*SA342 BUG REPORTS*

[borchi_2b]

well i do not know much about the apc tigr, but we had APCs in our forces and 7.62mm rounds would have not done much harm to it. our army tested it and we used them as medivac ground transports. dang i had to google the name of it. APC Fuchs.

[bobd]

I am happy to test it again this week, but last week I killed infantry, Kamaz trucks and even an outpost with the gun in singelplayer. Not sure why you could not kill trucks with the minigun

 

Thanks, borci. This is really strange. I can only kill infantry. Huey kills all with minigun. I reinstalled Gazelle, no change.

Edited May 8, 2018 by bobd

[ams999]

I get a DCS crash when I get shot at with an AMRAAM (120B) while flying the Gazelle (Minigun). Anyone else have noticed this?

[ams999]

Can confirm the bug with the Tigr that can't be killed by the Minigun. Made a mission in the ME with 8 Tigr but even after landing next to them and dumping the whole ammo into one vehicle, no damage was done...

[ams999]

I killed other vehicles ('armored truck') without problems

[shagrat]

well i do not know much about the apc tigr, but we had APCs in our forces and 7.62mm rounds would have not done much harm to it. our army tested it and we used them as medivac ground transports. dang i had to google the name of it. APC Fuchs.

Careful, that tests where usually based on "normal" MG3 or G3 bursts, not a spray of high volume M134 Minigun fire.

Though I agree the way DCS models damage on ground units currently can't really simulate the realistic damage, done to tires, drive assembly, mirrors and armament/outboard equipment.

IRL you will incapacitate the APC through prolonged minigun bursts, but never "kill" it...

[SUNTSAG]

Hi All,

 

I am no expert but as I understand it the APC Tigr 233036 (GAZ-233036 SPM-2) is armoured to NATO STANAG 4569 Level 2. (see below):

 

NATO AEP-55 STANAG 4569 is a NATO Standardization Agreement covering the standards for the "Protection Levels for Occupants of Logistic and Light Armored Vehicles".The standard covers strikes from Kinetic Energy, artillery and IED blasts.

 

LEVEL 2:

 

Kinetic Energy:

7.62×39mm API BZ at 30 meters with 695 m/s

 

Grenade and Mine Blast Threat:

6 kg (explosive mass) Blast AT Mine:

2a – Mine Explosion pressure activated under any wheel or track location.

2b – Mine Explosion under center.

 

Artillery:

155 mm High Explosive at 80 m

Angle: azimuth 360°; elevation: 0 - 22°

 

Now bear in mind the M134 Minigun uses a standard NATO 7.62mm x 51mm round, with a muzzle velocity in the region of 853m/s. That includes Ball, SLAP, Incendiary and Armour Piercing rounds. I would have thought (and I could be wrong) a sustained burst would indeed seriously damage this particular vehicle to the point of destruction (especially with armour piercing rounds or SLAP). Obviously there are many factors that could affect the ability to destroy this vehicle IRL that can't possibly be replicated in sim and we would also need to know what ammo type is being used in the M134.

 

Now if the vehicles lua were adjusted to an armour_thickness value of 0.004 instead of 0.005, then the vehicle could be destroyed by the M134. Now my hypothesis could be wrong and I am sure there are more knowledgeable people out there...... so this is only a suggestion not a request. Cheers.:thumbup:

[shagrat]

Hi All,

 

I am no expert but as I understand it the APC Tigr 233036 (GAZ-233036 SPM-2) is armoured to NATO STANAG 4569 Level 2. (see below):

 

NATO AEP-55 STANAG 4569 is a NATO Standardization Agreement covering the standards for the "Protection Levels for Occupants of Logistic and Light Armored Vehicles".The standard covers strikes from Kinetic Energy, artillery and IED blasts.

 

LEVEL 2:

 

Kinetic Energy:

7.62×39mm API BZ at 30 meters with 695 m/s

 

Grenade and Mine Blast Threat:

6 kg (explosive mass) Blast AT Mine:

2a – Mine Explosion pressure activated under any wheel or track location.

2b – Mine Explosion under center.

 

Artillery:

155 mm High Explosive at 80 m

Angle: azimuth 360°; elevation: 0 - 22°

 

Now bear in mind the M134 Minigun uses a standard NATO 7.62mm x 51mm round, with a muzzle velocity in the region of 853m/s. That includes Ball, SLAP, Incendiary and Armour Piercing rounds. I would have thought (and I could be wrong) a sustained burst would indeed seriously damage this particular vehicle to the point of destruction (especially with armour piercing rounds or SLAP). Obviously there are many factors that could affect the ability to destroy this vehicle IRL that can't possibly be replicated in sim and we would also need to know what ammo type is being used in the M134.

 

Now if the vehicles lua were adjusted to an armour_thickness value of 0.004 instead of 0.005, then the vehicle could be destroyed by the M134. Now my hypothesis could be wrong and I am sure there are more knowledgeable people out there...... so this is only a suggestion not a request. Cheers.

The point about these "protection levels" is, they do rarely translate into a distinct armor value or Damage result.

