‘A Fistful of TOWs’ (FFoT) is a set of rules for modern miniatures wargaming. It is designed around 6mm (micro armor) scale miniatures with each miniature (or. As I continue to “down scale” I am venturing into 6mm. I remembered trying A Fistful of Tows maybe 10 years ago – a demo ruleset with a strong. A Fistful of TOWs 3 – Free Preview – A free, more comprehensive sample of all the crunchy goodness packed into A Fistful of TOWs 3’s pages.
|Published (Last):||19 April 2015|
|PDF File Size:||10.98 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||11.20 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Scotia Micro Models http: They have, far and away, the most comprehensive range of tlws micro armor of anyone out there. Some pieces, such as their UK Saxons, are very good.
Other, such as some of their French engineering vehicles, are a bit rough. Additionally, Scotia models seem to run small.
The Urban Bunnie’s Ramblings: Fist Full of Tows weekend
It does not appear that any new models have been added in the last two years, although they are still in production and their customer service is excellent.
They also sell a good line of neutral equipment, such as generic towed mm mortars and 20mm Oerlikon AA guns. Typically about 60 cents a model, with large ones a bit more. Shipping from Scotland is surprisingly reasonable. Their Ms are kind of dreadful. Who has the most effective tank in the world continues. The most likely candidates are western tank designs the M1 Abrams, the Challenger, the LeClerc, and the Leopard 2which are much better on a tank-for-tank basis than Russian designs like the T and its descendants the T, T and T Which of these four Western tanks is the best?
Added to combat records, one can see that the French LeClerc drops back on one major issue: It has an autoloader — which is much slower and maintenance-intensive than a year-old private. That leaves the Big Three of Western tanks. The Challenger is slow, but heavily armored. It also has a gun with a longer range in Desert Storm, a Challenger killed an Iraqi tank five kilometers away than either the M1A2 or the Leopard 2. That said, it is much slower than the other two 56 kilometers an hour vs.
The Leopard 2 and Abrams are very similar tanks. The major difference is in the type of engine used. The Leopard 2 uses a diesel engine, while the Abrams used a gas turbine. Each engine has its advantages and disadvantages. That said, the gas turbine on the Abrams is quieter, meaning that opponents without infrared systems will have a harder time detecting the Abrams at night, which can mean their only warning an Abrams is around could be when the Abrams sends a mm candygram their way — most of the time, the result will be a direct hit.
There are smaller differences. The Leopard 2 has two 7.
The Abrams has three: This means it is that much harder for infantry to sneak up on the Abrams than it would be to sneak up on a Leopard. The matter of auxiliary power is another thing not always mentioned in the specs. The Leopard 2 has none. The Abrams features an auxiliary power unit, which allows it to shut off the turbine in some instances, allowing it to conserve fuel. In situations where the Abrams is on defense, this is a huge advantage — not only because the Abrams saves fuel, but because infrared sensors have a harder time picking it up.
Again, the first indication the Abrams is there will be when it fires — and well-trained Abrams crews are very accurate. If you see an Abrams firing at you, it is probably the last thing you will see. The Leopard stores some of its main gun ammunition in the crew compartment, and uses steel as its liner.
While the steel can keep something out, it also creates nasty spall fragments when a sabot or HESH high-explosive squash head round strikes the tank.
The Abrams keeps its main gun ammo in a separate compartment and has a spall liner while using aluminum, reducing casualties when an Abrams is hit. This is important — an uninjured crew can fight dist even if the tank is damaged. This was proven Hows Desert Storm, when an Abrams stuck in the mud continued fighting despite taking three hits from the main guns of Iraqi T tanks — and promptly dispatched the offending Ts.
The tank defied American efforts to destroy it in place, and after being recovered had the turret replaced and was back with its unit in 24 hours. The damaged turret was sent back to the United States for analysis. In short, the Abrams still takes the title overall, despite arguable deficiencies in range which careful logistics planning can overcomeas its combat record proves. I think I agree with Harold, but I’d hasten to add that tlws is very little material diference in FFT terms anyone between these tanks.
