Takes a lot of gun rounds to kill a T-90

[Mohamengina]

Anyone else notice how many gun rounds you need to take out a T-90? All the videos ive seen online seem to suggest that it shouldn't take as much as it does in the game.

 

For me with all rounds on target it takes around 3 sweeps to take out one T-90 tank and then ive used up about 75% of my ammo. :huh:

[159th_Viper]

T-80?

 

It takes only 70 rounds (or less?) to kill any MBT in-SIM.

 

I'll even go so far as to say that it's too easy at present - on the whole it's however satisfactory: Rewards you if done right - punishes you if done wrong :)

[Ragtop]

How are you attacking? There are a lot of variables to think about.

 

How close are you when you engage, and are you taking the time to line up? I see a lot of people rolling in at 2.0 miles and firing at 1.8. This isn't enough time to line up adequately. I'd trim the dive so the plane is flying itself into the target, ensure that I'm on a consistent course, enable PAC and then fire when I'm in range.

 

You also need to consider what part of the tank you're attacking. The top and rear are far less armoured than the front and sides of the tank, so make sure you use this to your advantage.

 

Similarly, consider your attack angle. If you're flying low and only nosing down 15/20°, then you leave a lot of room for your rounds to spread. If you climb a bit and dive closer to 45° or so, then your grouping will be considerably tighter.

 

Hopefully these tips will help you out a bit, happy flying!

[HiJack]

I think ppl just go prt prt prt and not prrrrrt ;)

[Garfieldo]

I think people go "askaskask" instead of "searchsearchsearch"...

[EtherealN]

Ragtop, this isn't just about lining up, it's about having two things:

 

1) A small CEP.

2) Lots of energy in the projectiles.

 

Generally, you achieve them through being CLOSE when firing. For MBT's, 0-7 miles slant range. At that range, and assuming your aim is on, you'll need very very little to kill the tank, also assuming you're attacking the tank on his vulnerable rear aspects.

 

If you attack the tack with gun on a frontal aspect, you don't deserve a kill :D

[LostOblivion]

It also helps getting the hog up to about 5000 knots before firing. :)

[Ranger79]

T-80?

 

It takes only 70 rounds (or less?) to kill any MBT in-SIM.

 

I'll even go so far as to say that it's too easy at present - on the whole it's however satisfactory: Rewards you if done right - punishes you if done wrong :)

 

Viper is right, once you get the PAC down and get a kill feels great. Sometimes one or two rounds are all that makes the difference.

[Cali]

I think ppl just go prt prt prt and not prrrrrt ;)

 

Lol, I think this could be the culprit also and maybe they aren't lined up well, they are doing this :joystick:

[Crescendo]

Mohamengina, to put it bluntly, you have to use a lot of rounds because your technique is poor. :D

 

This seems to be a perennial topic around here. All tanks as presently modelled can be actually killed with <60 rounds, but that's only if you do everything perfectly and put your aircraft at great risk of flying into the ground/target. Good luck nailing <60 round passes every single time.

 

However, repeatably killing tanks in one pass with 80-120 rounds is easily achieved with practice.

The key to killing tanks is to shoot where the armour is thinnest, to shoot at right angles to minimize deflections and richochets, to maintain a dive angle of 20-30 degrees (or greater) so the rounds cluster tightly, to maintain a stable guns platform so the rounds cluster tightly, and to only shoot at close range so the rounds have maximum kinetic energy and cluster tightly.

So,

 

• Attack the thin armour from the top, rear,or side (never head-on).
  
• Attack with an angle-off of 0°, i.e. attack at right angles wherever possible.
  
• Attack with a minimum dive angle of 20-30° (30+ is better). Larger dive angles yield better results, but are less 'user-friendly' in certain situations
  
• Engage PAC-1 as early as possible and for as long as possible to maintain a stable guns platform
  
• Attack with a 1-1.5sec burst at 0.6nm or less, then egress in the vertical and horizontal at 0.3-0.4nm
  
• PAC-1 stabilisation before firing is preferable but NOT required; PAC-2 (firing your gun immediately) works just fine if you're short on time and your aim is true.
  

