Invader ZIM

It's a sort of blanket statement, but in reality there's a LOT of jobs created whern there is a government sponsored program to create such a plane/spacecraft/weapon. Or any military machine for that matter. So such military programs actually help a lot of people feed their families, and not just for the U.S. Someone has to make submarines, missiles, planes, tanks.....

LMAO!! Those Amazon reviews people wrote for it are hilarious!

Everybody needs a hobby. :) Years ago my buddy got hooked on playing Harvest Moon for some reason. He was literally spending hours mowing virtual grass, and plucking weeds. I don't know why he couldn't have gone outside and mowed his real lawn or plucked weeds that way lol.

zzspace beat me to it. For me there would only be the Su-34 that I would be interested in flying on the Russian side. It simply does everything.

Looks a lot more serious, but I still think of Farmville when I see a farming simulator. Here's a funny Farmville ad: "Designed by Chronos himself to alleviate the bordom of time!!"

Thanks to you guys, I got hooked on Wargame: EE this past week. So seeing this, it's definately on my list. They're talking about having jamming platforms as well. Something I would like to see more of DCS is the dedicated jammer aircraft to degrade air defense networks.

speaking of which, how does one exactly give reputation points? I don't think I've ever been able to do it.

LOL, yea, I know what you mean cichlidfan. It was between that and Tom and Jerry with Tom chasing Jerry with an Axe. :D

Well Said EtherealN, The best part is that we can at least make educated guesses on the strengths and weaknesses of these weapons systems given public information and put them in our simulator. The best part is that we can then simulate WW3 on our desktops, where I hope it always stays. :D

I agree with EtherealN, I like to stick to the facts and be objective, and find it fun to learn more about differnt military vehiles and such by putting together info I can find out there. I learn a lot by playing these sims and questioning what I'm seeing in the sims. Putting down or brushing off another countries military power or showing a lack of respect for another countries competing or opposing military force is a recipe for disaster on the battlefield. wilky510, it's not a matter of getting the money, it's the fact that these are the actual fielded upgrades. From the article posted below, and back in 2004: http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/04/defense_reactive_armor_070413/ so that's at least 1,000 Bradley's with the armor and according to the contract it's at least 600 M1's, but claims that ALL M1's have recieved the armor upgrade that were in Iraq. These tanks are a result of lessons quickly learned on a battlefield with a lot of city fighting and threats that can get close to the vehicles. And for the T-90, watching the video on the first page of this thread I noticed something rather telling, when the T-90 jumps, you can see it's side skrits flop and bounce with the tank, indicating that the side skirts aren't heavy armor, or are perhaps a combination of rubber with some ERA plates in them near the front. Definately more vulnerable than the ERA armored M1's on the sides. And watch how the gun in some of the moves isn't able to stabilize adequately. I'd like to see a similar test of the T-90 compared with any Western tank, like this glass of water on the barrel of a moving German Leopard 2A6 at 3:54 into the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0et5e3fGoto&list=FLUbMa9kEYoLP3_Zlc2nzVPA&index=31&feature=plpp_video That shows you how stable the 2A6 gun platform is, and how accurate the system might be. Also want to see the T-90 go into reverse, how fast or slow is it in getting to a hull down position. There's no doubt the T-90 is a step up from the previous generation of Russian tanks, but when you compare the details of the system with Western systems there's a difference in how they are to be deployed. Going by weight alone, in the West the T-90 would be considered a medium tank, versus the Western designed Heavy tanks.

LOL, I just think it's funny we're continuing a thread from early 2008 posted possibly by one of Leafer's co workers because he forgot to log out one day at work... 4 years ago..... About R. Lee Ermey of all things. And yes, he's still awsome. The internet is crazy sometimes. :D Not as crazy as an online conversation I witnessed, seeing a German gentleman help an Englishman convert Pounds to Euros, who was then to purchase some collectable from a Swiss gentleman who was getting help from an American on where to get the conversion prices for the Euros to convert to Swiss Francs currency that day. Gotta love this world economy. :)

LOL, okay so the UAV operator dies when the drone gets shot down. Easy to explain, apparently the American UAV station is made the same way as the Starship Enterprise Bridge stations. Ship get's hit, weapons operator pays the price, see below:

GGTharos is correct, but one thing to consider is that Russian Tanks like the T-80 and T-90 were built with ERA out of the factory. The advantage to this is that such armor allows for a lighter weight and smaller tank. The disadvantage is that you can't put heavier armor behind the ERA easily, so your design literally depends on the built in ERA protecting the tank. Another disadvantage if the opposing side has specialized kinetic energy rounds meant to defeat such armor like the M829-A3 and A4, or DM53. As mentioned in this Russian article, the above rounds don't activate the Kontakt-5 because of their lower velocity, not allowing the plates to move in front of the KE round to dissipate it's power. It's as if the T-80 and T-90 didn't have any extra armor with the Kontakt-5 against these rounds. http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA323948 The Western tanks were built with their own various armor designs, almost none of which incorporated ERA because of the considerations of infantry near the tanks. The ERA being used by Western tanks still has safety issues. I found a public army document that says the ARAT-2 equipped vehicles need to keep the troops at least 100 yards from the vehicle just in case. It mentioned that the ARAT-2 plates are facing downward to help the explosive charge fire downward toward the ground, but that ricochets are almost certain under battlefield conditions. The advantage of this bolt on ERA is that it's extra protection over armor that was already meant to defeat kinetic energy and Heat rounds without the added benefit of the ERA. The cat's eye active jammer for U.S. vehicles is called the AN/VLQ-7 Stingray. Info on it used in the 1991 war is below along with a photo of it on a Bradley: http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA323948

