Weapons Info

Post by **Taurec** » Sun Dec 29, 2002 4:43 pm

Hiya ... nice to see another gun bunny

Welcome, ..

Well in a other thread I was thinking about that AT-2

BUT .. it isn't launched from a tube .. so it's could be an error .. or the russians got another wireguided missile ...

The Hind F got a 23mm Turret ... and the 30mm's are fixed mounted to the cabin ..

StromCrow3000 · Post by **StromCrow3000** » Sun Dec 29, 2002 4:52 pm

It's not a Hind D then? Considering there are so many variants, I can't remember them all.......
I still find it funny that they field tanks in FMP. Blame it on all that Mechwarrior.........

Katyusha · Post by **Katyusha** » Sun Dec 29, 2002 5:03 pm

Well, it might just be an AT-6 then, but the AT-2 is more common. I forgot the AT-6's NATO codename. While the Hind-F has a 23mm gun, some variants have a 30mm gun instead. Unfortunately, it's pretty hard to tell 1 type from the other just by looking at it, as the main difference is in specs, not looks. As for the tanks, does anyone else find it odd that the RK-92 is easily taken down by the M-9's assault rifle, yet a bunch of LAVs didn't even scratch it? While the M-9's gun could have just been a Hi-vel weapon, well, half a dozen LAVs could take out a T-80....

StromCrow3000 · Post by **StromCrow3000** » Sun Dec 29, 2002 5:07 pm

Dunno, perhaps DU rounds? The A10 uses them in the Avenger cannon. It's not called "tank-killer" for nothing, ya know......

Katyusha · Post by **Katyusha** » Sun Dec 29, 2002 5:14 pm

*smacks himself on the head for forgetting about that*

Doh! I forgot all about that. Gotta love the GAU-8. However, an HE round still packs a punch. I wonder what they made the Savages out of. Couldn't have been Titanium, since it would cost to much, and the USSR isn't exactly known for having a superb economy. Probably just steel, which kinda reinforces my previous point.

Post by **Taurec** » Sun Dec 29, 2002 10:00 pm

It's NATO name is SPIRAL but it uses radio instead of wire for guidence,

The one they could have drawn ... Tube launched AND wire guided is the
AT-5 SPANDREL ... BUT the launching platforms
where only the BRDM, BMP-2

Well they made subs of the stuff (Ti) so why not <g>
Since they made the USSR the bad guys again, I think they didn't think about the economics .....

OT:
Those LAV 40's got a 40Mm autocannon don't think they would harm a T80
Remember the Gulfwar .. those T72's managed to get 15 hits on a Challenger 2 Tank .. and just scratched the paint <g> ..
And they used 125mm shell's

I give the russians credit for the T80 .. it's armor is very good ..

I'm afraid those poor LAV's get picked off one by one ..

Katyusha · Post by **Katyusha** » Mon Dec 30, 2002 2:28 am

The Challenger II has carbon-composites for armor, and the turret is shaped to deflect SABOT shells. The T-80 is made out of steel, with some reactive armor on the turret, meant to stop missiles. Besides, LAVs are ussualy loaded down with HE shells, since they are meant to support infantry against infantry, and SABOTs would not be all that useful. And in any case, how could they bring those along and forget to bring a guy with a TOW launcher?

I automatically excluded the AT-5, since Hinds don't carry them. Or at least not as a matter of standard practice. The only other tube launched AND wire guided missiles I know of are made on the other side of the Iron curtain. Unless the Ruskiyes decided to buy a few TOWs and HOTs and loaded the Hinds with them...

Post by **Taurec** » Mon Dec 30, 2002 10:14 am

It's frontal armor was designed to withstand 120mm's (You know the "evil" 60deg.) and that reactive armor does works on shell's
atleast the ones they are using on the U models of the Tank.
But anyway just as you said you don't fight a Tank with sticks and stones

Well I was thinking along that path that they would have bought / "borrowed" some.

Nazgul · Post by **Nazgul** » Mon Dec 30, 2002 10:34 am

*leaves the thread.... to much in put*

Katyusha · Post by **Katyusha** » Mon Dec 30, 2002 11:24 am

On the T-80U, yes, but I have my doubts about the T-80A. The Iraqis had a few of those, and a single 120mm SABOT sent it's turret flying. Moving on, I finally found the entry on the 688(i) in "Jane's all the World's Fighting Ships". Most of it is just background history, but I thought some people might be curious on the Pasadena's specs...