While an armour fulfilling the specs can be even more protective, it does not account for multiple exposures to hits/explosive blasts in the same area.

 

For example it will definitely survive a burst of 7,62mm rounds hitting the engine cover or the window. Maybe it will survive a hundert dozen bursts to different areas.

But when you unfortunately hit the same window pane again and again, or manage to get enough bursts into the same area of the engine compartment, you may penetrate the armour.

 

The practical result of sustained fire is more with glass getting cracked, tires damaged, drive assembly broken and definitely an external MG3, .50cal or Dshka getting damaged beyond use...

 

So, what does that mean for DCS? I was always a bit sceptical at how easy you could kill certain armored vehicles with a minigun. A balance between realism and current damage model could be a "kill" when blasting a single armoured vehicle with sustained(!) minigun fire or .50cal hits, but not with a dozen short bursts, given a good third of the bullets may miss anyway and the rest is peppered all over the target.

 

If the choice is between "can penetrate" or "cannot penetrate" the armour, I recommend to go with a "can penetrate" as else the helicopters would always require anti-tank weapons or AI units with heavy weapons to successfully stop most APCs...

[SUNTSAG]

To be fair and having tested it......the Hueys M134 takes out far more heavily armoured vehicles. tested against BTR-80. :thumbup:

[shagrat]

To be fair and having tested it......the Hueys M134 takes out far more heavily armoured vehicles. tested against BTR-80.

Not sure this has anything to do with the module. The weapons are represented as a gun firing "bullets"/launchers firing rockets etc.

The bullet/rocket/missile shell is part of DCS world and has a damage/penetration against objects. All this is handled in EDs engine.

 

That said, a BTR-80 was designed to withstand blast and shrapnell from artillery shells impacting at a certain distance.

The more modern APCs in the advent of the IED and heavy guided weapons have upped the armour considerably.

The Humvee and Bradley got armor updates, for that.

As I said the effects IRL will differ considerably from what we see in DCS.

You will get mission kills on APCs like a BTR-80 or BRDM-2 (they could have weapons and engine damage so can't fight or move anymore).

What you likely won't see in real life, is an exploding BTR-80 or BMP after a thorough barrage of small arms fire...

There is already very limited, enhanced "damage modeling" on ground units, as they now get "engine damage" (speed is halved after some 50% damage?).

 

That even works for infantry.

 

Maybe in the future ED introduces a more detailed damage model.

[SUNTSAG]

To be honest shagrat all my posts are designed to do is highlight a disparity. I'm not suggesting there is a bug one way or the other.

 

Having coded a large number of ground vehicle mods I do appreciate the mechanics of the sim which is why I know reducing the armour penetration value will have an impact. Of course IRL things are different as I eluded to in my initial post so that is not an issue.

 

What now springs to my mind is that changing the value of the vehicle is not the answer, seeing as how the Huey can but the minigun Gazelle can't. It's this that I don't understand, unless they are potentially using different weapons.lua files for the source information as there are a few. Something somewhere is making a difference. I just hope these posts help in tracking it down.

 

I agree, hopefully in the future damage models will improve and I am sure that will be on EDs radar at some point. :thumbup:

[shagrat]

To be honest shagrat all my posts are designed to do is highlight a disparity. I'm not suggesting there is a bug one way or the other.

 

Having coded a large number of ground vehicle mods I do appreciate the mechanics of the sim which is why I know reducing the armour penetration value will have an impact. Of course IRL things are different as I eluded to in my initial post so that is not an issue.

 

What now springs to my mind is that changing the value of the vehicle is not the answer, seeing as how the Huey can but the minigun Gazelle can't. It's this that I don't understand, unless they are potentially using different weapons.lua files for the source information as there are a few. Something somewhere is making a difference. I just hope these posts help in tracking it down.

 

I agree, hopefully in the future damage models will improve and I am sure that will be on EDs radar at some point.

Absolutely with you on that one.

The current system is a "compromise", but it works in a somewhat believable way.

There is definitely "room for improvement".

 

The weapons lua shouldn't affect the munition defined. Maybe they set a different cadence?

Unless the ammo fired by the Gazelle's minigun is different, they should reference the same 7.62mm NATO standard caliber bullets, for heavy machine gun.

 

Damage is simulated by shells/bullets hitting an object, not the weapon itself.

 

So what is currently happening, has to do with the different armor representation (values/health) of the e.g. Tigr and BTR-80.

 

And maybe the modern Tigr (as an MRAP or Mastiff) is better protected, than an 70ies/80ies BTR-80?

 

I am not at my PC, so can't have a look at the values...

[shagrat]

http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/cv/inf/BTR-80.html

 

OK, with a 10mm (1cm) "armor" on the hull and 7mm on the turret, this is interesting.

The Tigr has a 7mm armor on the more modern variant.

 

If we can "kill" a BTR-80 we should be able to "kill" a Tigr. The armor values should be the same at least.

