What if Recoiless Rifles weren't bad?

User avatar
frostypooky
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4334
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 14:12
Contact:

Re: What if Recoiless Rifles weren't bad?

Postby frostypooky » Tue 13 Dec 2016 01:42

GARGEAN wrote:Service dates of K1A1? Caesar? Amos?


MICA, K-9, "Jianghu III" (not that ships matter), NK BTR-80a

User avatar
Narcissistic Black
Major
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue 14 Jan 2014 01:58
Contact:

Re: What if Recoiless Rifles weren't bad?

Postby Narcissistic Black » Tue 13 Dec 2016 01:54

GARGEAN wrote:
Narcissistic Black wrote:Pretty sure thats out of timeframe. 1998 being a service date. hince the 98.

Service dates of K1A1? Caesar? Amos?


"The K1A1 was accepted into Korean service on October 13, 2001, after the first one was produced on April 3, 1996"

"Caesar was developed in the 1990s as a technology demonstrator by the French state-owned company GIAT Industries; in cooperation with Lohr Industrie. It was first shown in public in 1994. Four years later a pre-production model underwent trials with the French Army. With the first five units being delivered in 2003"

AMOS... I have no comment on. Service date 2007..

MICA EM first trials occurred in 1991, and the missile was commissioned in 1996 as for the MICA IR that is OOTF I believe.

K-9 In 1996, the first prototype of this new artillery system was tested. The contract for the new K9 artillery system was awarded to Samsung Aerospace Industries (SSA) by the Korean Government on 22 December 1998

NK BTR-80a This is an alternate timeline thing. Russia supplied NK with high tech equipment. (os basically its bias to make nk better)



Just because Eugen includes something out of timeframe doesn't make it suddenly the standard. While I agree I beleive those units are in game because they had working prototypes before 1996 except Amos.. Amos is just Amos and IKEA must have paid Eugen off to include it.
The First Narcissist
Image
Click signature to see Modification, Alpha Released. Try now.

User avatar
Mako
General
Posts: 7352
Joined: Sun 5 May 2013 20:00
Location: Cascadia
Contact:

Re: What if Recoiless Rifles weren't bad?

Postby Mako » Tue 13 Dec 2016 01:55

GARGEAN wrote:
Darkmil wrote:It has been explained before.
http://www.soldf.com/pvpj1110.html
It uses a more powerful explosive than over heat rounds.

And still PzF-3IT with 110mm caliber and extremely powerful explosive(up to 10km/sec detonation speed) reach only 900mm AP. Dunno, dunno...


That's tandem though, I think you lose raw penetration with two warheads though I might be wrong.
If there's two kinds of players, those that like challenges and those that want a fair game, pubstomps should make everyone happy.

User avatar
Razzmann
General
Posts: 7497
Joined: Fri 7 Mar 2014 15:29
Location: The land of flowing beer and Sauerkraut.
Contact:

Re: What if Recoiless Rifles weren't bad?

Postby Razzmann » Tue 13 Dec 2016 01:56

Narcissistic Black wrote:
Razzmann wrote:You want RRs to be good? Gib China the PF-98 8-)


Pretty sure thats out of timeframe. 1998 being a service date. hince the 98.

Pretty sure a prototype was ready earlier.

User avatar
wargamer1985
Brigadier
Posts: 3305
Joined: Sat 4 May 2013 00:36
Contact:

Re: What if Recoiless Rifles weren't bad?

Postby wargamer1985 » Tue 13 Dec 2016 02:01

Razzmann wrote:
Narcissistic Black wrote:
Razzmann wrote:You want RRs to be good? Gib China the PF-98 8-)


Pretty sure thats out of timeframe. 1998 being a service date. hince the 98.

Pretty sure a prototype was ready earlier.

What was it's penetration performance?
APPLY TO THE GLORIOUS CULT OF THE WARHAWK! LIBERATING NAZIS SINCE 1939!
Image

Gopblin
Major-General
Posts: 3620
Joined: Thu 24 May 2012 19:10
Contact:

Re: What if Recoiless Rifles weren't bad?

Postby Gopblin » Tue 13 Dec 2016 02:03

Chinese RR actually aren't bad against inf, even in forests. But they're kinda expensive for what they do, 3x Sturmi are far more efficient.
Nationality? - Russian.
Occupation? - No, no, just visiting.

User avatar
Mako
General
Posts: 7352
Joined: Sun 5 May 2013 20:00
Location: Cascadia
Contact:

Re: What if Recoiless Rifles weren't bad?

Postby Mako » Tue 13 Dec 2016 02:10

Equivalent points in sturmi is better than most units
If there's two kinds of players, those that like challenges and those that want a fair game, pubstomps should make everyone happy.

GARGEAN
Brigadier
Posts: 3496
Joined: Wed 9 Apr 2014 14:19
Contact:

Re: What if Recoiless Rifles weren't bad?

Postby GARGEAN » Tue 13 Dec 2016 02:23

Mako wrote:That's tandem though, I think you lose raw penetration with two warheads though I might be wrong.

Not really, at least if constructors not funked up. And it's stated to be 900mm after ERA(about this I was always sceptical, but not too much - it's really have some jacks in pocket).

User avatar
Razzmann
General
Posts: 7497
Joined: Fri 7 Mar 2014 15:29
Location: The land of flowing beer and Sauerkraut.
Contact:

Re: What if Recoiless Rifles weren't bad?

Postby Razzmann » Tue 13 Dec 2016 02:23

wargamer1985 wrote:What was it's penetration performance?

Keldon writes 800mm in his NK/China thread.

GARGEAN
Brigadier
Posts: 3496
Joined: Wed 9 Apr 2014 14:19
Contact:

Re: What if Recoiless Rifles weren't bad?

Postby GARGEAN » Tue 13 Dec 2016 02:24

wargamer1985 wrote:What was it's penetration performance?

Stated to be up to 800mm, unckown about after ERA, but should be around 650-700mm.

PS: dam Razz...

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests