Canada has used the Carl-G for decades, and the Canadian infantiers I've
talked to about it say it's a good piece of kit, but too heavy - even
the lighter more modern versions.
** To an infanteer, any object is too heavy!
My friend fired one during famil training at an old tank, and the round
bounced off the turret and set fire to some grass on the range.
** Angle of attack can do that to just about any round.
They then had to put the fire out and he was most
unimpressed - particularly since I think the tank he fired it at was an
old
Korean-war vintage Centurian, or something like that... We also use the
US-made LAW, though for some reason I think that the Canadian
*disposable,
one use* LAWs are reloaded - maybe for practice purposes only, but
that's what I was told...
** I've heard this rumor too. Since we reload "disposable" plastic C7
(M-16) mags, this doesn't really come as a shocker.
What we don't have is a good GMS/P - and with the
introduction of the Javelin we're finally getting something that is guided,
but smaller than the TOW...
** And we'll never be able to afford to train with so all the training
(mostly) will be of the "if you were to want to shoot this...." variety. We
don't even do enough training with LAWS, Grenades, and the Carl G
(IMO).
** I wrote some stuff up on GMS/Air based on some previous suggestions
including an Aircraft Action drill for infantry small arms. I'll check it over
then repost the URL.
** If Oerjan is tuned in, or anyone else who knows, I have RR figures from old
BT sets.... gunner and loader. It's like a thinned out Carl G. I'm wondering
what kind of effective ranges the new Carl G claims, and
what kind of penetrations relative to saw an M-72 66mm LAW. (Or even the
LAW-80). ? I want to give these weapons some reasonable stats, and I'm
not sure if they are qualitatively better than an IAVR or if they should
basically be treated as a multi-shot IAVR. Maybe they should have their
RB multiplied by vehicle size class or something?
Tom.
> One of the Tom's wrote:
Sounds like a glancing hit. If it was one of the current HEAT rounds (751 or
551) the angle of attack needs to be very shallow (is that the word? "Very far
from perpendicular to the target surface" is what I'm
trying to say here :-/ ) for the round to bounce off like this.
> What we don't have is a good GMS/P - and with the
variety.
> We don't even do enough training with LAWS, Grenades, and the Carl G
Live fire exercises are expensive, but that's what simulators and training
weapons are for. Not sure how to make a training weapon for a TOW, but the CG
trainers fire rifle or 20mm rounds (and a backblast charge <g>).
> ** If Oerjan is tuned in, or anyone else who knows, I have RR figures
Can't compare with the M-72 or LAW-80 since I don't know their official
stats off-hand, but they're both said to be less effective than the
AT-4 which definitely is an IAVR.
Using IAVR stats for the current CG AT rounds in DSII should be OK. The
warhead is more powerful than 2 chits, but OTOH IAVRs don't roll to hit so you
get about the right Pkill.
However, if you bring the right ammo the CG can *also* be used as a SAW
(firing frag or flechette rounds), to lay smoke or to fire illumination
rounds. In DSII terms, a CG element is probably best represented by an SAW
element (with the normal integral IAVR) able to fire smoke rounds
up to some 16-20". Smoke rounds should be bought separately at a cost
of ~5 per round (due to the short range) per element.
I haven't played enough SGII to come up with an accurate representation of the
CG, but at a guess:
HEAT rounds as IAVRs ("Unguided Rockets"). AP rounds as "light artillery AP
rounds" (burst radius 3", impact D8) against infantry with no effect against
AFVs, but with a lower risk for
deviation within 30" (direct-fire mode) and a higher risk for deviation
beyond that (high elevation of the CG gives *long* ranges, but very poor
accuracy).
Smoke as "light artillery smoke rounds" but with a range of 160-200" or
so; same deviations as for the AP rounds.
Keep track of all rounds in SGII, not just the smoke ones :-/
Best wishes,
Oerjan Ohlson wrote (about Carl Gustavs):
> Using IAVR stats for the current CG AT rounds in DSII should be OK.
The warhead is more powerful than 2 chits, but OTOH IAVRs don't roll to hit so
you get about the right Pkill.
> However, if you bring the right ammo the CG can *also* be used as a
Oerjan, would you also give the same range, about 16"-20", for the CG
antitank round? For DSII, the standard IAVR can only be fired in close
assault, as it has a range of only about 2" or 200 meters, IIRC.