DCS: Mi-24P - What we know + Discussion

[Fri13]

5 hours ago, S.E.Bulba said:

You tell unreal stories. Especially considering that the range tables of Soviet/Russian 12.7×108mm cartridges are compiled for a range of no more than 2000m, and the maximum sighting range of the USPU-24 gun emplacement (YakB-12.7) does not exceed 1500m.

 

It depends from the weapon and the platform from what you fire. From an higher altitude and higher firing speed you get extra range. I have personally been shooting with NSV to 2500 meters with 12.7 x 108 mm from a stationary and moving platform, it is not a real problem.

And if you would carefully read, I said "up to" and that means if you get hit by the 12.7 mm bullet even past that range, YOU DIE! The 2000 meters is effective range, but not maximum range. And if someone doesn't have skills or talent to fire weapon past the sighting it has set, then it is own personal disadvantage.

No where I have said that 2500 m is the maximum scale for the sight.

 

 

5 hours ago, S.E.Bulba said:

IRL, the Mi-24V pilots and operators fired from the USPU-24 at ranges of 800–1000m.

 

Yes? Did I say anywhere that they didn't fire below long ranges? 

Did I not say that the Mi-24 doctrines were for fast passes and close engagements ranges?

Do you think that those ranges are somewhat "too close"? No.

800-1000 meters is fairly normal range for helicopters. It is about enough to stay away from the small arms fire but not from the 12.7 mm why that range is wanted to be avoided.  

 

[S.E.Bulba]

1 час назад, Fri13 сказал:

It depends from the weapon and the platform from what you fire. From an higher altitude and higher firing speed you get extra range. I have personally been shooting with NSV to 2500 meters with 12.7 x 108 mm from a stationary and moving platform, it is not a real problem.

And if you would carefully read, I said "up to" and that means if you get hit by the 12.7 mm bullet even past that range, YOU DIE! The 2000 meters is effective range, but not maximum range. And if someone doesn't have skills or talent to fire weapon past the sighting it has set, then it is own personal disadvantage.

No where I have said that 2500 m is the maximum scale for the sight.

For example, if you install an telescopic sight on the Utyos, then you can try to shoot someone at ranges up to 3000m… and nevertheless, the fact that I once shot quite well from the AGS-17 does not make me a 'marksman' from the GUV-1. 

I must admit that in most cases I am not very impressed by the stories of various 'Finnish snipers'… frankly, I personally would like to hear more about, for example, how many flight hours do you have on a Mi-24V as a pilot or operator? Or, for example, stories about the specifics of firing from the USPU-24 gun emplacement using the KPS-53 reflector sighting station, etc.?
 

Скрытый текст

 

Original in Russian

Например если на «Утёс» установить оптический прицел, то можно и на дальностях до 3000 м попытаться кого-нибудь подстрелить… и тем не менее то, что я допустим когда-то довольно неплохо стрелял из АГС-17 – не делает меня «метким стрелком» из ГУВ-1. 

Должен признаться, что в большинстве случаев меня мало впечатляют рассказы различных «финских снайперов»… откровенно говоря, лично мне бы больше хотелось послушать например о том, сколько у Вас часов налёта на Ми-24В в качестве пилота или оператора? Или к примеру рассказы о специфике стрельбы из пулемётной установки УСПУ-24 с помощью прицельной станции КПС-53 и т.п.?

 

[Fri13]

2 hours ago, S.E.Bulba said:

For example, if you install an telescopic sight on the Utyos, then you can try to shoot someone at ranges up to 3000m… and nevertheless, the fact that I once shot quite well from the AGS-17 does not make me a 'marksman' from the GUV-1. 

 

Why so hostile again?

 

Quote

I must admit that in most cases I am not very impressed by the stories of various 'Finnish snipers'… frankly, I personally would like to hear more about, for example, how many flight hours do you have on a Mi-24V as a pilot or operator? Or, for example, stories about the specifics of firing from the USPU-24 gun emplacement using the KPS-53 reflector sighting station, etc.?

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Frankly you can keep speaking fantasies as much you want, but your ad hominems doesn't work.

 

If you can not stay in the subject that how effective a 12.7 mm caliber can be even at the ranges that are past the typical engagement ranges, then you can just leave it there. If you can not stay polite and understandable without getting hostile because your information is incorrect, then leave it there as there is no need to go building strawman arguments. 

