Jump to content

Damian90

Member
  • Content count

    806
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Community Reputation

339 Excellent

3 Followers

About Damian90

  • Rank
    First Sergeant

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. BWMod

    Not matters, double post. :D
  2. In real world they are OP as f... as well. ;) I can imagine these radio messages during Red Flag excercises - F-22 and F-35 OP af... nerf plox! :P
  3. Arma 3 Aegis (Alpha)

    @Night515 A small suggestion. Can a NATO (Pacific) which is based on British Armed Forces, receive the same armored vehicles as rest of NATO, or in general entire NATO, as in Armaverse, as per 2035 NATO unified it's equipment and weapons systems, especially if we consider heavy vehicles, to the single standard. So they should have M2A1 Slammer tanks, IFV-6c Panther APC's etc.
  4. Tanks - Fire-control system

    APFSDS rounds are not limited to 3000+m. It's all depending on FCS capabilities, a modern FCS can calculate range up to 5000+m for APFSDS rounds that are of the modern design, which means large sabot made from composites to reduce it's parasitic mass, and small fins to reduce drag during rods flight. Of course there FCS that are unable to calculate range up to 5000+m due to variety reasons, be it's optics zoom limitations and APFSDS designs, for example T-90M/SM that is quiet primitive in this regard compared to modern tanks like Merkava Mk4 or M1A2SEPv1/v2/v/3/v4 that are capable to both calculate range for all conventional (non guided) ammo types up to 5000+m and fire these ammo types effectively up to this range.
  5. HQ Replacement CSAT

    CSAT vehicle crews, especially for pacific faction, needs helmets.
  6. @TeTeT One minor suggestion, the SU-35 name in game should be fixed, now it's SU35S or something, a proper writitng per Russian system should be Su-35S. Just thought that I give a hint. ;)
  7. 2035: Russian Armed Forces

    @Deathstruck Small suggestion, T-14 MBT also should have a coaxial machine gun, this small slot next to the main gun on the right, is coaxial machinegun port.
  8. BWMod

    As it was said, Bundeswehr at the moment changed the order from A7's to A7V's. Which is kinda funny because A7V is what originally was intended for A7, but budget did not allowed for it at that time for some odd reason.
  9. BWMod

    BWMod team, a question, were you thinking about adding Leopard 2A7V through modification of your Leopard 2A6M model? Leopard 2A7V is a final version of Leopard 2A7 upgrade, besides what A7 variant added like improved sights, APU etc. It also adds addon armor for front hull and mounting points for addon armor for hull and turret sides, so vehicle can be also uparmored. So it can look more or less like that fully uparmored altough with less changes to the model, like external sights are the same shape as in A6M, it lacks RWS etc. It would be a really great addition and would fit perfectly in to 2020-2030+ time frame of the current BWMod.
  10. Tanks DLC Feedback

    1. Future Tank project under NGCV program is at the moment at the concept development phase, which means no private contractor is taking participation in it, it's purely done by TARDEC, TACOM, ARL and so on, it's because in US there is GOCO system or Goverment Owned Contractor Operated, which means that some weapon systems at the beggining are developed solely by US goverment agencies, and later a choosen private contractor is invited to join. Same was in case of XM1 pogram for example, initially it was being designed by TARDEC, TACOM and ARL (then known as BRL), and the requirements were made by MBTTF, only lated Chrysler Defense (later renamed General Dynamics Land Systems) and General Motors were invited to participate. 2. The tank is named M1 Abrams, not Abrahams. M1 is named after General Creighton W. Abrams. This is another lesson for you. 3. And how do you know the M1A1SA or M1A2SEP is not able to even compete with T-14? T-14 is not some wunderwaffe, and have some weak spots, for example it's unmanned turret have no significant armor protection, which was concious decision to reduce it's size and weight, but it also means that any hit will be a probable firepower kill. Another important factor is, that despite all propaganda noise surrounding T-14, for example it's active protection system is not the most modern or best one out there. Afganit is based on earlier Drozd-1/2 systems, and as such, it's hard kill countermeassures are unable to intercept either APFSDS rounds or top attack diving ATGM's like Javelin, Hellfire or Spike. Also high elevation attacks from conventional ATGM's or RPG's can't be intercepted by Afganit, simply because of the systems design. M1A2SEPv3/v4 will also receive Trophy HV active protection system as short them upgrade, and as long term upgrade new MAPS or Modular Active Protection System, that will use both soft kill and hard kill countermeassures. Not to mention heavier Next Generation Armor Package that offers greater protection than current 3rd generation Heavy Armor Package. There are also some informations about further development of Explosive Reactive Armor in US, including ARAT series for M1, BRAT series for M2 and SRAT series for Strykers. 4. As I said, PL-01 was a concept mockup for a WWB Gepard program, and program requirements changed, so this concept is already obsolete. F-35 is actually a good project and extremely good fighter jet. Only because program face some problems, does not mean it's a failure, but to know this, some greater knowledge on the subject is needed, and not "knowledge" from mass media that gives a brain cancer truth to be told. As for NATO, again you seems to not understand geopolitics, in short, the US builded it's power on alliances, because alliances gives US both necessary territory for force projection, and economic expanse. This in result builds US citizens prosperity in extremely peacefull way for a superpower. If you want US to withdraw from it's alliances, you are pretty much calling for US not being as powerfull as it is and can be, in terms of military force, economics or political influance. In terms of technology, I explained already why T-14 is not some wunderwaffe. Oh and by the way, I assume you meant new Rheinmetall Rh130 smoothbore gun, well the work on this gun is extremely slow, what was presented was very early prototype, I would even say a mockup, as there is no ammunition ready for Rh130, and there was not even a single, test shot fired from it yet. As for invasions that are mythical, well, I will put it that way, check what happend in Europe few years ago, you might be surprised. ;) By the way, if someone is interested, here are official US Army renders of how Stryker and M1 will look like with their active protection systems installed. Note one thing, in this render, M1A2SEP have it's special armor modules removed only for presentation purpose, normally vehicle will have it's special armor installed in real life. And here some additional informations about active protection systems development, including MAPS.
  11. Tanks DLC Feedback

