confirmed feature list for the next SBP upgrade

[Skybird]

Would it have more of it than the Leo2A6 ?

No, the later abrams offer the IVIS system (unit symbols on digital maps in digital netweork, later Leo2s have something comparable), and an thermal sight for the TC that works independant from the gunner's sight (also for the Leos). so far, the old Abrams-TVs need to override the gunner, link to their sights and mastercontrol these in order to look where they want to look. the gunner cannot look at a different direciton for the duration of the TC overriding him. also, the Leos have optical periscopes, that the Abrams is missing altogether. Often talked down, these periscopes, but I find them to be a most valuable tool. Would hate to miss them. there is a reason why you switch so often between optical and thermal sights. thermals are no super witchcraft. Many tanks from their fronts remain to have a low visibility from the front, if not contrasting to the empty sky. It also has not the viewing distance of optical sights.

I prefer the Leopard2 to the Abrams any time. also, slightly simplified aiming and gunnery procedures.


Leased ?

= "geliehen". They might consider to buy Leropards later on.


I am talking about this one here:

Look in 3:06

That is a swedish CV9040. the last update/addon introduced both the B and C versions.


or here in 5:41:


CV9040.


Could it be eventually the marder 3 ?

No, it remains to be the CV9040. The Marder-2 will not be built. It was stopped almost ten years ago. One or two prototypes sit in a museum. Looked more like a tank than an IFV anyway.

http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=h...%3Dde%26sa%3DG


I am talking about this one here btw: http://www.freundeskreis-panzergrenadiere.de/fileadmin/freundeskreis/artikel/puma_sut_200410.pdf
http://www.panzerbaer.de/types/bw_spz_3_puma-a.htm

That is the Puma, the successor for the Marder1A3. Not in SBP.


The Puma. But it seems to be much smaller than that one in the SB movie. So could it be the marder 3 or something ? Or is this something from scandinavia ?

Hm, let me guess... I think... yes.. it is the CV9040 you talk about, without doubt.

BTW is the fennek or at least the Luchs in there?

Keine Füchse, keine Luchse.

[Deamon]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Often talked down, these periscopes, but I find them to be a most valuable tool. Would hate to miss them.

Yeah me too, but I do not find myself so often in a situation where it becomes really indespensable, just sometimes.

there is a reason why you switch so often between optical and thermal sights.

And that would be ? Most of the time I hang around in the thermal view.

thermals are no super witchcraft.

I find it pretty super, frankly. Especially in the crappy resolution in that SB1 comes.

It also has not the viewing distance of optical sights.

I think the high end things can spot a human size thermal source up to 2 kilometers away.

I prefer the Leopard2 to the Abrams any time. also, slightly simplified aiming and gunnery procedures.

Yes I also tend to preffer the Leo. Exept when it maybe gets to T-80isch, or else when I expect to get alot of beating, then I want the M1

Leased ?

= "geliehen".

I know but was just wondering why only leased and that the germans lease their tanks at all. I guess its too hot for buying

No, it remains to be the CV9040.

I got a little bit rusty on tanks. It's been a while since I dealt with them

BTW is the fennek or at least the Luchs in there?

Keine Füchse, keine Luchse.

What no fennek ?

Then I will have to goon to waste that wolfes

[Skybird]

there is a reason why you switch so often between optical and thermal sights.
And that would be ? Most of the time I hang around in the thermal view.

You often see more in optics, than thermals, especially in woods. It depends on the actual situation. You then flip sights let's say every second, back and forth and back and forth.


I find it pretty super, frankly. Especially in the crappy resolution in that SB1 comes.

SB1 has unrealistic thermals, without range limit, and no degrading of quality over range. SBP has corrected that, and is said to be much closer to the truth. The templates for the heat signatures of vehicles also have repeatedly been worked over. Thermals in SBP give you much degraded and blurry pics than in SB1.


I think the high end things can spot a human size thermal source up to 2 kilometers away.

Depends on the contrast of the background. If it is cool air, you see more, if it is ground clutter or woods, you maybe don't see a tank from frontal that sits 1000m away.


Yes I also tend to preffer the Leo. Exept when it maybe gets to T-80isch, or else when I expect to get alot of beating, then I want the M1

that's because you do not have the 2A5 in SB1, only the 2A4 less armour.


