CIA Tank FCS Assesments... and You

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

CIA Tank FCS Assesments... and You

Postby Killertomato » Fri 20 Jan 2017 04:41

HrcAk47 wrote:https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP84M00044R000200890001-1.pdf

here's what CIA thinks of FCSes in the early 80s. I should probably go sleep.



This is an interesting document, which may be relevant to our interests.

Apparently, some AMX-30Bs were fitted with battlefield radars. Exceptional optics recon tank, anyone?

Merkava Mk. 1 fire control systems were some sort of bizarre mix between a Leopard 1A4 and an M60A3- so that's a nerf.

Early Type 74 fire control systems were apparently similar to an M60A3's but it was missing some of the environmental sensors...

Estimates on east bloc systems are as unreliable as you'd expect.

Strv 103B has no FCS at all, or a rangefinder- just a big scope. Not much of a surprise considering it's from the mid '60s.

M47 has a stereoscopic rangefinder and a (very, very primitive) ballistic computer, which was amazingly still being made in Italy at that late date.

M48A2+ has a coincidence rangefinder and a slightly less primitive ballistic computer.

M60A1/AOS/RISE have more or less the same computer and are basically product-improved M48s as far as fire control goes.

M60A2 has a full FCS- first actual one in the US.

M60A3 is the vanilla of fire control systems- laser rangefinder, environmental sensors, etc.

The M1 is like above, except slightly better at calculating lead.

Leopard 1-A4 are like the M60 in fire control operation.

Leopard 1A4 is a hybrid system- fancier than the ones that came before it, M60s, etc, but not as fancy as M60A3, T-64B, etc.

Export Leopard 1s fitted with the SABCA system (that's our ANZAC and Canadian Leopards) are similar to the M60A3 in terms of FCS. That is to say, better than the 1A4. Dutch, Danish, and Norwegian pre-A5 leopards DO NOT have this.

Everything else is not much of a surprise or already well-known.
Last edited by Killertomato on Fri 20 Jan 2017 07:12, edited 1 time in total.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

codextero
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2334
Joined: Sat 13 Dec 2014 02:52
Contact:

Re: CIA Tank FCS Assesments... and You

Postby codextero » Fri 20 Jan 2017 06:44

Killertomato wrote:M60A3 is the vanilla of fire control systems- laser rangefinder, environmental sensors, etc. It does not generate lead angles.


M60A3 does generate lead, and the gunner actions is basically the same as the M1 (lase on target, hold the track button for 2 seconds, shoot).

What it does not have is a slaved mirror like the M1, and that the lead is generated by averaging turret traverse rates for the past two seconds and multiplying by TOT, while the M1 tracks the aim-point itself, so it gives a somewhat better lead.

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: CIA Tank FCS Assesments... and You

Postby Killertomato » Fri 20 Jan 2017 07:11

codextero wrote:M60A3 does generate lead, and the gunner actions is basically the same as the M1 (lase on target, hold the track button for 2 seconds, shoot).

What it does not have is a slaved mirror like the M1, and that the lead is generated by averaging turret traverse rates for the past two seconds and multiplying by TOT, while the M1 tracks the aim-point itself, so it gives a somewhat better lead.


Then the CIA was mistaken. Which is a bit worrying, but their wording vs. what you said and what I just read on the steelbeasts wiki makes it seem like the guy who prepped the report read the TM and didn't quite understand it.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3062
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

Re: CIA Tank FCS Assesments... and You

Postby urogard » Fri 20 Jan 2017 10:02

Killertomato wrote:Apparently, some AMX-30Bs were fitted with battlefield radars. Exceptional optics recon tank, anyone?

Would be dank

User avatar
Doinize
Lieutenant
Posts: 1433
Joined: Tue 30 Jul 2013 13:14
Contact:

Re: CIA Tank FCS Assesments... and You

Postby Doinize » Fri 20 Jan 2017 10:50

Killertomato wrote:Apparently, some AMX-30Bs were fitted with battlefield radars. Exceptional optics recon tank, anyone?


rr comabt recon should not have more than VG optics.
Image

User avatar
Akkku
First Sergeant
Posts: 209
Joined: Wed 9 Nov 2016 17:03

Re: CIA Tank FCS Assesments... and You

Postby Akkku » Fri 20 Jan 2017 11:30

More cancerous radar recons is the last thing this game needs.
President of Eugen

Oktoberfest
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 987
Joined: Wed 23 Oct 2013 09:01
Contact:

Re: CIA Tank FCS Assesments... and You

Postby Oktoberfest » Fri 20 Jan 2017 12:22

Akkku wrote:More cancerous radar recons is the last thing this game needs.


Radar recon on a 6 AV tank with (currently) 12AP gun (should be 15) is WAAAY below the capacity of rival recon tanks available in other nations.

But it would be limited to very good optics as France already have the RASIT.

User avatar
HrcAk47
Colonel
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat 3 May 2014 18:00
Contact:

Re: CIA Tank FCS Assesments... and You

Postby HrcAk47 » Fri 20 Jan 2017 12:27

I would like an AMX-30 variant with radar. It is self-limiting by nostabs and weak armor.
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

User avatar
Akkku
First Sergeant
Posts: 209
Joined: Wed 9 Nov 2016 17:03

Re: CIA Tank FCS Assesments... and You

Postby Akkku » Fri 20 Jan 2017 12:38

Oktoberfest wrote:
Akkku wrote:More cancerous radar recons is the last thing this game needs.


Radar recon on a 6 AV tank with (currently) 12AP gun (should be 15) is WAAAY below the capacity of rival recon tanks available in other nations.

But it would be limited to very good optics as France already have the RASIT.

The problem with radar recon is that they get good stealth, simply because they are in the recon tab, when in reality their active radar gives their position away and they should have the worst stealth value. That's so backwards.
President of Eugen

User avatar
Doinize
Lieutenant
Posts: 1433
Joined: Tue 30 Jul 2013 13:14
Contact:

Re: CIA Tank FCS Assesments... and You

Postby Doinize » Fri 20 Jan 2017 14:08

Oktoberfest wrote:
Akkku wrote:More cancerous radar recons is the last thing this game needs.


Radar recon on a 6 AV tank with (currently) 12AP gun (should be 15) is WAAAY below the capacity of rival recon tanks available in other nations.

But it would be limited to very good optics as France already have the RASIT.


Yeah it certainly wouldnt be OP or anything, the AMX 30B is just a shit tank, it neither has the AV or AP to do the sort of damage that makes recon tanks a bit of a problem...
A radar justifies EX optics, with that the thing would cost around 80-90 points (if my math is correct)...
An exeptional recon unit thats neither durable nor packs a punch for the price of at least two VG units...

It wouldnt be OP, because it would be fucking useless.
Image

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 guests