  You very well understand what was written, so don't try to go behind your language barrier.

 

At no where I have denied 30 mm being more effective caliber and ammunition overall, but it is required to be put in the context.

I have well explained some of the benefits and reasons for turret versus fixed gun, as well why the modernized variants opt for the turret instead fixed gun.

In the context of the various terrain conditions one becomes more suitable than other, but it doesn't mean it is so everywhere else as well.

There was, and still is a good reason why V model is in use and was done. Same way how P was then made and is as well in use.

 

Why the P model over V for the DCS is the topic, and P doesn't make any more obsolete in the DCS than the simple ground units damage modeling, terrain engine restrictions and lack of infantry and ground units basic logic how to operate.

 

 

While old and from USA, still valid even today. 

Edited December 2, 2020 by Fri13

[Fri13]

12 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The doctrine was developed for following up rocket attacks. This means the helo is flying straight at the target. Using the gun in that scenario is rather simple, the turret is basically pointing forward and doesn't have to traverse much.

 

There are multiple different attack patterns for the Mi-24 based exactly that helicopters can fly sideways as well they have turret that allows co-pilot shoot to side as well and on targets at quick appearings. 

 

12 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

However, it doesn't make it significantly harder to hit (it's armored against frontal shots for a reason).

 

What doesn't make hard to hit?

 

12 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

 It can shoot while moving, all right, but it's not going to be spraying bullets at some target way off the the side while flying at high speed.

 

P isn't, but D, V, VP, VM etc are.

 

12 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

In fact, I suspect the doctrine of following a rocket attack up with the gun was developed because the S-5 rocket that Hind-D used at the time wasn't very effective, either. If you combine two crappy weapons in one pass, chances are one of them will do enough damage.

 

Again for the given battlefield conditions you find some weapons not effective enough.

The S-5 rockets has their own story. But do you know which one is more effective,  a S-5 rocket or a single 30 mm shell? A volley of S-5 rockets or 30 mm shells at you?

The S-5 rocket has taken back in the service, you can go find out more about that why so.

 

12 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

A mounted HMG is easy to handle, but Yak-B is not a HMG. It's a helicopter-mounted minigun.

 

Doesn't matter for the discussion of caliber effectiveness or usefulness in various terrains.

 

12 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

If you're shooting from a moving platform, at a moving target, from a gun that's inherently inaccurate (as all gatling-type weapons are), then chances to actually hit the target enough times to immobilize it (meaning hitting the engine or wheels) are low.

 

Actually not. The shooting is fairly easy when you just learn how to shoot with those.

And having easy to use sighting system for aiming at first times makes it anyways easier.

 

12 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

You would need to fly fairly close which exposes you to much more accurate fire from the ground.

 

Fairly close is the deal of major part of the doctrines. That is as well major part of the ground forces goals, to get you close. To deny enemy from engaging you from longer distance where you can't shoot back.

Don't say that you think that Mi-24 are designed to fly and fight from 3 km and up distances only without ever getting any closer?

 

12 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The Hinds in the RHS mod for ArmA3 are the best simulation right now, until this gets released.

 

Doesn't matter. And even there it is super easy, but I don't have at all so high opinion about that as you do, I actually prefer more the 1996 Hind over A3.

But as I said, it doesn't matter and better to you concentrate on DCS. Like go take UH-1H on the fly, or use the Mi-8 doorgun. Compare them to KA-50 cannon in fixed position and Mi-24 with the gunpods etc. 

 

A real limiting factor in DCS is just the damage modeling, terrain engine limitations for cover and concealment, infantry animations and modeling and of course the AI simple logic. 

 

12 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Plus, I think the actual Hind crews know what they're talking about better than you do. So, I'd take their opinion over yours. Raw numbers never tell the whole story.

Well, it just tells you are biased then. If you don't understand it, then you don't. 

 

[S.E.Bulba]

8 часов назад, Fri13 сказал:

Why so hostile again?

In my opinion, in the above quote you invented my "hostility" for yourself. 

 

8 часов назад, Fri13 сказал:

Frankly you can keep speaking fantasies as much you want, but your ad hominems doesn't work.