According to this article: http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/04/defense_reactive_armor_070413/ It does work against EFP's and multiple warheads. It's a sort of American version of Kontakt-5 But the article mentions that U.S. vehicles will need active protection too. There's a video of "Iron Curtain" for light vehicles: Trophy: Better Trophy video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2IqZhonKzU Raytheon Quick Kill: And for fun: BAE's passive thermally camoflaging technology: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkkWya-oun0&feature=related There's a lot more to ground warfare than I once thought, it's getting really complex.

Well, you might be right Tharos, but for the M1 there is the Explosive reactive armor as listed here: http://www.eba-d.com/products/xm-19-abrams-reactive-armor-tile-arat/ Photos of the ERA armor on M1's that prevented penetration in the field. From the description, you can put it on the roof on the M1 to increase against a top attack. But from what I can find the T-90 does not fire any top attack rounds. Edit: apparently the curved addon armor is the later TUSK-2 ARAT-2, details are that it's a combined armor from these images. So it's a spaced armor combined with ERA behind it, the curved plates degrade performance of sabot rounds, while the spaced area degrades HEAT, even before they reach the ERA plates behind it. Then behind that is the M1's standard, but still impressive armor.

M1A2 with ERA, noticed it's on the side of the turret too. Seems to also have spaced armor under the ERA Not reactive in the photo below, but they are armored slats, effective at stopping penetration from HEAT rounds at the rear of the turret, and engine.

Have to agree, tanks aren't obsolete, as long as an army has to capture and secure ground you need a tough vehicle supported by infantry to help achieve that goal. Regarding the T-90, I'm looking for more info to compare it with the M1A2 in this sim. Does the T-90 have a muzzle cant sensor, muzzle reference system, wind sensor, atmospheric temperature and pressure sensors that would allow it to make accurate shots out to any range like the M1A2 has? http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=M1A2_(SEP)&diff=6017&oldid=prev&chappeep_sbvbforum_wiki__session=646d4977a3db0ea1dcec2ed950f7729a For those interested, here's the link for the T-90 thermal sight with it's information. Interesting that it can see to 3km to detect a tank sized target, and even then can only recognize the target as a tank at 2km. It also mentions that their sight will do a digital magnification up to 25x. The M1A2 has up to 50x digital magnification by contrast and a 2nd gen thermal sight with a staring FPA. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m1a2.htm Counter the thermal with an M1 painted with this thermal paint: http://www.defensereview.com/intermat-anti-thermalir-camo-tech-for-infantry-and-special-operations-forces/ Or using multispectral smoke, or using the laser blinder system Tharos mentioned above. I think the M1A2 will be able to hold it's own. To compensate for Eastern Tank guns, you would want to close to within 1500m against the M1A2 to ensure better penetration of your round, and to better see the target. The M1A2 is better if it keeps it's opponents at 1500m and further, same holds true with other Western tanks like the Challenger 2 and Leopard 2's. And it does seem that everyone likes to tout the Kontakt-5 ERA armor as the primary defense of the T-90, but what happens to the M1A2's already upgraded 3rd gen depleted uranium armor when you decide to put ERA on top of that? Would it not make the M1A2 even more survivable against HEAT type warheads fired from the T-90? And would it not have a greater chance to break the Kinetic energy rounds fired by the T-90, even more so at ranges exceeding 2000m? As well, the Extra ERA on an M1A2 would make it even tougher within the 1500m range I mentioned above, as that range is quoted for Western tanks without any ERA applied to them.

I think the aliens haven't invaded because their economy is only using 0.5% of their fiscal budget toward space exploration. Meanwhile, on the same alien planet I envision 99.9% of the aliens population hopping into their cool steam powered automobiles as they kiss their wives goodbye and head off to work, just like most of us do.

LOL, he's a really nice guy when you meet him. Always enjoy his colorful Drill Seargent sayings. Sgt. Hartman: How tall are you, private? "Cowboy": Sir, five foot, nine, sir! Sgt. Hartman: Five foot, nine, I didn't know they stacked sh** that high. My dad was a Marine in Vietnam, he always told me that after 6 weeks of boot camp, the drill seargents literally had you believing that you could single handedly charge a machine gun nest and win the fight.

double post.

I am rather fond of this video. JTAC is talking the two a-10's onto the targets, you can hear the small arms fire after the JTAC on the ground. Helps me to realise the importance and urgency of doing correct target ident.

LOL, do a barrel roll reminded me of this: The rest is my funny picture collection. :D

Yea, jumped in for a quick mission. Had labels on and pressed F6 to watch the missiles fly. The AI F-18's had the AGM-84's and it's the first time I had them in a quick mission so I wanted to see them in action. That's when I saw the AGM-84E doing the loops lol. Okay, good to know it's already known, thanks guys!

I wasn't sure where exactly to post this. I had some F-18's fire the AGM-84E at some ground targets, but came across a strange problem, the missile tried to fly through the ground and then endlessly made loops over the already dead target. Attached is the trk file. AGM-84E problem.trk