only against hovering or closing helicopters, no fixed wing aircraft mentioned, which are way too much for this type of gunsights. (except if you wish to shoot down a Cessna :D)

No way. Do you think its easy to shoot down an aircraft with those primitive (for AA role) FCS that tanks and IFVs have? Definitely NO! Only slow helicopters. (don't even dream hitting a Mi-24 flying at max speed with an Abrams!) Tank and IFV FCS measure range, azimuth, elevation and to some extent, lead in azimuth, but not continuously. This is completely inadequate. Why? I tell you an example, the ZSU-23-4 Shilka. It has a radar (1RL33, RPK-2) and a mechanical ballistic calculator (1A7) Lets begin with the RPK-2. It measures 6 (!!!) different parameters: 1 & 2, target's elevation (epsilon) and its change in time 3 & 4, target's azimuth (beta) and its change in time 5 & 6, target's distance and its change in time From this data, the 1A7 calculates 4 parameters: Tu - projectile's time of flight H - lead for beta in height Ñ„ - target's lead angle, with projectile's ballistics over Tu Bu - lead for beta in azimuth So you can see that a "primitve" FCS, like in tanks and IFVs, dont have any chance of hitting an aircraft. If you dont believe me, check SAM simulator's documentation: https://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home EDIT: Even better: http://simhq.com/forum/files/usergals/2012/12/full-17362-48332-pcds.jpg (166 kB)

Oh, not again... :( JSRS vehicle sounds (mainly tracked) are absolutely terrible, not even close to reality.

No problem!

- facepalm - :D Sorry, of course you are right. Yes, it is indeed impossible to fire all at once, that would turn over the truck.

Unleash hell... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VU4JGShbCnw

Sorry for offtopic: Well, yes, true they won but only with the use of weapons of mass destruction! Agent orange, and similar, labeled as "herbicides", but in fact, chemical weapons. Resulted in at least one million of dead + countless of maimed. While the Panther was considered as MBT rather than a medium tank, it was still the best tank of the war. The Königstiger was also the best heavy tank. Jagdpanther was the best tank destroyer. XXI class submarines were also far superior to anything (I know they came too late) Me-262 was the best interceptor...

Yes, ammo selector looks exactly like that 1V517 is really similar to BV-55 and BV-62 too: http://www.kotsch88.de/Feuerleit/t-55am/BV-55_01.jpg The things (5-12) on the panel above are not important, just sockets for measuring equipment (maintenance)

I think I can help you with the shell selector. Its actually on the sight itself, switch number 19: http://www.kotsch88.de/Feuerleit/t-80/1G42_Frontplatte.jpg 1V517, looks like this: http://www.kotsch88.de/Feuerleit/t-80/T-80B_08a.jpg As you can see, almost the same functions as 1V528

Just dont forget that the Bradley before the A2 variant was also very poorly armored. Its frontal protection was almost exactly the same as the BMP, around 30mm. (OK, it was actually thicker, but unlike the BMP, it was made from aluminium, that's why its weak) And while I agree that BMP-3 wont protect against M919 APFSDS, but it has at least quite good basic armor (65-70mm vs KE), which may be enough against the still very common 25mm M791 APDS.

It will be released in two weeks If you played IL-2, you will know what this means. If not, you will figure out :p

While I agree that T-72A used sandbar filler, but I think T-80, B and BV used similar armor configuration as T-64. T-80 was meant to be a first line tank, like the T-64, not a lower quality second line tank as a T-72.

M60A1 would also have a place I think. Its rangefinder would be quite hard to script, (or even impossible) though...

Exactly! Also, ATGMs are becoming less and less useful since the introduction of composite armor. + Soviets used ERA, which made single warhead missiles useless. Sniping with ATGMs is possible only with a few tank destroyers that are small enough or have good mobility. For example, the 9P149 Shturm-S, which is very easy to conceal, and fires supersonic missiles.

Except if the projectile is a good old fashioned full caliber one. It may be important if the T-55 will be included in the mod, because it still used BR-412D APBC even in the 80's in Poland, Hungary and DDR. While the BR-412D has miserable performance compared to other types of ammunition, if it somehow still manages to penetrate, it does horrific damage to the crew and interior components, most probably seriously injuring, if not killing everyone, thanks to its bursting charge.

I dont agree. The aim of the T-64 was to produce a quality tank, not a quantity. This was also reflected in production numbers. BMP series were also quality, in contrast to BTRs (quantity) The quantity tank was the T-72, which was much simpler, and it was easier to produce. (Although it was more expensive than the T-64, but the reason for this was politics) Anyway, good luck with your project, it is an iteresting one. :) (if it were for A2, I'd gladly donate a few models)

Nem a nyugati árakra értettem, hanem az oroszra. Ha a fenti filozófiát vesszük, (szegény országoknak kevesebbért) akkor olcsóbbnak kellene lennie.

No, $team (and probably BI$) just wants even more $$$. Hungary is the poorest country of europe, with salaries lower than in russia. Still, prices arent lower. $team should burn in hell.

The problem with JSRS is that the author probably didnt see (hear) real tanks or other tracked vehicles in motion. He also has no idea how incredibly loud the engine of these vehicles. So, for example, you absolutely dont hear any track noise inside. Or, the engine sound is actually amplified inside, not damped, totally deafening. In the mod, outside track noise level is vastly exaggerated. (see video above for comparison) Im saying these from experience, I have driven various types, like VT-55, BLG-60, MTLBu, BMP-1 or GSP-55. Again JSRS mod is great, the weapon sound effects are very well done. Just vehicles are off.

Maybe "lower" quality, but at least realistic. Dont get me wrong, JSRS is a great mod, but its vehicle sounds (especially tracked) are nowhere near "realistic".