Corp.Pihla

IRL you have to remember that the gunner is a human allso. When I was at gunners place of BMP-2 and in combat exercise we had close contact with MBT the commander never had a chance to say "fire". If I saw the enemy, I opened fire (when I was sure they were enemy). I haven't played MP, yet, but I hope that someday when I deside to join the group, there won't be a gunner like Ai... About radio commucations allso; I think there is too much small talk at SP missions. That is not 'profecional'. And allso, I have no idea, if that is how Us uses it's radio, but we were allways reminded that "If you can hear the radio, so can enemy". Due we never spoke of ranks, places, loses, ammo in 'clear', we allways hade some sort of codes for those...

If I remember correct, AT-4 is a common name for a generation of AT-missiles.. Dragon, Fagot, and many others... They are all so-called second generation missiles... Guided with infra red signals, and are aimed simply by keepeng the target center of targeting grid...

We did (IRL) have pistols in army. I was a bmp-2 gunner, and I had a pistol. In T-72 only commander (in finish tanks) has an AK, but every one else has a pistol. For it usefulnes... In urban, and in forrests, it could be useful, not in open terrain...

Yes, Its calibrated for a western tank. Numbers are hundred meters...

Ok. Here is me... I'm from small northern country called Finland. I was born in 1981 AD. I live near city of Tampere. And study automation... I'v just beem released from military, as BMP-2 gunner. And I served in Armored recon/ AT Company... Now my intrest are basicly in tanks (My teletubie could give a hint..) and I'm part of institution which runs Finnish Armor museum... And my real name is Matti Petteri Pihlaja

Ochen harashaja wodka... Nope, they could be better... For example spoken all in russia.. Ok, maybe not... Spashiba...

Thanx... It was desinged for shirt (which hasn't been printed, yet...) by a friend, me and my brother (also found in this forum...)

Yes... I can confirm this... The sights they are using for commanders are actually T-72's gunners sights....

"Have You checked the batteries from mine detector?" "Hey, look stupid looking guy in leather..." "Nice barrel You have there..." "Are you sure that's unarmed?" "It cant be a trap" "Who would put a mine under a bed?" "Now, this one couldn't be a trap" "Who would see us from here?" "Would you put a mine in every door?"

IRL I would like to see the man who actually carries, AT-4 (russian version) and two missiles for it... The AT-4 it self is sized about a backpack, and weights about 30 kg. Missiles for it are man-sized, and weights 25kg each. (It is loaded by replacing entire upper part of launcher, wich may be seen outside BMP-2 (the tube on the top of tower)) Im not sure but, For as I know LAW can't be reloaded in a field... (Correct me if Im wrong...)

Yes, I agree with WKK. Everyone is talking about Russian military machine, like they know everything about it, even if they haven't even SAW an actual Russian tank IRL!!! I can tell (by experience) that Russian military equipment is HIGHLY reliable. Not very comfortable, but working. And is repairable in the field. Allmost everything is working by simple mechanically, not by electornics. And for AK-series, it IS the most common weapon in the world. And not only by its cheapness... Armies don't buy a weapon 'cause it is cheap, but cause it is usefull... BTW, West haven't ever forgot about Russian military power...

Just wanted to enlighten Wooble: T-72 and T-80 does not, I repeat does NOT have same gun... Both guns are 125mm, but they are NOT same... (T-72 has 2A46 and T-80 2A26M-1)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wobble @ Mar. 07 2002,21:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the tank smoke.. when you fire there is massive black and grey smoke that obscures your view for several seconds... this isnt the 1800s we dont use black powder anymore.. big flash and a whisp of smoke is all that there should be.. not a massive plume that encompasses the entire tank.<span id='postcolor'> Actually, they do still use a 'black powder'... Well not exactly the same as they used in 17th century, but it is still powder... I'd like to know, have You ever seen a tank firing IRL?!?!? I have... Actually I have fired several hundred shots with BMP-2 and have seen T-72s and BMP-1s firing IRL. And have seen a video clip of Challenger 2 firing. See for details.