 

Read the following thread:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=78122

 

In this thread I posted a guide demonstrating the technique I generally prefer, which is to fly circles/boxes/rectangles around a target and 'rolling-in' on it at my leisure. There are alternate methods such as the split-S dive (as demonstrated by 159th_Viper) and the "pop-up" attack. The split-S attack yields kills with fewer rounds expended because the dive angle is greater, but it is generally more cumbersome when re-attacking the same area over and over. The circle/box/rectangle method is very useful for quickly re-attacking the same area again and again, but you usually have to use more ammunition because the dive angle is less.

 

Personally I use the split-S-type profile when attacking a one-off target, or when I'm already at high altitutes (10k ft+). On the other hand, if I want to quickly re-attack an area multiple times I'll use the circle/box/rectangle profile, so that I don't have to climb as much and spend a lot of time orienting on the target.

 

That said, there's no 'right' method: You can also mix and match. For example, if I'm flying at angels 15 and I spot a group of unprotected tanks with my TGP, I may decide to use a split-S profile for my initial roll-in, and then transition to a circle/box/rectangle profile as I prosecute the remaining targets when I'm on the deck. This is as opposed to getting stuck in a split-S —climb—re-orient—split-S—climb—re-orient cycle that requires a little more time.

 

Finally, if you only remember two things from this post, remember that higher dive angles are better for tight round clustering, and that you should only fire at close range to ensure maximum kinetic energy and penetration.

 

Play around with the various techniques and let us know how you go.

[Crescendo]

By the way, the terms "circle/box/rectangle profile" and "split-S profile" are my own — you won't see them called that anywhere else I should think.

 

Furthermore, the "split-S" in "split-S profile" is also a bit of a misnomer because it's not really a full split-S. The maneuvers are ultimately the same, but you roll wings-level to initiate a dive as soon as you can see your target, not when your heading has changed by 180°.

[RobC]

 

If you attack the tack with gun on a frontal aspect, you don't deserve a kill :D

 

You can still kind of do it if you absolutely need to for some reason (like its backed up to a mountain or something, I don't know), but you need to be really coming down on it from like 5K and hitting the top.

 

Rear definitely works a lot better though. :thumbup:

[hog_driver111th]

Crescendo, I'm not sure why you're saying to use a 30+ degree dive angle. All my shots regardless of target type are around 10 - 15 degrees with 95%+ kill ratio. Depending on terrain or altitude, I'll increase it as needed, but typically I'm low in the weeds when going in for a gun shot. If you watch any video of the A-10s at the ranges, they all use a shallow angle. Also, performing a split S maneuver places you over the target. That's the last area you should be. a pop up would be better.

As for your box, rectangle pattern, this is the optimum usage by actual Hog drivers and keeps you flying inbound to target on a specific heading. I try to teach the one as it keeps everyone attacking without running into each other.

[Eddie]

Crescendo If you watch any video of the A-10s at the ranges, they all use a shallow angle.

 

That's because just about every video online shows low angle attacks. A-10s use both low angle (what you describe and as show on most youtube vids) and high angle attacks (what Crescendo describes).

 

High angle attacks provide better target visibility, leave you with more energy to get out of trouble, keep you out of SAM/AAA WEZ for longer and result in lower bullet dispersion as well as (depending on the angle) put you above the max elevation of many ground vehicle weapon systems.

 

Low angle attacks on the other hand allow you to re-attack faster (no need to climb to altitude again afterwards), use terrain masking and are better for strafing columns of soft targets.

 

Which one to use is a tactical decsision that needs to made at the time based on the target.

[Crescendo]

Crescendo, I'm not sure why you're saying to use a 30+ degree dive angle. All my shots regardless of target type are around 10 - 15 degrees with 95%+ kill ratio. Depending on terrain or altitude, I'll increase it as needed, but typically I'm low in the weeds when going in for a gun shot. If you watch any video of the A-10s at the ranges, they all use a shallow angle. Also, performing a split S maneuver places you over the target. That's the last area you should be. a pop up would be better.

As for your box, rectangle pattern, this is the optimum usage by actual Hog drivers and keeps you flying inbound to target on a specific heading. I try to teach the one as it keeps everyone attacking without running into each other.

 

Thanks for the comments hog_driver111th. First let me say that I am by no means an expert on this topic, I'm just an interested layman who likes busting tanks in this sim with as little ammunition as possible.

 

Eddie explained the advantages of the high angle attacks versus low angle attacks quite nicely (better visibility, more energy for egressing and defensive maneuvering, tighter cluster etc.), so I won't dwell too much on that.