 

If you can not stay in the subject that how effective a 12.7 mm caliber can be even at the ranges that are past the typical engagement ranges, then you can just leave it there. If you can not stay polite and understandable without getting hostile because your information is incorrect, then leave it there as there is no need to go building strawman arguments. 

  You very well understand what was written, so don't try to go behind your language barrier.

The difference between us is that I do not write anything at all, except for what is written in real documents, and even more so I do not write any "fantasies", as you have deigned to express… while you often try to convince inexperienced readers that, about which you actually have a rather vague idea, based only on your personal speculations, usually far from reality.
 

Скрытый текст

 

Original in Russian

По-моему, в приведённой цитате Вы сами для себя придумали мою «враждебность». 

Разница между нами в том, что я вообще ничего не пишу, кроме того, что написано в реальных документах, а уж тем более не пишу никаких «фантазий», как Вы изволили выразиться… в то время как Вы зачастую пытаетесь убедить неискушённых читателей в том, о чём в действительности имеете довольно смутное представление, основываясь лишь на Ваших личных домыслах, как правило далёких от реальности.

 

[Fri13]

55 minutes ago, S.E.Bulba said:

In my opinion, in the above quote you invented my "hostility" for yourself. 

 

Sarcasm is hostility against the other participant in the conversation. It purpose is to attack the person, not discuss about the topic.

You as well made strawman arguments about comparing a grenade launcher accuracy to 12.7 mm effectiveness.

You attack person to make you sound authoritative and right, a very common tactic to try counter arguments when not able to discuss about the topic.

 

Quote

The difference between us is that I do not write anything at all, except for what is written in real documents, and even more so I do not write any "fantasies", as you have deigned to express…

 

Please provide: 

- your documented evidence that Russian 12.7x108 mm caliber becomes ineffective to injure or kill a person from past 2000 meters.

- your documented evidence that the gunner can not shoot further than the limitation of the sight range adjustment.

 

Quote

while you often try to convince inexperienced readers that, about which you actually have a rather vague idea, based only on your personal speculations, usually far from reality.

 

Ad hominem.

 

You just provided evidence that you are not capable to discuss about the topic, you make personal accusations with oblique information and then you use it to attack again to the person. 

Edited December 2, 2020 by Fri13

[S.E.Bulba]

2 часа назад, Fri13 сказал:

Sarcasm is hostility against the other participant in the conversation. It purpose is to attack the person, not discuss about the topic.

You as well made strawman arguments about comparing a grenade launcher accuracy to 12.7 mm effectiveness.

You attack person to make you sound authoritative and right, a very common tactic to try counter arguments when not able to discuss about the topic.

These are your fantasies. I get the impression that you either do not read the interlocutor's messages at all, or you read very fluently, and at the same time you do not want to delve into what he writes to you.

 

2 часа назад, Fri13 сказал:

Please provide: 

- your documented evidence that Russian 12.7x108 mm caliber becomes ineffective to injure or kill a person from past 2000 meters.

- your documented evidence that the gunner can not shoot further than the limitation of the sight range adjustment.

In your opinion, I must provide documentary evidence of your own words?! LOL. And by the way, for some reason you did not provide any documentary evidence that the YakB-12.7, at a distance of up to 2500m, penetrates the armor of any APCs of the 1980–1990s, regardless of the angle, while maintaining its destructive power. You wrote the following, right?

01.12.2020 в 15:51, Fri13 сказал:

12.7 mm is very effective up to 2500 meters against that time (80's and even 90's) APC's almost regardless their angle, and you are there against the infantry, not the APC itself when it is empty.

 

2 часа назад, Fri13 сказал:

Ad hominem.

 

You just provided evidence that you are not capable to discuss about the topic, you make personal accusations with oblique information and then you use it to attack again to the person.

For heaven's sake, leave your tone policing for someone less sophisticated. I expressed my opinion whether you like it or not. At the same time, I did not receive answers regarding the technical side of the question, in relation to the Mi-24V. On this I consider our discussion with you to be over.
 

Скрытый текст

Original in Russian

Это уже Ваши фантазии. У меня складывается такое впечатление, что Вы либо вообще не читаете сообщения собеседника, либо читаете очень бегло, и при этом не желаете вникать в то, что он Вам пишет.