I know but was just wondering why only leased and that the germans lease their tanks at all. I guess its too hot for buying

No, it was lacking production capacity. The tanks could not be deliverd so soon and in the quantity the Candians wished to buy them. So they leased 20 already existing new 2A6m from the BW, and bought 80 old 2A4 from BW reserves. It also was a nice way out for the Germans not to contribute more heavily to the actual battle groups with BW troops. Like the Tornados. Politically, the leasing deal as well as the Tornados are serving as alibis. But that belongs to the GT forum.

[Deamon]

SB1 has unrealistic thermals, without range limit, and no degrading of quality over range. SBP has corrected that, and is said to be much closer to the truth. The templates for the heat signatures of vehicles also have repeatedly been worked over. Thermals in SBP give you much degraded and blurry pics than in SB1.

Oh, didn't knew that. But for SB1 it was maybe a good workaround for the bad resolution.

I think the high end things can spot a human size thermal source up to 2 kilometers away.

Depends on the contrast of the background. If it is cool air, you see more, if it is ground clutter or woods, you maybe don't see a tank from frontal that sits 1000m away.

Hmm, I just remember that footage where police copters or ground observation stations use the highly sensetive thermal vision devices leaving any suspect chanceless no matter in which terrain. Devices that can make temperature differences of 0.5 degree visible. But then I also remember some images, I think from the apache where the performance appeared to me rather crappy. But I think the quality of the device plays a major role. I don't know which quality level various military branches can effort. There are this standart night vission goggles for soldiers with a crappy visual range of maybe 300 meters whereas super expensive night vision devices have a very long range and cristal clear optics.

Yes I also tend to preffer the Leo. Exept when it maybe gets to T-80isch, or else when I expect to get alot of beating, then I want the M1

that's because you do not have the 2A5 in SB1, only the 2A4 less armour.

Of course. How much more armour do the 2A5 have compared to the 2A4 and the M1A1 ?

As far as I can remember the M1A2 has twice the armour of the M1A1m is that right ?

I know but was just wondering why only leased and that the germans lease their tanks at all. I guess its too hot for buying

No, it was lacking production capacity. The tanks could not be deliverd so soon and in the quantity the Candians wished to buy them. So they leased 20 already existing new 2A6m from the BW, and bought 80 old 2A4 from BW reserves. It also was a nice way out for the Germans not to contribute more heavily to the actual battle groups with BW troops. Like the Tornados. Politically, the leasing deal as well as the Tornados are serving as alibis. But that belongs to the GT forum.

Maybe the sales rate of the 2A6 will beat the one of the donut at the end of the day ? :hmm:

[Skybird]

Hmm, I just remember that footage where police copters or ground observation stations use the highly sensetive thermal vision devices leaving any suspect chanceless no matter in which terrain. Devices that can make temperature differences of 0.5 degree visible. But then I also remember some images, I think from the apache where the performance appeared to me rather crappy. But I think the quality of the device plays a major role. I don't know which quality level various military branches can effort. There are this standart night vission goggles for soldiers with a crappy visual range of maybe 300 meters whereas super expensive night vision devices have a very long range and cristal clear optics.

I think you mix up thermals and rest light amplifiers (? =Restlichtverstärker). Western tanks use thermals, soldiers wear night vision goggles of the latter kind. Also, a tank from the front can be suprisignly cool, especially when having sit still since longer. An uncovered human body from 400 m away and filmed against cold ground of course lights up like a bright white spot on dark background.


Of course. How much more armour do the 2A5 have compared to the 2A4 and the M1A1 ?

You'll feel it in the sim. The Strv122 almost outclasses the M1A1. The 2A6m is considered by many to be the best protected tank in service, currently. The guy in your video confirmed that, too, if I remember correctly.


As far as I can remember the M1A2 has twice the armour of the M1A1m is that right ?

Don't know out of the blue, I need to look it up. It has more armour of course.

[Skybird]

As far as I can remember the M1A2 has twice the armour of the M1A1m is that right ?

Don't know out of the blue, I need to look it up. It has more armour of course.


