Sonar

I must say Classic is my prefered ver. as well. I dont like the new interface in 3. But there is a good community behind 3 making some really good missions.

Quote: Originally Posted by Sonar View Post Wiki is useless I didnt realise they gave degree's on wiki being usless????? I suspect you probably think you have a degree in ....psychology, only at a guess. Wait a minute didnt you say 0.18. Sorry but I think YOU need to see a psychiatrist! End of argument. I have no time for people who cannot have a discussion without reverting to swearing to try and get their point across. Oh btw MOA means Minute of Arc Not bullet dispersion as you would have everyone think. again from#153 I appear to have a better understanding of the word "means" that you do. Your statment of would be better written as " MOA, as an example 4MOA means......" Remember to some people here english is a second language, so they dont always understand what we are saying.{quote] §13) Write in EnglishPlease write only in English on the public forums. Avoid writing in any other language or any kind of slang or txt speak since the majority of the members most likely won't understand. In private messages you are of course welcome to write in any language you wish. One of the forum rules I believe.ta ta and go read your your notes for your degree and see what it says about people who swear.:nener:

So let me get this right... I'm wrong! MOA dons't mean Minute of Arc, it means bullet disperion over range. Wow that just destoryed 30 years of competion shooting and a 5 year engineering degree. So the next time someone says that something is out by 4 mins I have to tell them that we can fix the problem by shooting at it.:p Boy you thought my logic was bad. ps I dont recall having a fit over anything so you are not going gain anything by misquoting me or him. And its 0.047 not .18

WAY TO GO Placebo

Um ahhh thats cheating:D I know we did it, saved a load of work. Mind you we did find some references were wrong, not many though.

We were not allowed to use it in Uni because it is uncontrolled. A recent court Decision (State v Flores Texas 2008) ruled that Wikipeadia cannot be used because it uncontrolled. And a lot of pm's to me have congradulated my refusial to accept wiki entires as proof. As for the sources listed, again uncontrolled.

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Boobies!

Never read Shooters Weekly....any good?

Wiki is useless No you didnt! So dont go quoting stuff at me when you dont even quote yourself correctly. No your wern't nowhere have you explained what MOA means. You havnt even said where you pulled the 5% from. So again dont quote me until you can quote yourself. Anyone reading this thread knows I explained MOA not you. Remember this from post #156 And this bit from #185 Totally relevent, My initial statement was You claimed in post #153 So I brought up the point of it being poorly manufactured as an argument against it's supposed accuracy and compared it to rifles that are of almost identical design. I have maitained that "CommBloc Weapons are in accurate" and I will maintain this stance. As I have said I have used them, and whilst I cannot prove it to you, my "OPINION" is based on experience not something I read on a uncontrolled website.