 

I do use low angle attacks, but mainly when flying nap-of-the-earth and killing soft targets. My personal 'bread and butter' is the high angle attack. I find that in most tactical situations the visibility and excess energy aquired in high angle dives proves absolutely invaluable when it comes to responding to and avoiding threats. The extra speed affords you the luxury of turning and jinking agressively without promptly stalling, the luxury of returning to a safe altitude quickly, and the luxury of running away quickly should you be required to do so (). If I'm threatened when using a low angle attack down in the weeds, I find that my options tend to run out faster unless I can terrain mask.

 

As to why I specifically recommended the circle/box/rectangle profile (high angle attack), I have two reasons: the first is that it's simply my prefered 'go-to' method for reasons mentioned earlier (a personal bias ); and the second is that less ammunition will generally be required due to the tighter cluster (which will hopefully address the crux of Mohamengina's problem).

 

Regarding the split-S profile, as I said earlier it's a bit of a misnomer on my part. Sorry about that. You don't actually fly directly over the target — you rather initiate the beginnings of a split-S by rolling inverted, then roll wings-level as soon as you see the target. Your final heading will be the same as your initial heading, i.e. you dive towards the target rather than flying directly over it. It's sort of like a quarter split-S. If you watch Viper's track in the thread I linked to you will see what I mean, but maybe this drawing should clear it up:

 

 

Think of it as a standard dive without pushing forward on the stick and inducing negative G's. The period of inverted flight can be used to visually acquire the target, rather than being 'surprised' by a target below the nose.

 

Perhaps someone more knowledgable than I knows what this maneuver is actually called, if anything. :helpsmilie:

[EtherealN]

Personally, I prefer a three/nine-line pitchup-roll-in. The "Split-S" profile you indicate sort of requires a high flight in, which might make you easier to spot. If terrain and SAM/MANPAD/AAA circumstances allow it, I prefer to set up for my gun pass through flying perpendicular at a 2-mile offset to the target, and once the target is appriaching my 3 or 9 I pitch up to climb and get my attack angle, then roll and turn 90 degrees onto the target once he's at my 3 or 9, dive in and gun for it.

 

The advantage here is that you can then turn back into your ingress route fairly easily for your egress (which, it is assumed, was previously inspected for threats), and you approach with terrain masking which should maximise your surprise element.

 

Depends a good bit on the situation of course, but it is my fav and feels very gratifying when done right.

[Eddie]

Personally, I prefer a three/nine-line pitchup-roll-in. The "Split-S" profile you indicate sort of requires a high flight in, which might make you easier to spot. If terrain and SAM/MANPAD/AAA circumstances allow it, I prefer to set up for my gun pass through flying perpendicular at a 2-mile offset to the target, and once the target is appriaching my 3 or 9 I pitch up to climb and get my attack angle, then roll and turn 90 degrees onto the target once he's at my 3 or 9, dive in and gun for it.

 

The advantage here is that you can then turn back into your ingress route fairly easily for your egress (which, it is assumed, was previously inspected for threats), and you approach with terrain masking which should maximise your surprise element.

 

Depends a good bit on the situation of course, but it is my fav and feels very gratifying when done right.

 

 

THIS. Or if already at altitude, the same just without the pop-up. These methods of delivery are the 2 main attack profiles for non guided ordnance, both forward firing (gun & rockets) and dumb bombs/CBUs.

 

The split-s technique is just a way to get out of a poorly planned approach to the target, it offers minimal target visibility as the target will be below the nose and obscured by the airframe for most of the final run in. Although it is still a lot better than the 5 mile dive method many people use.

[Crescendo]

I think you're both right, offsetting for a roll-in is better. I tend to do that naturally, I realise, especially when I'm delivering dumb bombs from altitude in CCIP mode.

 

The 90-degree roll-in is very similar to what I do with the circle/box/rectangle profile I was talking about, and is applicable at all altitudes now that I think about it. It offers good visibility of the target area, which is why I initially gravitated towards it when plinking tanks with guns. I even do the "pitch up" maneuver when required as mentioned by EtherealN to increase my dive angle, and/or to bleed airspeed so I don't snap my wings in the recovery.

 

Maybe I'm a better pilot than I thought.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Crescendo