Builders: Newport News Shipbuilding Co.; General Dynamics Electric Boat Division.
Power Plant: One nuclear reactor (S6W type) , one propeller shaft, 7 screws
Length: 360 feet (109.73 meters)
Beam: 33 feet (10.06 meters)
Displacement: Approx. 6,900 tons (7010.73 metric tons) submerged
Speed: 20+ knots (20 standard, 30 full, 36 flank)
Crew: 13 Officers, 121 Enlisted
Armament: Tomahawk missiles, 12 VLS tubes (SSN 719 and later), MK-48 torpedoes, RGM-84 Harpoon Missiles, multiple remote controlled underwater vehicles and mobile mines, four torpedo tubes (Seawolf has 8).
Date deployed: November 13, 1976 (USS Los Angeles)
Ships of this class:
USS Los Angeles (SSN 688), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Philadelphia (SSN 690), Groton, Conn.
USS Memphis (SSN 691), Groton, Conn.
USS Bremerton (SSN 698), San Diego, Calif.
USS Jacksonville (SSN 699), Norfolk, Va.
USS Dallas (SSN 700), Groton, Conn.
USS La Jolla (SSN 701), Pearl Harbor, Hi.
USS City of Corpus Christi (SSN 705), Guam.
USS Albuquerque (SSN 706), Portsmouth, NH
USS Portsmouth (SSN 707), San Diego, Calif.
USS Minneapolis-St. Paul (SSN 708), Norfolk, Va.
USS Hyman G. Rickover (SSN 709), Norfolk, Va.
USS Augusta (SSN 710), Groton, Conn.
USS San Francisco (SSN 711), Norfolk, Va.
USS Houston (SSN 713), San Diego, Calif.
USS Norfolk (SSN 714), Norfolk, Va.
USS Buffalo (SSN 715), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Salt Lake City (SSN 716), San Diego, Calif.
USS Olympia (SSN 717), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Honolulu (SSN 718), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Providence (SSN 719), Groton, Conn.
USS Pittsburgh (SSN 720), Groton, Conn.
USS Chicago (SSN 721), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Key West (SSN 722), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Oklahoma City (SSN 723), Norfolk, Va.
USS Louisville (SSN 724), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Helena (SSN 725), San Diego, Calif.
USS Newport News (SSN 750), Norfolk, Va.
USS San Juan (SSN 751), Groton, Conn.
USS Pasadena (SSN 752), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Albany (SSN 753), Norfolk, Va.
USS Topeka (SSN 754), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Miami (SSN 755), Portsmouth, NH.
USS Scranton (SSN 756), Norfolk, Va.
USS Alexandria (SSN 757), Groton, Conn.
USS Asheville (SSN 758), Bremerton, Wa.
USS Jefferson City (SSN 759), San Diego, Calif.
USS Annapolis (SSN 760), Groton, Conn.
USS Springfield (SSN 761), Groton, Conn.
USS Columbus (SSN 762), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Santa Fe (SSN 763), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Boise (SSN 764), Norfolk, Va.
USS Montpelier (SSN 765), Norfolk, Va.
USS Charlotte (SSN 766), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.
USS Hampton (SSN 767), Norfolk, Va.
USS Hartford (SSN 768), Groton, Conn.
USS Toledo (SSN 769), Groton, Conn.
USS Tucson (SSN 770), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Columbia (SSN 771), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Greeneville (SSN 772), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
USS Cheyenne (SSN 773), Pearl Harbor, Hawaii

Just thought someone might be interested. I'll look up the Tico class later. All I remember about it right now is the AEGIS system, the SM-2ER and the Phalanx "R2D2" CIWS system.

Nazgul - This isn't much. Just a typical discussion between 2 people who are WAY too much into military technology for their own good.

Post by **Taurec** » Mon Dec 30, 2002 11:27 am

ROTFLMAO

..

Aaaahhh yes Jane's you got to have those...
I'm still looking for some digital versions <grin> ...

StromCrow3000 · Post by **StromCrow3000** » Mon Dec 30, 2002 11:31 am

Does anybody know where to get a digital version of the Jane's Reference manuals from? Or better yet, could they send me the compendium on Combat Aircraft and Weaponry, or something to that ilk?

EDIT: Whoops, didn't see Taurec was already asking!

URZ-zero · Post by **URZ-zero** » Mon Dec 30, 2002 11:37 am

Lol this almost seems like that scene in Ep 3 when Kazama and Sagara were having this AS discussion on Kaname's balcony...

Too bad I can't contribute, since my mechanical knowledge only limits to 70's super-robot mechanics.

Katyusha · Post by **Katyusha** » Mon Dec 30, 2002 11:37 am

You could just buy a few Jane's combat simulations games. They are pretty good, and they include data from the Jane's books. I don't know where to get any other digital copies of it. In the meantime, I am the proud owner of 7 volumes.

URZ - Yeah, it does doesn't it? Luckily, nobody is around to hit us with bats.

StromCrow3000 · Post by **StromCrow3000** » Mon Dec 30, 2002 11:45 am

What are the Titles?
Can we ask any tech question freely, with no fear of flames?

If so, then we dub thee:

OFFICIAL FORUM MILITARY ENTHUSIAST #2( Since Taurec has #1)

Congrats recruit, your intro posts have some really interesting content!