[SUNTSAG]

Well there in lay the problem.....the chassis values for the BTR-80 are set higher than those of the Tigr as you would expect

 

BTR-80:

Life = 2

Armour thickness= 0.010

 

TIGR:

Life =1.5

Armour thickness = 0.005

 

Now the M134 on the Huey can take out both vehicle types the Gazelle can't take out either...which is why I was leaning more towards the weapon than the vehicle. Agreed they should both be referencing the same ammunition type, which makes this all the stranger.

[shagrat]

Well there in lay the problem.....the chassis values for the BTR-80 are set higher than those of the Tigr as you would expect

 

BTR-80:

Life = 2

Armour thickness= 0.010

 

TIGR:

Life =1.5

Armour thickness = 0.005

 

Now the M134 on the Huey can take out both vehicle types the Gazelle can't take out either...which is why I was leaning more towards the weapon than the vehicle. Agreed they should both be referencing the same ammunition type, which makes this all the stranger.

Weird, indeed! Did Polychop reference their own ammunition?

Or maybe the "accuracy" of the AI gunner.

The Huey had a slider to adjust the accuracy of the miniguns. At 100% it was devastatingly accurate.

Over a long time there was a bug, that even on 99% the AI couldn't hit a barn door at 50ft.

That was fixed quite a while ago.

 

Does the Gazelle have a similar adjustment? Though, it should not affect the manual firing on both the Huey and Gazelle...

[SUNTSAG]

I must admit I have not seen an adjustment option for the gunner. I have landed the Gazelle very close to the target and watched the rounds hit the collision shell with good accuracy.

 

I haven't looked in any great detail at the ammunition lua files but perhaps there are levels of the 7.62 round to represent Ball, SLAP and normal armour piercing.

 

If true perhaps the Huey is coded with the latter two and the Gazelle is not. I can't see why Ploychop would code their own ammo when its available as a standard...extra work for no benefit I would have thought. Pat would have been busy with other elements too.

 

Perhaps this is being seen from the wrong perspective...... perhaps the Huey is simply OP LOL

[YorZor]

Ok few things to report here, some or all might already be reported but guess better to have too many than too few.

 

First of all. The FM is a bit wonky. Why if you apply a decending collective setting it decends steady until you get within 20ft of the ground and it then the rate of decent picks up... it should be the other way around with ground effect kicking in. Note translational lift is not changing since i'm not changing the forward speed.

 

Second FM related thing is that why is it that when you apply collective you notice it in banking very sharply? It makes no difference with AP on/off.

 

Second. I always get the same crash when flying in mp at random time intervals.

 

Thank you for your time.

Yorick

dcs.txt

dcs2.txt

Edited May 9, 2018 by YorZor

[SUNTSAG]

Shagrat I now know the Gazelle is using a different ammo type to the Huey as can be seen in the image below so that solves the difference between the two modules. :thumbup:

 

 

don't worry I managed to destroy the TIGR by reducing its armour value to 0.004 to test my armour value reduction theory.

[shagrat]

Shagrat I now know the Gazelle is using a different ammo type to the Huey as can be seen in the image below so that solves the difference between the two modules.

 

 

don't worry I managed to destroy the TIGR by reducing its armour value to 0.004 to test my armour value reduction theory.

I noticed the number of hits as well. 9 and 6 vs. 20 maybe a coincidence.

 

Strange to model different ammo, but seems they did.

[CHRISXTR3M3]

I don't know, not a lot of players are using multicrew so it might be low on their list.

 

 

 

Could it be because of how broken multicrew has been/still is?

 

Multicrewception :doh:

[CHRISXTR3M3]

I noticed the number of hits as well. 9 and 6 vs. 20 maybe a coincidence.

 

Strange to model different ammo, but seems they did.

 

Shagrat I now know the Gazelle is using a different ammo type to the Huey as can be seen in the image below so that solves the difference between the two modules. :thumbup:

 

 

don't worry I managed to destroy the TIGR by reducing its armour value to 0.004 to test my armour value reduction theory.

 

 

 

PolyChop, you guys have any response/input for us on this?

 

 

Kind of seems like this should definitely be looked at considering the factors at play...

[Baldawg]

Multi crew de sync

 

Not sure if the particular issue has been reported. In multi crew, if you are shot down or crash, when re spawning in a new bird the Co pilot is out of sync which causes the engine spool down sound to continually sound and the master arm switch which allows the gunner to fire will not remain in the armed position. If the pilot moves to the gunner position he/she can fire it.

[Kilo 4-2]

My Gazelle Mistral was totally unflyable today on the Buddyspike Blue Flag server. Fly for 10 minutes and then DCS crashes to desktop.

 

Thanks

 

Sent from my G3223 using Tapatalk

[shagrat]

My Gazelle Mistral was totally unflyable today on the Buddyspike Blue Flag server. Fly for 10 minutes and then DCS crashes to desktop.

 

Thanks

 

Sent from my G3223 using Tapatalk

Very helpful bug report. So much information and detailed description... ;)

 

That will help them tremendously to fix the problem.

 

...what was the problem, again?!

[Kilo 4-2]

Gazelle Mistral was unflyable yesterday. Was able to fly it for about 10 minutes and then DCS would crash to desktop.

 

Sent from my G3223 using Tapatalk