По Вашему, это я должен предоставить документальные доказательства Ваших же слов?! LOL. И кстати, Вы почему-то так и не привели ни одного документального доказательства того, что ЯкБ-12,7 на расстоянии до 2500 м пробивает броню любых БТР 1980–1990-х годов, независимо от ракурса, сохраняя при этом свою убойную силу. Это ведь Вы писа́ли следующее?

Ради бога, оставьте свой tone policing для кого-нибудь менее искушённого. Своё мнение я высказал, нравится оно Вам или нет. При этом ответов касающихся технической стороны вопроса, применительно к Ми-24В, я так и не получил. На этом считаю нашу с Вами дискуссию законченной.

 

Edited December 2, 2020 by S.E.Bulba
UPD.

[Razorback]

Gents please, could you stop your spamming discussion and stay focus on the topic of this discussion....

Thx a lot and have a very nice day,

Chris

[Fri13]

1 hour ago, S.E.Bulba said:

These are your fantasies. I get the impression that you either do not read the interlocutor's messages at all, or you read very fluently, and at the same time you do not want to delve into what he writes to you.

 

Ad hominem.

 

1 hour ago, S.E.Bulba said:

In your opinion, I must provide documentary evidence of your own words?!

 

You claim that it is "untrue stories" that 12.7 mm can be deadly (effective) at even 2500 meters.

Please provide evidence that the caliber is not capable to be used up to (or even past) 2500 meters.

 

1 hour ago, S.E.Bulba said:

LOL. And by the way, for some reason you did not provide any documentary evidence that the YakB-12.7, at a distance of up to 2500m, penetrates the armor of any APCs of the 1980–1990s, regardless of the angle, while maintaining its destructive power. You wrote the following, right?

 

No I didn't because I didn't make such claims. You are making strawman argument now.

 

I did not make claims that the round is capable to penetrate the armors at the 2500 meter ranges. It is effective against infantry at those ranges, something you said is untrue stories.

As I explained, depending the distance the armor penetration effectiveness changes, but at the closer ranges the 12.7 mm is still very effective.

Compare it like example against BTR-60/70 body that has typically less than 10 mm armor. The normal 12.7x108 mm round has about 25 mm armor penetration at 100 meters. Going further distances it will lower the armor penetration until it becomes ineffective. I as well explained that you do not need catastrophic kill for the armors, as a mission kill, firepower kill, or mobility kill will be enough. The APC is not the main threat, the infantry it is transporting is.  

I as well cleary wrote that the 12.7 mm will richotte from the armors at various angles, same thing will happen for 30 mm caliber in situations where it happens.

You try to claim that I wrote, and I quote: "at a distance of up to 2500m, penetrates the armor of any APCs of the 1980–1990s, regardless of the angle, while maintaining its destructive power." Nothing of that is what I have written.

 

You deny the facts that 12.7 mm caliber is deadly to human being even at long ranges like 2500 meters (in fact, it will go even further but maximum effective range starts to be the huge challenge, but it can be compensated by the amount of bullets but again, limited by the spread).

You as well deny the fact that any weapon can be aimed and shot at the target that is further than the sighting system range scale is. 

You as well deny the fact that Mi-24 is used in situations where it is overflown the target area at close ranges (below 1000 meters even), using various pop-up attacks in pairs or multiple pairs, utilizing the speed and terrain cover to minimize the time the target has to react. Well in the ranges of the YakB effective range.

You as well deny the fact that having a fixed gun requires the helicopter to fly straight at the target, without possibility to utilize the capability to fly past it and making it harder target doing so, and so on render such doctrinal tactics obsolete and requires new other kind ones. 

You as well ignore that I have clearly spoken that Afghanistan is only one sample where battlefield conditions were different than example european landscape, different doctrines and tactics required for different terrain. Where on one country one weapon can be more effective, in others it can be less effective.

 

1 hour ago, S.E.Bulba said:

For heaven's sake, leave your tone policing for someone less sophisticated.

 

Ad Hominem.

 

1 hour ago, S.E.Bulba said:

I expressed my opinion whether you like it or not.

 

Ad Hominems are based to opinions, but you lost the argument. Do not attack the person, discuss the topic. 

