Question about M163 Vulcan

[exsonic01]

Currently, M163 ADS in AB has 2000m max range. But I read the max range should be 5000m, and effective range should be 2000m. Isn't it? How do you think?

[CapnDarwin]

That max range is set the gun up at 45 degrees and fire a shell and in a parabolic arc, it will fly out 5000m and hit the ground, not engage a target moving at altitude. The M163 and the ZSU-23/4 both have muzzle velocities in the 1000m/s range and can engage a flying target out to about 2000-2500m with any effectiveness. Hope that makes sense. [8D]

[exsonic01]

Hmm I was thinking of harassing fire to scare the choppers out of the position, which should be available within max range. It doesn't need to be perfect shot, I was thinking of "close enough shot" or suppressing fire to force gunships to move their position to break LoS or SACLOS guidance. But not sure if such things are written in manual, but technically possible IMO. Thanks to let me know anyway.

[nikolas93TS]

The US Army Concept Team In Vietnam (ACTIV) sent several XM163 units to Vietnam for evaluation in a live-fire combat environment. This was not only to see how effective it was against enemy air targets, but also to see how effective the system was against ground targets. The results of this evaluation are recorded in the ACTIV final report on the XM163 Vulcan Air Defense System; this report includes the mention of six targets engaged at ranges above 2500 metres (out of one hundred and ten), and a further eight targets engaged at a range of between 2000 to 2500 metres. Those were indirect intelligence and interdiction missions, which is not surprising given the highly parabolic trajectory and high dispersion at such ranges.

US ADA commentary from 1985 I have consulted gives effective range of M163 VADS against aerial targets as 1200m. Mike Guardia's book on SPAAGs of the Soviet Union gives an interesting comparison with Shilka: at 1000m against F-4 target, firing 40-round burst, ZSU-23-4 has a kill-per-burst probability of 0.13; M163 VADS firing at MiG-21 target under same conditions has the kill-per-burst probability of only 0.08. In field tests against helicopters, it was noted ZSU-23-4 accuracy dropped considerably beyond 2,500 meters. Given the significant range margin of benefit of helicopter ATGMs, it would be very unwise to expose your SPAAG at ranges beyond 3,000 for harassing fire (as kill chance would be exceptionally low). Given the lack of radar and smaller range of 20mm shells (maximum range of 23mm is noted at 7,000m compared to 4,000-5,000m for 20mm) such no-engage range would be even lower for M163 VADS.

Another issue is that in-game, there is no different maximum range vs. ground and vs. air. While accuracy algorithms are different for two target types, units would still engage with inefficient ground fires. Plus, it would be hard to explain how 20mm can fire further than 105mm or even 120mm gun with FCS, and we would need to revise all anti-aircraft guns (and those in 30mm+ calibre tend to be the murkiest in this effective vs. maximum range discussion).

[exsonic01]

I got it, thanks for the explanations.

Another issue is that in-game, there is no different maximum range vs. ground and vs. air. While accuracy algorithms are different for two target types, units would still engage with inefficient ground fires. Plus, it would be hard to explain how 20mm can fire further than 105mm or even 120mm gun with FCS, and we would need to revise all anti-aircraft guns (and those in 30mm+ calibre tend to be the murkiest in this effective vs. maximum range discussion).

Sounds like a great plan!! I agree distinguishing air/ground target for all weapons are important in many ways.

[nikolas93TS]

Sorry, I think you misunderstood. There is no such plan, and I don't see much benefit in making it. There are already two different accuracy algorithms to distinguish between two different target types and most other games use same ranges for both.