I served as gunner of BMP-2 in FDF (Finnish Defence Force here also). And fired RK 62 (7.62 Assault Rifle) PKM and PKT (same weapon in tanks) KVKK LAV 30mm Autocanon (2A42) AT-5 9mm FN Pistol AK-47 That is all I remebered... Might be others...

I think we don't need another SCUD in the OFP. Grad could only be used like SCUD I think... Anyhow.. couple of those would turn an entire villages to dust..

I had a nice one allso.. I was with this Black Op mission, to destroy enemy base. I managed to plant exlposives, and crawled away... When I setted off explosives, and charged back to the base (to kill survivors...) I had quite a suprise when UAZ killed me... UAZ was blown to the sky with stachel, and had flown a minute or so, and managed to hit strait at me when it landed... Lession of this story: Sh*t happens...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wardog @ Feb. 13 2002,14:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">total lack of use of main gun when firing.. when using a box you could enguage 2 targets.. one with gun, one with missle..<span id='postcolor'> Meaning the fitting of two seperate fire control systems. granted, one could be allocated to the commander, but then there's the matter of added cost to the MBT in general. Also, when ANY large calibre weapon kicks off, there is a hell of a recoil. What would that do to missile lock?<span id='postcolor'> Ok, nice thought to target two targets at same time, but I would allso like meet the gunner who can do that... Now, I'm talking about BMP-2: I was wondering, how can you aim with 2A42 (30mm autocanon) and AT-5 at same time since they have seperated fire control systems... (AT-5 is desinged to be able to be removed, if needed to be used for instance, by crew when BMP it self is eighter burning or left to cower...) So, even when 30mm doesn't kick off a bit, it would be impossible to fire the gun and missile at same time... Oh, I just remembered... They CAN'T be launched at same time, due to system wich prevents missile to be launched when gun isn't at its lowest point...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wardog @ Feb. 12 2002,22:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Not quite true. HEAT (When it is working correctly) forms a shaped charge on the outer plate of the tank and all energy is directed inwards, into a very small space. The cone is rapidly (explosively) expanding gasses. Usually enough to make a real mess of the inside of the tank. ERA acts by setting off a counter-explosion, preventing the shaped charge from forming properly. Edited for a bit more dertail <span id='postcolor'> I don't know much about penetration, but what I have been told in military, it IS extremly hot metal, which penetrates armor. And yes, ERA works that way...

ERA is and old invention and allmost every modern tank has it.

ERA is and old invention and allmost every modern tank has it.

Actually from historical point of view: Russians in WW II desinged tanks to be used against infantry using big guns, high exlposives and machine guns. Which is still visible today. In their code of armored warfare (in early WW II) there were mentioned that if a tank has to fight against tank there has been an error somewhere. They had AT infantry and guns for enemy tanks.

Actually from historical point of view: Russians in WW II desinged tanks to be used against infantry using big guns, high exlposives and machine guns. Which is still visible today. In their code of armored warfare (in early WW II) there were mentioned that if a tank has to fight against tank there has been an error somewhere. They had AT infantry and guns for enemy tanks.

When I served my time in the army (as a BMP-2 gunner) tank crew had only 9mm F&N pistol with 3 mags. Well, I personaly think it is enough, cause I personaly wouldn't go to frontline on foot. And if the tank is disabled, there are enough ammo to make it back to friendly side of the lines... If not, you could allways save one ammo for yourself... Personaly on OFP I like Dragunov...

I also had this bug in Red Hammer campaing, in the mission called 'Alamo'. I disabled Abrams with mine, killed crew, drove repair ural and fixed Abrams... Then jumped in a middle of combat to gunners seat, turned the turret to the house, and before I noticed I was upside down... When I jumped out, I got killed cause the Abrams jumped over me... That wasn't fun...

In a matter of tracked vehicles handling I would like to say a thing in here about BMPs... Our BMP drivers were taught so called "Russian turn"; From high speed you lock the one side which makes it slide (assuming that the ground slips a bit... ), then press the clutch pedal and change gear down one step. When you release clutch pedal, tracks take the grip back, and the tank jumps forward... Nice move, but for crew usually very painfull...