I am mearly quoting you using the incorrect application of MOA, you said and I quote "4 moa means 4 inches dispersion every 100 yards" Using figures of 3-5 MOA confuses the argument and relating MOA to dispersion confuses the argument. And "niggling" over 1/2 an inch was proving that MOA is not a constant but a variable. If you are going to table an argument table it correctly. I personally would have said "...that a AK will group 3 to 5inches (76mm to 127mm) at 100yds(91.4m)" so the younglings who dont understand ballistics yet would at least know what we are talking about. You seemed to have decided to start an argument with a competion shooter....not the best idea you have had thus far:D. If you want, I can go right into the exeterior ballistics of a projectile in flight and really confuse things. But for the sake of a simplfied argument... Soviet era weapons are inaccurate not because of ammo or skill on the part of the user but because of quality control....they didnt have any. And for people interested in the Tank debate this also applied. I have sat inside a RUSSIAN MADE T80, and they are crap. Poor welding, no shock mounts on electronics, exposed wiring and fittings not secured properly. You can have the best armour in the world but if it isnt fitted properly it will fail. But dont misunderstand this is not to say the AK was a bad rifle, just a poorly manufactured one. The Finnish Valmet M and Rk series and the Israeli Galil ( a hybrid of the M16 and AK) are very well made and therefore very effective . side note: the M76 was calibred in 7.62x 39, 5,56x45NATO and 7.62x51NATO but not in 5.45X39. And all other variants are still 7.62x39mm. I wonder why? MER of a AK47 was 200yds AKM 350m (yes a differnet scale) 20-60% increase in MER is +180Metres therefore a MER of????? thats right 530m. How is that possible in a proji thats 5.45 out of a necked down 7.62x36 cartridge.....I doubt it very much esp when a 7.62x51 either from a M14 or a L1A1 has a mer of 300m and a battle range of 600. English translation follows: MER=Maximum Effective Range AK 47= a rifle 200yds= a distance AKM= a rifle 5.45x39mm is the new Russian Calibre they take a 7.62x39mm cartridge and squeeze the neck ( the bit where the bullet or proji goes) down from 7.63mm to 5.46mm, in shooters terms this is called wildcatting. examples are .243Ackly Improved with is a 308Win necked down to receive a .243" bullet. Make a very small bullet travel very fast with heaps of kinetic energy and heaps of speed means very accurate, I have heard of shooters with this round shooting sub 1/2MOA out to 500yds. I have a barrel for my M82 (Parker Hale 1200TX) which is 6mm BR (Bench Rest) its a 7.62x51 cartridge necked to 6mm, with it I have heard I will be able to (but not likely) shoot sub 3/4 MOA at 900 yds. M14 = 7.62x51NATO rifle used by the USMC until the M16 was forced on them....they didnt want it. L1A1= Australian and British version of the Fabrique Nationale de Herstal Fusil Automatique Leger (FN-FAL). The Belguim made 7.62x51NATO Battle Feild Rifle. Its not an Assualt rifle, it to big! And its fun when you stick a match under the sear plate....I never did this because its illegal and I was never here!:D Battle Range= The range that a squad of Infantry can shoot and expect to hit. These are not aimed shots in the sense that you can see your target but a aimed shot at an area where you target is. My point with the post is that a smaller and lighter proji shouldnt have a MER the same as a Battle range of a heavier calibre. The energy lose at range would make the smaller proji less effective. Its great if it hits the target centre chest, but usless if it dosnt penetrate. ---------- Post added at 04:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:37 AM ---------- I do apologise at this point Im getting my yds and metres mixed up and some of my facts. I unreservedly apologise for this, I should know better.:o The M14 is a brilliant rifle and the USMC didnt really want to change to the M16. The L1A1 also has a MER of 500m. But your statment about being to lunch is crap. I never said the the they shared the same casing. I said that the 5.45 uses a necked down cartridge. Again you show a profound lack of understanding about ammunition. And dont make assuptioms. The AK AKM and AK74 are innaccurate because of manufacture. My statement was in the vain of... I doubt using a smaller projectile increase the MER by 20-60%.

im am but mearly responding to the comment about a) Ak's are accurate to 3-5MOA and b) 4MOA is 4" which it is not. MER of a AK47 was 200yds AKM 350m (yes a differnet scale) 20-60% increase in MER is +18oMetres there fore a MER of????? thats right 530m. How is that possible in a proji thats 5.45 out of a necked down 762x36 cartridge.....I doubt it very much esp when a 7.62x51 either from a M14 or a L1A1 has a mer of 300m and a battle range of 600.

The full title is Me versus anyone on combloc weapons inaccuracy, Iraqi Republican Guard Tank Divisions and General rifle shooting(with a close look at MOA, mildot and exterior ballistic)

:p Have at you girly pants!!!

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1306856#post1306856 for those who wish to battle further....have at you scoundrals!!!!