 

1 hour ago, S.E.Bulba said:

At the same time, I did not receive answers regarding the technical side of the question, in relation to the Mi-24V. On this I consider our discussion with you to be over.

 

You didn't ask. You made Ad Hominems. 

You have not even participated discussion with me with technical questioning. You rampage in to claim "you tell untrue stories" and other Ad Hominems.

The discussion of the topic ended when you started to make ad hominems.

You have not been able to present evidence that 12.7 mm is not effective caliber to be used in a attack helicopter turret, that the most produced Mi-24 variant uses for a reason. 

[Stratos]

Are Fuel-explosive bombs to be released with the Mi-24?

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Fri13, S.E.Bulba has been one of the few people here who's regularly provided sources about the Mi-24. It's not his fault nor burden to provide even more arguments or proof to support opinion of active duty aircrews, the Russian Army Aviation planners and the Russian Ministry of Defence, who retired the Mi-24V due to its inadequate firepower but still actively deploy the Mi-24P to combat zones like Syria or Nagorno-Karabakh.

[BIGNEWY]

Please do not derail the thread.

 

thank you

[Lucas_From_Hell]

1 hour ago, Stratos said:

Are Fuel-explosive bombs to be released with the Mi-24?

On early access release as far as I know it will only have weapons that currently exist in game including the 30mm HE and AT shells, S-5, S-8 and S-24 variants, GUV pods, FAB and RBK bombs, plus the Shturm and Ataka missiles with HEAT warheads. After that, they plan to add missing bomb models and warhead options.

[ResonantCard1]

I honestly don't get why getting the 30mm or the 12.7mm is such a big deal. Not only just because at first glance the 30mm is the superior choice, and clearly favored by the Russian Armed Forces *and* the crews, but also because arguing this much about wether or not we should have gotten the 12.7mm turret is unnecessary. The developers chose to make the Mi-24P, so that's what they're making. They could have chosen to do the V, they could have chosen to do the Apache, yet they chose this. They probably have their reasons. If the 12.7mm machine gun is so important for one's enjoyment of the Mi-24, why don't you go and make an Mi-24V module?

[Stratos]

18 minutes ago, Lucas_From_Hell said:

On early access release as far as I know it will only have weapons that currently exist in game including the 30mm HE and AT shells, S-5, S-8 and S-24 variants, GUV pods, FAB and RBK bombs, plus the Shturm and Ataka missiles with HEAT warheads. After that, they plan to add missing bomb models and warhead options.

Thanks for info.

[Fri13]

48 minutes ago, ResonantCard1 said:

I honestly don't get why getting the 30mm or the 12.7mm is such a big deal. Not only just because at first glance the 30mm is the superior choice, and clearly favored by the Russian Armed Forces *and* the crews, but also because arguing this much about wether or not we should have gotten the 12.7mm turret is unnecessary.

 

It is not "which one is more effective". By the facts the 30 mm is MUCH better caliber than 12.7 mm by any means. 

BUT, how you can shoot those is the difference. If both would be fixed guns, then 30 mm is better choice for almost any scenario. But when other is aimable from the move to other directions than just where the helicopter moves. That gives huge advantage to move on a battlefield. 

 

The question is not just reality, it is what module we are getting to DCS World. And from that starting point the P is always better than V because you can fly the helicopter primarily in single-player without ever considering even other player. Where the V offers more for the Co-Op as PvE game. BUT, there is as well again the same arguments to be made, the V with turret is more flexible to offer better missions as there is more to do, and you are more capable combat helicopter with it as Co-Op. 

 

48 minutes ago, ResonantCard1 said:

The developers chose to make the Mi-24P, so that's what they're making.

 

Yes, the have the final word but it doesn't mean that they couldn't later on make a V version because so much shared code.

This thread is not about "do not make P, make a V". 

 

48 minutes ago, ResonantCard1 said:

They could have chosen to do the V, they could have chosen to do the Apache, yet they chose this.

 

Well, Apache has already been coming. Same way as Hind has been coming for years already. 

P is simply better choice by its single-player status, nothing more really. 

 

48 minutes ago, ResonantCard1 said:

They probably have their reasons. If the 12.7mm machine gun is so important for one's enjoyment of the Mi-24, why don't you go and make an Mi-24V module?

