Weapon accurracy. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Flashpoint Campaigns Series


Zakalwe101 -> Weapon accurracy. (5/29/2018 8:17:53 PM)

So, just lost 3 M1a1(HA) to ATGM fired from 10 T80BV at a range of 3500m, M1A1(HA) were at level 3 elevation, firing units at level 2 elevation, clear terrain between firer and target, targets were in 90% cover, and in Hold mode. Firing units were in Deliberate move mode.

So the Soviets got lucky, but I was still grumpy about it so went away and foolishly looked at the Wikipedia article on the KOBRA missile system. Well I wish I hadn't, in the article it gives the accuracy rating for the missile at 80% [&:]

Hmmmm......... I thought where did that come from, so looked carefully at the article and there was only one reference and that was to RT (Russia Today),not I would consider a credible source.

Well think I can safely ignore that Wikipedia article...

I have no idea where to look to find a reliable source of information for this sort thing.

Question to the game designers, where do they get their data for weapon effectiveness from....range, accuracy, penetration etc. Is the data available for some weapon systems more readily available and credible than others , are sources evaluated for bias ?

ctcharger -> RE: Weapon accurracy. (5/29/2018 9:25:59 PM)

I found some data in David Isby's Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army, it puts the TOW at 90%, 105mm APDS at 1,500 meters 61% gives some penetration data also..
Janes basically

Says the Soviet 125mm HVAPFSDS at 2,000 meters is 46% to hit (stationary target and shooter)
It has more data on the 115mm gun, with laser rangefinding and without...

It does have Soviet ATGMs too, 87% for the Sagger at 2,000 meters for example. It appears the later improvements made the missile easier to control while being shot at, faster, better control at shorter ranges, and improved warheads. My guess is the new ones require less training time also. Regardless, long range shots if you can see the target, the target does not see you, is stationary, pretty much are going to hit regardless of which ATGM it is.

Put some smoke on them or you, shoot at them or their general area, and/or move should greatly reduce their accuracy.

I did see a combat video of a TOW I think hitting a Syrian tank recently. Time seems to slow way down as the missile moves downrange...

CapnDarwin -> RE: Weapon accurracy. (5/29/2018 11:04:08 PM)

We take data from anywhere we can find it. Websites, books, first-hand knowledge (unclassified, of course), Field Manuals, released documents, and results of calculations and curve fits of know data. Pretty much anywhere we can find information. Our team has a great combination of knowledge with three team members being former military. We all have a ton of books, like Janes Armor and Artillery, FMs from both sides of the battlefield, books on armor, armor composition, protection calculation and the same for gun rounds. I have a number of spreadsheets with information on hit probability, penetration values, armor values and other factors. In some cases, if we think a value is out of family it gets smoothed out. Sometimes we also give it our best-educated guess. We are surely not perfect and that is why we allow folks to do their own thing in data and make their own scenarios. Hope that makes some sense.

I will venture a guess those 3 M1s got knocked out and not hard-killed in this fight. [8D]

Zakalwe101 -> RE: Weapon accurracy. (5/30/2018 9:32:03 PM)

Cap'n thanks for your reply, so a veritable mountain of data from different sources, thought it would be so, a labour of love then to go through it all.

ctcharger interesting data you have there.

My M1A1's and T80's had sighted each other, I make the assumption that the M1A1 were not stationary but displacing regularly or at least after every few shots within the hex boundaries. Indeed they had been shooting each other , but the M1's were unfortunately also shooting at an HQ unit and an AD unit.

A valid comment would be that if every missile system worked as advertised then we wouldn't see any fighter bombers or helicopters, other than as piles of wreckage!

If I could I would cover the whole of West Germany with a smoke screen, but I guess that next time I'll ensure that if can't get enough smoke missions then I'll fight in the dark or when it's "Infantry weather".

ctcharger -> RE: Weapon accurracy. (6/1/2018 12:41:24 AM)

From what I have read, the missiles systems work very well. They require aircraft to fly low which consumes extra fuel and puts them in range of AAA. It also requires using aircraft as Wild Weasels instead of additional bombers. So while the SAMs may not shoot down many jets, their presence makes a difference. AAA gets a bad rap also but forces the pilots to hurry and knocks them around a bit during their target runs. In GMT's MBT, AA units can cause air units bomb drops to scatter which seems right to me. Now if you have effective countermeasures (chaff, ECM, flares, evasive maneuvers), their performance can be greatly reduced. Stinger missiles required a definite change in Soviet helicopter tactics when it came on the scene.

The Saggers the Egyptians were very effective until the Israelis figured out their weakness and took countermeasures. RPGs force you to carry around the additional weight of reactive armor and standoff armor and makes you think long and hard before advancing on infantry unsupported in close quarters.

In my game experience, my air units rarely make it past one run. Helos last a little longer but not much...

IronMikeGolf -> RE: Weapon accurracy. (6/1/2018 2:56:13 AM)

3500m is the rated max effective range for the M1A1. That means a 50% probability of hit. I think 80% is in the right ball park for the Refleks. Ammunition effect also does not fall off at extended ranges for HEAT.

It's like 2 tanks defending against 8. Not good.

Also, those ATGMs flip the script on range bands.

ctcharger -> RE: Weapon accurracy. (6/15/2018 1:15:46 AM)

In my old Combat Commander ruleset from Enola games, it lists Tradoc Bulletin #1: Range and Lethality of US and Soviet Anti-Armor Weapons in the extensive list of sources.... that would be an interesting find...

WildCatNL -> RE: Weapon accurracy. (6/15/2018 8:40:43 AM)

This 1975 "Range and Lethality of US and Soviet Anti-Armor Weapons": http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a392784.pdf ?

Kind regards, William

ctcharger -> RE: Weapon accurracy. (6/15/2018 12:31:29 PM)

Yes, it would seem my Google fu is quite weak...[&o]

Red2112 -> RE: Weapon accurracy. (8/13/2018 4:57:07 PM)

You can find more Russian armour (FM) info on the links below...


As well as US amour FMs...

You can also find Janes "Armour and Artillery" which are yearly, in second-hand book shops at reasonable prices...

Janes Armour and Artillery books can also be found in some public libraries.

Main thing to know is when (year) the piece of gear was built, then just look for that yearbook (Janes).



MaxDamage -> RE: Weapon accurracy. (9/10/2018 11:39:35 AM)

Kobra does ~650-700 mm penetration and it defeats ERA. M1A1 has around 600-700 mm against HEAT and that is not counting the weak spots like its gun, gun shield, turret ring and tracks. So i think its pretty realistic and these things can happen. Tube atgm are good because they give extremely good hit chance at long ranges like at 2500+ m with 80+% hit chance. Each time yoir tanks come under ATGM fire you roll a dice and some of your tanks can get destroyed or take a disabling hit.

As for 80% accuracy. it is a guided weapon what did you expect? The downside is that this weapon is expensive and only ~4 missiles are included per tank. In game this means that the tank can only shoot a couple of times and then it can not use its missile weapon until resupplied. Also this weapon has low chance of activation because the ammo is scarce.

Page: [1]

Valid CSS!

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI