|
|
|
Notices |
Do you own this game? Write a review and let others know how you like it.
|
 |
|

May 16th, 2010, 12:07 AM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Uk
Posts: 3,308
Thanks: 98
Thanked 602 Times in 476 Posts
|
|
Re: T-72b Rogatka
Fail to see the logic here being a helicopter or a ground unit makes zero diffrence to the visibility rating the extra height of the helo does make a diffrence to its fields of view as it can see over stuff the ground unit cant.
What that means is it can make use of its visibility rating far better than the ground unit because any obstacle blocks the view.
Visibility ratings & fields of view are two entirely diffrent things land the helo & it can now see what the comparitvly equipped ground vehicle can see.
Stick the ground vehicle on a level 5 hill & it now has better fields of view than the low flying helo thats now below it skimming over level zero ground.
Yes the helicopter with vis 0 has a blanket over it if global vision dictates, moonless night or fog if you want a blanket, its likely to find a hill abruptly before it finds a target if it tries NOE.
If it goes high its a prime target for any ground unit with vision aids & AA capability.
__________________
John
|

May 16th, 2010, 01:02 AM
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki->City Center->noisy neighbourhood
Posts: 1,359
Thanks: 307
Thanked 128 Times in 87 Posts
|
|
Re: T-72b Rogatka
I didn't expect you to agree with me Imp, but what you said about helos still doesn't change what I said about the specific vehicle.
There is nothing showing that the specific vehicle has better optics/view/whatever you want to call it, than most modern vehicles, including modern gunships. As for the hill example, it works the other way too, place a modern gunship (except 1 or 2 models) on top of that same hill level 5, and it will see less than the khrisantema-s. Based on what?
Again, we are not talking about the range or guidance of the missile, but the view of the VEHICLE in question.
__________________
That's it, keep dancing on the minefield!
|

May 16th, 2010, 02:12 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki->City Center->noisy neighbourhood
Posts: 1,359
Thanks: 307
Thanked 128 Times in 87 Posts
|
|
Re: T-72b Rogatka
This is fruitless. Let's just agree to disagree Marcello.
__________________
That's it, keep dancing on the minefield!
|

June 20th, 2011, 05:40 PM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Poland
Posts: 926
Thanks: 93
Thanked 265 Times in 196 Posts
|
|
Re: T-72b Rogatka
Going back to T-72B Rogatka - the first date 1/06 is doubtful. Tekhnika i Vooruzhenie 8/2007 still treat it as being in development stage. Maybe 1/08. BTW, gun is designated 2A46M5.
PS - I've just found that Russian Wikipedia says, that it is not produced in series (without source).
Michal
|

June 20th, 2011, 08:18 PM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: GWN
Posts: 12,680
Thanks: 4,116
Thanked 5,904 Times in 2,906 Posts
|
|
Re: T-72b Rogatka
The actual gun designation is irrelavantwe do not care about the guns in this case as it's the ammo that advances. The Russian tank guns in the game are set up as combinations of Sabot and HEAT ammunition advancements. In this case the sabot rating goes up over the 125mm Gun 00
Don
|

June 21st, 2011, 10:17 AM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Poland
Posts: 926
Thanks: 93
Thanked 265 Times in 196 Posts
|
|
Re: T-72b Rogatka
I know - this was just by the way, if somebody wanted to change system (M5 is obviously better, than M4  )
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|