 

Should everyone who would wish something, to go and make it by themselves?

 

[Fri13]

3 hours ago, Lucas_From_Hell said:

Fri13, S.E.Bulba has been one of the few people here who's regularly provided sources about the Mi-24. It's not his fault nor burden to provide even more arguments or proof to support opinion of active duty aircrews, the Russian Army Aviation planners and the Russian Ministry of Defence, who retired the Mi-24V due to its inadequate firepower but still actively deploy the Mi-24P to combat zones like Syria or Nagorno-Karabakh.

 

If you read his texts, he does personal attacks toward me. If you make a claim that if someone does something nice sometime in their past and then they deserve to get a free card for any other disrespectful behavior, then it is very interesting how you can explain it.

He made wild claims about how it is untrue that 12.7 mm caliber is effective up to 2500 m ranges, and he needs to backup his claims. If you think that he doesn't need to do that, then you could explain his claim if you so want to defend his behavior.

 

And your argument about active duty, did ALL countries that use Mi-24V retire it and upgrade to 30 mm or 23 mm variants?

And if you very very very carefully look my writings, I am not denying the 30 mm benefits anywhere. So argument that I am claiming that 12.7 mm is better than 30 mm that would require evidence, doesn't exist.

I have nothing required to provide evidence as facts are facts, 12.7 mm will fly far further than 2500 meters. It is effective caliber against unarmored targets even at those ranges. It doesn't turn to be a "paper cut" bullet past some exact range.

And if you can not understand separate discussion about the calibers, the gun and the platform, then it is your problem.

 

There is too much BS about how 12.7 mm is "ineffective". There are reasons why 14.5, 20, 23, 25, 30 mm etc calibers exists. Same way as why there are 5.45, 5.56, 7.62 mm etc.

 

 

[S.E.Bulba]

2 часа назад, Fri13 сказал:

If you read his texts, he does personal attacks toward me. If you make a claim that if someone does something nice sometime in their past and then they deserve to get a free card for any other disrespectful behavior, then it is very interesting how you can explain it.

He made wild claims about how it is untrue that 12.7 mm caliber is effective up to 2500 m ranges, and he needs to backup his claims. If you think that he doesn't need to do that, then you could explain his claim if you so want to defend his behavior.

Stop doing demagoguery. Can you prove your words?

01.12.2020 в 15:51, Fri13 сказал:

12.7 mm is very effective up to 2500 meters against that time (80's and even 90's) APC's almost regardless their angle, and you are there against the infantry, not the APC itself when it is empty.

 

7 часов назад, Fri13 сказал:

You deny the facts that 12.7 mm caliber is deadly to human being even at long ranges like 2500 meters (in fact, it will go even further but maximum effective range starts to be the huge challenge, but it can be compensated by the amount of bullets but again, limited by the spread).

You as well deny the fact that any weapon can be aimed and shot at the target that is further than the sighting system range scale is. 

You as well deny the fact that Mi-24 is used in situations where it is overflown the target area at close ranges (below 1000 meters even), using various pop-up attacks in pairs or multiple pairs, utilizing the speed and terrain cover to minimize the time the target has to react. Well in the ranges of the YakB effective range.

You as well deny the fact that having a fixed gun requires the helicopter to fly straight at the target, without possibility to utilize the capability to fly past it and making it harder target doing so, and so on render such doctrinal tactics obsolete and requires new other kind ones. 

You as well ignore that I have clearly spoken that Afghanistan is only one sample where battlefield conditions were different than example european landscape, different doctrines and tactics required for different terrain. Where on one country one weapon can be more effective, in others it can be less effective.

Can you quote where I wrote this?
 

01.12.2020 в 17:35, S.E.Bulba сказал:

Especially considering that the range tables of Soviet/Russian 12.7×108mm cartridges are compiled for a range of no more than 2000m, and the maximum sighting range of the USPU-24 gun emplacement (YakB-12.7) does not exceed 1500m.

By the way, here I was mistaken because of my forgetfulness. The maximum sighting range of the USPU-24 gun emplacement (YakB-12.7) using the KPS-53 reflector sighting station = 2000m (when using the VSB-24 firing and bombing calculator).

1500m is the recommended maximum sighting range without using the VSB-24 firing and bombing calculator (for duplex rounds = 1000m).