    1. I do not really care if I hurt your feelings special snowflake. I talk about facts, and facts are facts, they can't be denied, or even argued with. 2. M1 series are meant to serve up to 2050 and beyond alongside NGCV vehicles and the Future Tank, untill completely replaced, which will take time, a lot of time. So for the moment, there is no M1A3 program, besides what is the reason of using the same primary designation code for a completely new and different vehicle? Did you even thinked about this? And what if US Army decides to designate it M5 for example? Or M1250? 3. PL-01 was nothing more than a concept mockup based on CV90 chassis for the WWB Gepard program. PL-01 was only partially functional (could drive around) and was empty inside, besides driver compartment. I actually seen PL-01 in person and it didn't made any good impression on me, neither on the army. Heck Army actually changed requirements so WWB Gepard will be larger and heavier armored vehicle, without any silly stealth features. Heck PL-01 itself was disassemled, and chassis was returned to BAE Systems. So in Poland we actually laugh our asses seeing foreigners being so excited about PL-01 and not even knowing anything about the program! :D Not to mention there is second program for a real MBT, with requirements under codename Wilk. 4. Younger people in general are dumb, especially these days, not all of them true, but majority, they are also arrogant. So pardon me for hurting your feelings, but as an older man I really do not care about them. Heck when I was teenager interested in this subject, I also had older mentors who treated me like shit when I said something dumb, and I will be eternally gratefull to them for that treatment, that forced me to use my brain more, and do a proper research. 5. Why end a conversation? You don't like to increase your own knowledge by simply listening someone with a greater knowledge? Look what you learned now about PL-01, and you would never know this from "sources" like globalsecurity site, which is a very poor source of informations. When I was in the army, NCO's also didn't cared about our feelings, but in the end they made two great things, made us harder men, that are not feel insulted when told by someone with greater knowledge we are wrong, and they teached us a lot of usefull things. My good advise for you, stop to care about your feelings, or that someone might offend you, or tell you difficult truth, instead listen people with greater knowledge, learn from them.
  12. Tanks DLC Feedback

    Yes, US military will report about their plans for conventional weapon systems because it's nothing classified, and they need to report that both for Congress and public domain so tax payers know, for what their taxes are spent for, because this is how system in US is made. I understand you are a teenager and not adult human being, but please, stop being a smart ass kid, because there are people older than you, with greater knowledge and experience, including this forum. Also I don't know if you noticed, but I clearly said that US Army is working on the new MBT, called at the moment as Future Tank, within the NGCV or Next Generation Combat Vehicle program. So yes, US Army is working on such project, but it's not M1A3. M1 might receive M1A3 designation, eventually, when all ECP's will be implemented, and designation code change is justified. Oh and by the way, M2 and M3 are named Bradley, after general Omar Bradley kid, not Bradly, it seems you lack even knowledge about your own countries history. And M2/M3 designation is not a pattern, M2 is simply designation for the Infantry Fighting Vehicle, while M3 is Cavalry Fighting Vehicle variant. As engineer you shold know that... Kid. Same with aircraft designation system, F-15, F-16 etc. are all different aircraft, there is no pattern here you speak about, kid.
  13. Tanks DLC Feedback

    Global security is a shit not a source. Besides kid, I work as military journalist in Poland, so I check better sources, like for example official US Army brefiengs. As I said, at the moment the only new variants of M1 in development, are M1A2SEPv3 (ECP1A upgrade) and M1A2SEPv4 (ECP1B upgrade), there is no M1A3 in development or even in concept development phase. However in concept development phase is new MBT, called Future Tank, within the NGCV program. https://fortbenningausa.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/02-Mounted-Reuirements-Breakout.pdf http://slideplayer.com/slide/10870946/ http://www.g8.army.mil/pdf/Army_Equipment_Program2017.pdf Here, some official sources for you to read.
  14. Tanks DLC Feedback

    You do realize that M1A3 is not in development, and this thing is a pure fantasy? At the moment in final phase of development is M1A2SEPv3 and M1A2SEPv4 is in early development phase. Maybe, maybe eventually when all ECP's will be added to M1, then and only then, designation will be changed to M1A3. Not to mention that US Army is in the early development phase of new MBT that will replace M1 series in 2030's. And no, Germans are not working on Leopard 3, such program do not exist. However Germany and France work on new MBT called MGCS or Main Ground Combat System.
  15. RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    In real world Rhino is a device that is used to prematurely detonate EFP IED's and mines that use EFP charge attacking vehicle side with thermal signature trigger device. So I guss it should work with stuff like vanilla ArmA3 SLAM mines?
×