My experience in SBPro PE shows they are twofold more accurate than 35 mm and 40 mm guns which seems to be hardly true in real life.



Your statement is ridiculous. You forgot modern FCS has thermal sight with large electronic zoom included so spotting and tracking moving targets is much easier. Well, some most advanced FCS can also track target automatically! Tracked target can be killed in a matter of seconds. On the other hand BMP-1/2s lack all these features.



Not entire BMP frontal aspect is protected by engine compartment.



We have found new AI bug!



Of course this gun can do some damage - unfortunately hitting something is possible only at 500 meter or closer distance.



The problem is BMP cannot use anything else against most targets except a few carried ATGMs.



Russian MoD and military officials claimed that BMP-3 is a crap and Greece did not buy BMP-3. Later it was ordered to stop acquiring many Soviet-era armored vehicles and now Russia is trying to develop brand-new concepts like Armada tanks and so on.

Have you ever been on an IFV? Tried to spot them when doing recon?
Do you now how to manuver?

Do you deny mentioned features and capabilities of most modern fire control systems?

In all the quoted cases - Bushmaster I, III, III, and Bofors L/70 gun, the dispersion figures are established with pretty high confidence (that is, from actual firing tables, or from development specifications given by the respective army customers). Unless you think that these armies were deliberately feeding us with false data, these are the results. Like them or not.

For public sources, see Jane's Ammunition Handbook issue 2009, page 262: Mecar 25mm x 137 M935 APFSDS, dispersion "less than .5 mil"
It's up for debate if this is the standarddeviation, or the 50% percentile (which happens to be about 1.05 x std dev ("s")).
In our model, all rounds will fall within 3s (that is, we cap the normal distribution there, so there won't be outliers). That means at 2000m a circular dispersion of 3m RADIUS around the aim point for 99.7% of all rounds, of 2m RADIUS for 95% of all rounds, and about 1m RADIUS for 68% of all shots.
A BMP's frontal silhouette is about 1.40m high and about 3m wide. Therefore, vertically only about 50% of all rounds will actually be in the allowed height bracket (provided that the BMP is actually fully exposed). Horizontally, about 80% of all rounds will be in the acceptable width bracket.
In order to hit, a round must be in both the vertical and horizontal bracket. That applies to only 40% of all rounds. In other words, the majority of all rounds will actually NOT hit at 2000m!

For comparison, Jane's Ammunition Handbook issue 2009,

• page 263:
  Alliant 25mm x 137 M792 HEI-T/SD, .55 x .55mrad
  Alliant 25mm x 137 M791 APDS-T, .30 x .30mrad
  Alliant 25mm x 137 PGU-32/U SAPHEI, .45 x .45mrad
• page 278:
  RO 30mm x 170 L14A2 APDS-T, .5 x .5mil (="half the dispersion of the HE-T round")
• page 281:
  De Kruithoorn 30mm x 173 MPDS, .4 x .4mrad

As you can see, these dispersions are by and large in a similar range. 40mm x 365 are modeled with quite comparable parameters in SB Pro.

So why are you seeing so seemingly different results?
Because your sample size simply is too small. In order to make a high confidence estimate of a standarddeviation parameter, a sample size of 4000 (!) is needed (for a confidence of (just) 95%). Your judgement is based not only on no actual controlled measurements, but even of sample sizes in an order of magnitude of about ten rounds. That simply isn't enough.

The definition of (natural) shot dispersion is that there simply is no way to get around it, except manufacturing ammunition to higher quality standards (which will drive up costs substantially). Sniper cartridges are selected out of regular production batches for particularly small deviations of projectile weight and geometry, and particularly small deviations of the amount of propellant material in a cartridge (among other selector criteria).
That makes them ten times and more costly than a regular round.

There is nothing that a gunner or a fire control system can do about shot dispersion. No matter how accurately you are measuring the range to target, the crosswind along the trajectory, your cant angle, the angular velocity of the target - the only way to achieve laser precision is to use a laser.

Spearfish,

on several issues you give me the impression that you do not differ between how you assume in your imagination how things should be, and how they really are in reality. I would encourage you to go over all answers given to you in this thread, read them again, and while doing so keeping that difference in mind. Lieste and Ssnake have given you far more competently some numbers than I could, and also the basics of statistical calculation. I also remind on the already given feedback on your assumptions about BMPs and how FCS works wonders, or not.

Lean back, take a breath, and relax. The things you mention are not so much issues with SBP, but your expectations not matching reality. For example your senario setup shown in that video: flat terrain, no cover, engagement against BMP from 2000m, no smoke - do not complain that you get eaten there! It's not the CV's fault, or the Bofors', but the commander's!

Reminds me a bit on the discussion thread on the Challenger-2. : stellar expecations versus less uber-glorious reality as described by available data, I mean.

The demo video surely was just that, a video to clearly demonstrate his point - which it did. One shouldn't read too much into this either.

I think Ssnake and others answered your questions and concerns in great detail, and great patience i might add, (I would of hit the ignore button on you long ago... if I was able, lol).

Just my outside view, you seem to either have some hidden agenda or ax to grind on the subject... may I suggest you visit and post at www.steelbeast.com those guys over there are more knowledgeable on the subject matter then us ol regular gamers here at SimHQ.

When did I say that??

You seem to overrate it. The FCS helps a lot when engaging a target. But 1st you must spot the tgt and 2nd you have to be in a position to engage it. While a TIS helps(and nothing more) on the 1st part in low light surroundings...it still can not see through obstacles(hills, woods...houses, you name it). More then once I've popped of 300m in flank/behind an tank or IFV unit during exercises...I can tell you: Their TIS and shiny FCS counts for nothing then.

During daylight a TIS is not that great a help and I usually had most succes in spotting tgts using MK-1 eyeball and ears.

Your statement of a FCS negating ALL other factors(esp. teh advances a small vehicle size brings)is at best an oversimplification or worst...


On the issue of the gun accuracy. Do have anything else then your "feeling" that it should be different?
I also think that the spread in the 40mm and 35mm rounds is big. But hey, my guess is agood as yours.

It would be a shame on esim if they'd change their specs according to players "feelings" or "impressions". That is going the way of "how could your lvl 12 rouge backstab my lvl 15 paladin! the devs should change that!!!"

In all fairness, there's always a possibility that our parameters are wrong, and I am taking these discussions seriously enough to check our work of the past. I made a fundamental error once, I can't rule out that I made another one. I will never insist on the indefensible. If an error was made, it will get corrected.

Of course it's always easier to react to feedback that is specific and factual. But even where that is not the case, I try to keep in mind that someone still may be right about his point. It's not about avoiding mistakes at all costs. It's about how to deal with them once that they are recognized as such.

And that attitude and support is a big part of why I not only bought SBP originally, but will keep paying for upgrades each year. (and the developers keep MAKING upgrades each year!).