I take the easy path and just quote wikipedia:

Panzerung

Der M1 ist durch eine Chobham-Panzerung geschützt, eine Kompositpanzerung aus mehreren Schichten Stahl und Keramik, beim M1A2 zusätzlich auch abgereichertem Uran. Diese Panzerung entspricht an der Front 900 mm und an den Seiten 700 mm Stahl. Beim M1A2 entspricht die Frontpanzerung gar 1200 mm Stahl. Tank und Munitionsdepot sind in eigenen gepanzerten Bereichen untergebracht, um die Gefahr des Ausbrennens zu verringern. Der Innenraum des Panzers ist mit einer Schicht Kevlar ausgekleidet, um Splitterflug vorzubeugen.
Mit seinem Schutzniveau ist der M1A2 mittlerweile als veraltet anzusehen. Zwar hört und liest man in den Medien oft davon, dass die Panzerung des M1A2 für die Geschütze aller anderen Kampfpanzer und aller bekannten Panzerabwehrwaffen undurchdringbar sei, doch ist hierbei von einer positiven Tendenz der Berichterstattung auszugehen. Im Kampf um Bagdad sah man mehrere von irakischen Kämpfern vernichtete M1A2, viele davon mit Fronttreffern und im vorderen Teil ausgebrannt. Iraker berichten davon, dass es kein Problem sei, den M1A2 mit der tragbaren 9M111 Fagott (Nato: AT-4 Spigot) frontal zu „knacken“. Selbst mit der RPG-7 gelang mehrfach ein Durchdringen an den Schwachstellen wie dem seitlichen Wannenbereich. Ebenso zeigte sich die Tendenz der Panzertruppe, bei schnellen Märschen die Kanone nach hinten zu richten, um sie bei Kollisionen zu schützen. Dadurch wird der schwächer gepanzerte, hintere Teil des Turms, der auch Munition enthält, Frontalbeschuss ausgesetzt. Ein US-amerikanischer Kommandant des M1A2 schilderte in einer Reportage über „Friendly Fire“, wie die Turmfrontpanzerung, die stärkste Stelle seines M1A2, vom Geschoss eines Flugzeuges des Typs A-10 durchschlagen und die Besatzung schwer verletzt wurde. Bei der von der A-10 verfeuerten Munition handelt es sich um ein 30-mm-Geschoss, das seine Penetrationsfähigkeit aus der Verwendung eines Urankerns bezieht (Uranmunition). Auch um dieses US-amerikanische Waffensystem gibt es eine Art Legendenbildung. Uran ist hier aber nur insoweit wirksam, als die verwendeten Legierungen sehr hart sind und das Material als Schwermetall über ein hohes spezifisches Gewicht verfügt. Hieraus resultiert eine hohe Querschnittsbelastung beim Auftreffen auf eine Panzerung. Zusätzlich besitzt Uran noch die Eigenschaft, pyrophor zu sein, d.h. beim Eindringen in die Panzerung schärft sich das Uran durch den Abrieb selbst und setzt im Inneren des Panzers hohe Temperaturen frei.

This article confirms my own belief that the M1 is not that über-tank as which it often is described. On the other hand - what tank is?

[Deamon]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I think you mix up thermals and rest light amplifiers (? =Restlichtverstärker).

Nope. I brought them up as an example how much the quality strikes the performance. I bet it is the same with thermal imagers.

You'll feel it in the sim. The Strv122 almost outclasses the M1A1. The 2A6m is considered by many to be the best protected tank in service, currently. The guy in your video confirmed that, too, if I remember correctly.

Any RHA data on the 2A5 resp. 2A6 ? I guess both will have largely the same armour.

In that one canadian video that one guy told that the ammo is stored in the tower but isn't there also an ammo load in the hull like in all predecesors ?

[Skybird]

there is a ready rack with, I think, 15 rounds in the turret, and the rest of the rounds are stored in a separate compartment at the backside of the turret. It is a security feature, in case of fire. The compartment can be separated from the turret in case of an emergency, you can see the small "gap" between it and the turret on photos. So, every 15 shots or so, the tank has run dry and the gunner needs to relocate ammo from the separate compartment to the ready rack. I think this was not simulated in SB1.

Supplying new rounds from external stocks into a tank, btw, takes much more time in the Abrams, than in the Leo 2.