 

Скрытый текст

Original in Russian

Перестаньте заниматься демагогией. Вы можете доказать свои слова?

Вы можете процитировать, где я такое писа́л?

 

Кстати, здесь я ошибся из-за своей забывчивости. Максимальная прицельная дальность пулемётной установки УСПУ-24 (ЯкБ-12,7) с использованием прицельной станции КПС-53 = 2000 м (при использовании вычислителя стрельбы и бомбометания ВСБ-24).

1500 м – это рекомендуемая максимальная прицельная дальность без использования вычислителя стрельбы и бомбометания ВСБ-24 (для двухпульных патронов = 1000 м).

 

Edited December 2, 2020 by S.E.Bulba
UPD.

[Fri13]

55 minutes ago, S.E.Bulba said:

Stop doing demagoguery. Can you prove your words?

 

Yes, where I did speak about penetrating armors as you claim?

Doesn't most common APC's have wheels?

Do you now claim that 12.7 mm caliber is not effective to cause mobility kills or mission kills?

Do you know what a 12.7 mm does for a normal windshield that is armored only against smaller caliber bullets?

Do you know why they do have the armored combat plates to cover the glasses?

 

A common AP 12.7 mm round can penetrate about 15-20 mm armor at 500 meters (some even more, like SLAP almost 20 mm at 1500 meters).

Do you know that they cause zero damage at 1500-2500 meters?

I don't need to provide any evidence for well known facts how destructive a 12.7 mm can be at long ranges against infantry, non-armored targets, lightly armored targets. You need to provide the evidence that it becomes ineffective at specific ranges (1500 m or 2500 m, your pick) and it is nothing. The APC's that were used at the 80's and 90's are mostly older generation that didn't have armor upgrades or other means to improve the withstanding of higher calibers like 12.7 mm AP and 14.5 mm or some even 20 mm. 

 

55 minutes ago, S.E.Bulba said:

Can you quote where I wrote this?

 

"You tell unreal stories."

 

You can go to read your own strawman arguments with personal insults as you specifically deny everything, and then provide evidence for claims that 12.7 mm is not capable to do any damage to infantry or to that era APC's from 2500 m (or especially below).

 

[S.E.Bulba]

36 минут назад, Fri13 сказал:

Yes, where I did speak about penetrating armors as you claim?

Doesn't most common APC's have wheels?

Do you now claim that 12.7 mm caliber is not effective to cause mobility kills or mission kills?

Do you know what a 12.7 mm does for a normal windshield that is armored only against smaller caliber bullets?

Do you know why they do have the armored combat plates to cover the glasses?

 

A common AP 12.7 mm round can penetrate about 15-20 mm armor at 500 meters (some even more, like SLAP almost 20 mm at 1500 meters).

Do you know that they cause zero damage at 1500-2500 meters?

I don't need to provide any evidence for well known facts how destructive a 12.7 mm can be at long ranges against infantry, non-armored targets, lightly armored targets. You need to provide the evidence that it becomes ineffective at specific ranges (1500 m or 2500 m, your pick) and it is nothing. The APC's that were used at the 80's and 90's are mostly older generation that didn't have armor upgrades or other means to improve the withstanding of higher calibers like 12.7 mm AP and 14.5 mm or some even 20 mm.

Again, just words. That is, in fact, you cannot provide proof of your words?

 

36 минут назад, Fri13 сказал:

"You tell unreal stories."

 

You can go to read your own strawman arguments with personal insults as you specifically deny everything, and then provide evidence for claims that 12.7 mm is not capable to do any damage to infantry or to that era APC's from 2500 m (or especially below).

That is, you cannot give quotes allegedly 'my' words that you ascribe to me? Therefore, everything that you have written is nothing more than your personal fantasies?

 

Скрытый текст

Original in Russian

Опять только слова. То есть по-факту, Вы не можете предоставить доказательств своих слов?

То есть Вы не можете привести цитаты якобы «моих» слов, которые Вы мне приписываете? Следовательно всё то, что Вы написа́ли, является ничем иным как Вашими личными фантазиями?

 

Edited December 2, 2020 by S.E.Bulba
UPD.