Totally and utterly agree with that. Here's a little known factoid. US Armay Tropps do .5 hour dry firing for every hour of live, USMC do 2 hours dry to 1 live Australian Army do 3 to 1 The Russians do 5to1. Even with inaccurate rifles Soviet infantry were better shots than US Army. The NON REPUBLICAIN GUARD Divisions were armed with Type 69. The Republicain Graud Regiments WERE armed with Babylon Lions. Which were T-72M1A. So whilst not as good as the Russian ones they were better than the Type69's. You will not see refernces to thew Sights because it is NOT confirmed ( however it has never been openly denied either) Some of them also had laser range finders, which, also, is not confirmed. The Iraqi T72's did have laminated armour on the front and slope. But my argument is that the T72 model used in game isnt accurate I used the Iraqi tanks as a reference point because it is one of the few wars where M1's came head to head with T72's. I will admit its probably not the best example, but it does annoy me when people make statments likepoorly trained and led militia using mostly T-55s and and a few T-72s constructed in Iraq with rejected Soviet parts. They wernt militia and they wernt poorly trained. The Republican Guard were enough of a threat that the Airwar proir to Desert Storm specifcally targeted RG Divisons from the outset. You dont waste Billions of Dollars of Ordanance on militia poorly trained or otherwise.(well the USAAF wastes it on who they want really:D) Some people forget I served during GW1 a point I made earlier and asked the person if they had served....still no answer. You obviously dont understand exterior ballistics, accurary may incresae range but it wont increase kinetic energy, and an increase of 60% is only 180 odd yds. Boy and I thought my maths skills were bad!:D To the MOA question roughly yes accuratly no. 1moa at 100yds is 1.047".so for every increase of range and/or angle it incresases by that much again. So at 1000yds its not a 10 inch increase but an 10and 1/2 inch increase and when you are shooting at that range 1/2 inch is the differnece between life and death. I know Im being anal about this but it is fact and facts I have had to work with. If I make a mistake with a calculation on elevation and windage at +500yds it is the differnce between a vbull and 5 points and I will lose a competition. That is the one saving grace now, because before if I made the same mistake I would lose my head!

I think we should move this disscussion to the off topic thread as we are going to fill this one up with off topic stuff before much longer.

"4 moa means 4 inches dispersion every 100 yards" It does not! Well not really.MOA means Minute of Arc (or Angle) it equates to 1.047" at 100yds and 10.47 at 1000yds so at 400yds it would equal 4.188" So 4MOA would be 4.188 at 100yds and 16.752" at 400yds at 1000yds it's 41.88". Some people will mistake MOA for Mils which dosnt work. one MOA is 1/60th of a degree one mil is 1/6400th of a degree. ps the M24 scope is a mildot.Heres a good website to learn how to use them http://www.mildot.com/index.htm I have fired a Type56 and a SKS both which are 7.62x39mm and there is no way I would pull a 3-5MOA group at 350Metres. And to qualify as a "A"class marksman I had to hold a sub MOA group at 300metres, which is less than 3 inch group...from memory I shot 2 3/4" group. I should point out that I still shot sub moa groups at ranges up to 900metres, I have to , to remain competative. I still do not believe the commbloc weapons are as accurate as people think. Its one thing to read these numbers on a web page but its different on a bi-directional rifle range. Milspec ammo.....my favorite! One day for shits and giggles we took a 100 round random sampling of Australian made 7.62.51NATO rounds. Put them in a ballistic Hammer, broke em and weighed each component. We found a 10-15% variation in powder weight, projectile weight and case weight ( which does affect accuaracy) Non milspec ie commerical ammo had less than 5% variation and Laupa Target Rifle ammo has less than 1% variation. And these are from countries with good to excellent quality control. My own hand loads for my M82 is less than .1% variation. Hell Toupee."Iraqi tanks are just not representive of Russian ones" No they are not because they were Polish ones. And they had better sights because the Belgium supplied them with Thermal sights, however this is NOT confirmed and I was never here!!!! And the 2 M1A1 kills suggest that they did have "Quality" Ammo because the hits were caused by APDSFS rounds, and as they had no radiological reading they were not DU, which all collalition forces used. However one tank had a HEAT signature on its engine cowling suggesting that it had been first hit by a Hellfire.....this is not confirmed and I was never here! ( notice how I skip intelligence questions quiet nimbly!) When you are playing with MOA numbers 20-60% isnt all that big. we are talking 1.047 to 1.704 INCHES so no I dont consider it a big increase. Anyway you can all say what you like as far as I am concerned combloc weapons are inaccurate for various reason's including I have been shot at by them and am still here, I dont like or play CS and I still think combloc weapons are inaccurate so :p pfffffft!

