Should VRISS/Arena be restored ?

[serg3d]

I'm playing genertaed campain and see my tanks/APC go into battle without VRISS/Arena shots, though they are listed in the unit description. Are VRISS shots not restored in the next battle if spent ? Or number of shots randomly generated before each battle ? Can VRISS be reloaded from ammo carrier ?

[Mobhack]

serg3d said:
I'm playing genertaed campain and see my tanks/APC go into battle without VRISS/Arena shots, though they are listed in the unit description. Are VRISS shots not restored in the next battle if spent ? Or number of shots randomly generated before each battle ? Can VRISS be reloaded from ammo carrier ?



VIRSS/ARENA should be restocked between campaign battles, as with smoke rounds.

I'll investigate this one

Cheers
Andy

[SCAJolly]

Could one implement a feature (I haven't seen it yet) that causes there to be a risk of infantry causalty if a tank with ARENA uses it, while an infantry unit is located in the same hex?

[Pergite]

SCAJolly said:
Could one implement a feature (I haven't seen it yet) that causes there to be a risk of infantry causalty if a tank with ARENA uses it, while an infantry unit is located in the same hex?



The same rule would in that case have to be implemented on regular WPsmoke dischargers and grenades.
http://ww3report.com/phosphorus.jpg

[SCAJolly]

Why so? Not only does the smoke land fifty metres/a hex in front of the unit discharging them, but surely the explosion would be more devastating (and at least cause suppression) than grenades falling in a rookie's head?

[PlasmaKrab]

Do you really think that rapid-blooming chaff/smoke clouds, presumably exploding some meters over the ground, would cause that much suppression on neighbouring troops?
Also consider that VIRSS/smoke pots tend to land some ten meters away from the firing vehicle (any tanker to confirm/correct that?). In a 50m radius hex, the infnatry squad can pretty well be at the opposite corner, or behind the tank, where they will be screened by the smoke, and should therefore feel less suppressed given that the enemy cannot seem them anymore. Also consider that moves less than 50m are not calculated in (missile evasion), so you squad can very wel be warned and move out, or the tank move in front of them while manoeuvring.

Oh, and AFAIK the smoke used is no WP (phosphorous), which tends to be more than dangerous and is used to throw smoke/flares on the enemy's face: see the US M-20 flash launcher for one example: the real thing fires WP ammo.

[Pergite]

SCAJolly said:
Why so? Not only does the smoke land fifty metres/a hex in front of the unit discharging them, but surely the explosion would be more devastating (and at least cause suppression) than grenades falling in a rookie's head?



I meant that the smoke (at least the white phosphorus munition) should cause damage or at least suppression in the hex it lands. We are talking about a rain of burning pieces of metal, that quickly burns through both clothes and skin. (just look at the picture in my last post)

WP grenades was even extensivly used to clear out foxholes and trenches in the Falklands.

[SCAJolly]

Certainly, but that pic looks as if its taken from a larger demonstration. A tank would fire... how many discharges? Four, eight? Spread over such an area, I don't think they'd cause any fear. Rather, if an infantry unit that is suppressed is within the hex of a discharging tank, it would be more neat if the suppression was decreased 2 or 4 points. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Pergite]

SCAJolly said:
Certainly, but that pic looks as if its taken from a larger demonstration. A tank would fire... how many discharges? Four, eight? Spread over such an area, I don't think they'd cause any fear. Rather, if an infantry unit that is suppressed is within the hex of a discharging tank, it would be more neat if the suppression was decreased 2 or 4 points. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif



http://www.mil.se/int/images/local/skjutovn.jpg

I know from experience that it hurts to get burning WP on you, and that it indeed can create terrible wounds, because it burns through everything.

[PlasmaKrab]

I think everyone can agree on that, burning phosphorous is something pretty horrible to be spread with...

But I really don't think phosphorous is used in vehicle-mounted SGDs. The thing must be closer from what is in the hand-held signal smoke pots.
Otherwise why would have some firms designed specific SGD-launched frag warheads for close-in defence, and why would the infantry friendly casualty issue have been raised only with the Arena system?
SGDs have been fitted on vehicles for decades and I haven't ever heard of troops getting phosphorous burns from smoke pots. From flare rounds, yes.
Has anyone anything about that?

[Pergite]

PlasmaKrab said:
...But I really don't think phosphorous is used in vehicle-mounted SGDs...
...Has anyone anything about that?



Its not bright yellow paint that is spewed out in the picture above. But it may just be that its only Sweden that uses WP in the close protection of its armour.

Better picture (http://www.geocities.com/martinsvensson2000/ba07_03.html)


Then we have the artillery and their gigantic smoke rounds, that would indeed hurt... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/fear.gif

[Weasel]

Hi; I am an ex-zipper head (tanker).

The smoke grenades land about 20 meters in front of the vehicle. There is no shrapnel effect from the discharging smoke canisters, and even if you were hit by a canister it would only leave a good lump and bruise at the most.

I am not sure about the VIRSS shot though, we didn't have those on the Leos when I drove.

[Pergite]

Weasel said:
Hi; I am an ex-zipper head (tanker)...

...I am not sure about the VIRSS shot though, we didn't have those on the Leos when I drove.



I think its standard today. Today most smoke dischargers are armed with VIRSS (Visual and InfraRed Smoke Screening System). It offers a 1-2 minute smoke screen 20-50m in front of the vehicle. The smoke itself is thick hot smoke that contains small metal fragments to disrupt even active sensors.

[Stirling]

Shouldn't some of the U.S. vehicles have VIRSS in the oobs, or do we not use it at all?

[PlasmaKrab]

Most modern AFVs have IR-screening smoke pots, but the principle of the VIRSS system in the game is more sophisticated than that.

It is meant to be linked to various sensors (laser warning recievers, flash detectors, milliwave radars...), which automatically detect incoming missiles and spread the smoke layers, plus in some cases high energy flashes or laser jamming.

So it doesn't boil down to advanced smoke pots, but it also needs the whole electronic suit, which many countries haven't fielded yet.

[serg3d]

Some russian systems not just fooling but actually destroying missile. "Shtora" is a pure VRISS. Drozd/Drozd-2 (also reperesented as VRISS in the game ?) is a turret mounted 180 degree system of mortars. Arena is a more interesting device. Mounted on top of the turret it is a ring of vertically launched rockets. Each rocket covereing a part of 360 degree sector. Then incoming missile in the range rocket launched up and warhead shooting projectiles down at the missile. Both Drozd and Arena guided by milliwave radar.

[PlasmaKrab]

Noppe, you are confusing two things: VIRSS is active non-destructive jamming of incoming missiles and firer's sensors.

Drozd and Arena, and any other projectile-destructive device are represented the same way in the game: it is all termed ARENA. Presumably since pivoting the vehicle is not counted as move (don't even ask for it, the code won't be changed on this), the system covering !(= or §&=° makes no difference since the vehicle can point to the new direction immediately.

Anyway I guess you can model this angle difference by assuming the "ARENA 1 shot" is a Drozd-like system, as opposed to the all-around Arena.

[SGTGunn]

US AFV's use 66m smoke grenade dischargers which have to be manually fired. They launch the 66mm L8A1 Red Phosporus grenade, which is a thermal smoke grenade, designed to defeat or at least degrade thermal imaging. The M1 series tank uses two 6 tube M250 launchers - one on either side of the turret. The M2/M3 Bradley IFV, USMC LAV-25, the Stryker family of vehicles, M113A3 all use the 4 barrel M257 launcher. I'm not sure of the incindiary effect of the L8A1's vs. troops, but I've been told they can start fires.

Sgt Gunn (a former 19K)