[ResonantCard1]

3 hours ago, Fri13 said:

It is not "which one is more effective". By the facts the 30 mm is MUCH better caliber than 12.7 mm by any means. 

BUT, how you can shoot those is the difference. If both would be fixed guns, then 30 mm is better choice for almost any scenario. But when other is aimable from the move to other directions than just where the helicopter moves. That gives huge advantage to move on a battlefield. 

 

Let me ask you something. If you had to choose between an A-10 with the famous BRRRRT memegun, fixed to the fuselage, and an A-10 with a backseater to control a 12.7mm gun in a flex mount, would you still take the one with the 12.7mm gun?

[Fri13]

21 minutes ago, S.E.Bulba said:

Again, just words. That is, in fact, you cannot provide proof of your words?

 

You are good, that can be admitted. You try to deny everything through personal attacks so you can avoid ever saying anything specifically that could be hold against you.

Your words has been denying everything. You try to poison the well, build strawman arguments and many other common tactics just to go against person. 

 

Do you know what a 12.7 mm bullet does to an armor that it can not penetrate?

Do you know what it does to personnel inside an lightly armored vehicle like a BTR-60 or BTR-70?

 

Over 30 000 of BTR-60's were built. Less than third of that was BTR-70 series.

Over 20 000 of M113 were built. Similar thing with the upgraded models.

MT-LB was similar thing, even slightly less armored. Same way tracked like M113 but still very vulnerable.  

All those are really protected only against small arms fire and shells splinters (30 mm etc), not against HMG.

 

APC's are not designed to be shot at. They are meant to be "battlefield taxi" that will protect the infantry from some small arms fire and splinters when transporting troops to fighting position and then retreat back to cover, maybe doctrinal idea to be able give fire support if so required.  

 

21 minutes ago, S.E.Bulba said:

That is, you cannot give quotes allegedly 'my' words that you ascribe to me? Therefore, everything that you have written is nothing more than your personal fantasies?

 

As can be said, personal attacks and insults from you.

If you would not do those, you would simply discuss about the topic but you do know it would put you to admit I am right. 

 

So start explaining why the 12.7 mm was ineffective caliber against APC's used at the 80's and even 90's at the ranges that Mi-24 would be engaging them in european warfare? Do not go to person, discuss about the topic of 12.7 mm effectiveness.

Why it would be ineffective in the DCS if we would consider that we would get a semi-realistic damage modeling to vehicles and all other ammunition included?

Would it have rendered the Mi-24V to be like a UH-1H with its minigun?

 

[Fri13]

42 minutes ago, ResonantCard1 said:

 

Let me ask you something. If you had to choose between an A-10 with the famous BRRRRT memegun, fixed to the fuselage, and an A-10 with a backseater to control a 12.7mm gun in a flex mount, would you still take the one with the 12.7mm gun?

 

No.

Is the A-10 same as the Mi-24?

 

[S.E.Bulba]

35 минут назад, Fri13 сказал:

You are good, that can be admitted. You try to deny everything through personal attacks so you can avoid ever saying anything specifically that could be hold against you.

Your words has been denying everything. You try to poison the well, build strawman arguments and many other common tactics just to go against person…

Do not divert the conversation away from the questions asked to you. I ask you again: besides an infinite number of empty words, can you provide any real evidence for your statements?

 

35 минут назад, Fri13 сказал:

As can be said, personal attacks and insults from you.

If you would not do those, you would simply discuss about the topic but you do know it would put you to admit I am right…

I have to ask you again: can you quote allegedly 'my' words that you attribute to me? Or will you continue to use your fantasies as ad hominem?
 

Скрытый текст

Original in Russian

Не уводите разговор в сторону от заданных Вам вопросов. Я ещё раз Вас спрашиваю: кроме бесконечного количества пустых слов, Вы можете предоставить какие-нибудь реальные доказательства своим утверждениям?

Я вынужден ещё раз Вас спросить: Вы можете процитировать якобы «мои» слова, которые Вы приписываете мне? Или Вы и дальше продолжите использовать свои фантазии в качестве ad hominem?

 

Edited December 3, 2020 by S.E.Bulba
UPD.

[NineLine]

Dear all participants in this thread, be kind to each other, believe it or not you all like similar things and they brought you here. Be respectful to each other, and others will be respectful to you, thanks.