:DOk we have to have an easter egg or silly suggestions thread just to lighten the mood around here. So I will kick it off: 1. Attack rabbits aka Monty Python and the Holy Graile :p and/or Rabbits armed with satchels so we can ied the baddies in multiplayer games

:rolleyes:Ok I accept your point on the difference's of AK47 AK74 AK107. But I generalised with the statment the" AK's" I did not state AK47. I will standby the statement that"AK's" are inaccurate.However Wiki is not a quotable source....why. No university allows it to be referenced as it is not controlled.“Wikipedia entries are inherently unreliable because they can be written and edited anonymously by anyone.â€So as my reference I tend to use,Rifles of the World by John Walters isbn 1-85409-9 mines the sixth edition so it is a little dated. I also use Janes Infanty Systems, which I dont have on my desk right now, because I usually borrow it from the library because its so damn expensive. Another point...I was a senior NCO in the Royal Australian Navy. I served for 16 years as a Weapon System technician and did 2 years in the Australian Army as a Infantryman. I have been shot at by most variants of the AK and are still very much alive at last check. I should point out that I believe M16's and generally all 5.56mm NATO weapons are also inacurate and pretty much usless. This is because my intial training was with the L1A1 7.62x51mm NATO.In fact when playing any version of ArmA I tend to dump 5.56 and grab any 7.62x51mm cal weapon I can find...call me old fashion:D. Also I was rated as a "A"class marksman and today I still shoot competion over ranges of 900metres in all calibres up to 8mm, so I believe my "Education" is adequate.:cool: The AK47 was a 7.62X39mm round, the newer versions are 5.45 x39mm, however intel sources...cheifly the US Army quotes ...."In it's accuracy AK-74 surpasses AKM in 20 - 60%. So realistically no great leap. Also the mechanics are not different.The differnence is in the size of extractor claws and locking lugs, reciver manufacture, stock and other hardware manufacture. In fact apart from improved manufacture and caliber change there is little differnce. If you were trained to use a AK47 (or in my case a Chicomm Type56 which is a pain cuase I'm 185cm tall and the 56 is made for someone about 152cm tall so the butt is incrediably uncomfortable for me:mad:) you can pick up a AK74 and still use and field strip it! The AK107 however is a completly different kettle of fish, but I feel I have made my point. Xenios, I wouldnt consider the Iraqi army poorly trained or equipped. People forget that proir to the 1990 invasion of Kuwait; Iraq had been in a full on no holds barred war with Iran for 8 years and the USA, UK, USSR, France , Germany, North Korea and others supplied both sides and Belguim, Spain, Portugal and Egypt supplied only Iraq. So a lot of weapons testing went on. I digress. So in 1991 when we hit back the Iraqis had 8 years of experience whilst the majority of the US hadnt been in a major War since 1975. Now having said that the Coalition forces whacked Sadam quite nicely. However the US Army only lost 21 M1A1 to moslty blue on blue with only 2 being confirmed as being destoryed by Iraqi T72's(with only one kia). Other non Republican Guard units had T62's and Type 69's (ChiComm T62) , so I dont know were you get the idea that they only had mostly T-55s and and a few T-72s constructed in Iraq with rejected Soviet parts.I served during the Gulf War(1), did you? Anyway I still believe the T72 model is a too tough and not realistic compared to a M1A1 and the AK's are too accurate over range. :D I will do the experiment for you to prove my point and will post on youtube. please feel free to set the parameters of the experiment.

The AI skill has always been an issue, along with the accuracy over range of Comblock weapons. AK's are notroiusly innaccurate above 250metres but how many of us have been killed by AI at 500+ metres in A1. Its like the T72 Vs M1A1. The Gulf war showed that M1's would wipe out T72's in and head to head fight, but in A1 different story. Im for balancing, but I also want realism.

Did you map it? or tell your puter you had a joystick? I know that sounds like a redundant question, but I have come across peeps that didnt know they had to turn it on and/or map the JS. Esp given the range of controllers avaiable. So I dont mean to sound condesending or anything mate. A side note Im glad they fixed the flight model to react to rudder inputs better than ArmA. Its a hoot to fly now. So it makes the flight sim agrument less. As in its rapidly evolving into a combined War/Flight Sim....well done again BiS

Bring out your Dead....but Im not dead yet

OFP wanst a Flight Sim either but it had it. So the question remains why wasn't it included?

When can we expect an updated/upgraded or whole new version of Visitor. Im itching to get back to the Australia Mod island! I got heaps of new ideas just looking for a place to happen after seeing all the screenies. And it will get worse in 2 weeks when I can finally get an english copy!!!:bounce3:

Ever tried Harpoon3 ANW. Not much in the graphics dept but very realistic.