It toqs all boil down to troop fll, in my opinion. Another round known fixt the 7N13, chambered for 7. Armor penetration is the same as the 7N10 at meters. Originally these bullets were designed to be used against both armored infantry and light armored vehicles, and test firings have proven that many of these rounds are quite effective at piercing the armor on BTRs and BMPs which are about 5 and 10mm thick.
However, the results against Western-style armored vehicles are not known since Western vehicles have not been used as test subjects, nor have they been encountered in combat. One thing is certain, though, any hostile force with access to this ammunition would make life extremely difficult for troops wearing even high-quality body armor like the Interceptor.
Most small arms still in production by the Russian Federation have some sort of armor-piercing ammunition made for them. The Russians have hinted that they might try to issue the new ammunition to regular soldiers and not just special forces. In addition to its compact size and light weight, the weapon is unique is that it is specifically designed to penetrate body armor. The system consists of a weapons platform mounted on a Talon robot [which] began helping with military operations in Bosnia indeployed to Afghanistan in early and has been in Iraq since the war started, assisting with improvised explosive device detection and removal.
Talon robots have been used in about 20, missions in Iraq and Afghanistan Different weapons can be interchanged on the system — the M16, theor caliber full guns, or the M —A1 with a 6mm rocket fulo. The only margin of error has been in sighting, he added. As early as March or April, 18 units of the Talon — a model armed with automatic weapons — are scheduled to report for duty in Iraq. Around the same time, the first prototypes of a new, unmanned ambulance should vull ready for the Army to start testing.
In a warren of hangar-sized off ballrooms in Orlando, military engineers this week showed off their next generation of robots, as they got the machines ready for the war zone. Santiago Tordillos, waving to the black, 2-foot-six-inch robot rist around the carpeted floor on twin treads, an M machine gun cradled in its mechanical grip. For years, the Pentagon and defense contractors have been toying with the idea of sending armed, unmanned ground vehicles, or UGVs, into battle.
Actually putting together the robots was fisr remarkably straightforward job, said Tordillos, who works in the Army’s Armaments Engineering and Technology Center.
Ordinarily, the Talon bomb-disposal UGV comes equipped fits a mechanical arm, to pick up fisf inspect suspicious objects. More than a hundred of the robots are being used in Iraq and Afghanistan, with an equal amount on order from the UGV’s maker, Waltham, Massachusetts-based firm Foster-Miller.
For this fust, lethal Talon model, Foster-Miller swapped the metal limb for a remote-controlled, camera-equipped, shock-resistant tripod, which the Marines use to fire their guns from hundreds of feet away. The Marines’ version relies on cables to connect weapons and controllers, while the Talon gets its orders to fire from radio signals instead.
Navigating the Pentagon bureaucracy and putting together the proper training manuals are what’s keeping the Talon stateside, for now. Now, tist brigade wants 18 of the UGVs to watch the backs of its Stryker armored vehicles. Four cameras and a pair of night-vision binoculars allow the robot to operate at all times of the fkll. It has a range of about a half-mile in urban areas, more in the open desert.
And with the ability to carry four mm rockets or six mm grenades, as well as an M or M machine gun, the robots can take on additional duties fast, said GlobalSecurity. These things have no family to write home to. You can put them places you’d have a hard time putting a soldier in.
It’s the same goal Army-funded researchers are keeping in mind as they develop an unmanned ambulance. The Robotic Extraction Vehicle, or REV, is a foot-long, 3,pound robot that can tuck a pair of stretchers — and life-support systems — beneath its armored skin.
The idea is for battlefield medics to stabilize injured soldiers, and then send them back to a field hospital in the REV. But the REV also carries an electrically powered, pound, six-wheeled robot with a mechanical arm that can drag a wounded fighter to safety if there isn’t a flesh-and-blood soldier around. Ordinarily, it takes two to four men to get the wounded out of harm’s way. But this early version will be limited, Howe said.
Ideally, the REV would drive around on its own, with no help from human operators. In practice, the robot would either be driven by a person with a joystick, or it would get around by itself by sticking to carefully preplanned routes.
As the limited performances in the Pentagon’s robot off-road rally in March showed, unmanned drivers are still pretty lousy at handling open, unknown terrain.
That’s one of the reasons why iRobot’s new UGV will still have a steering wheel inside, so it can be driven by a human, too. The company — best known for its Roomba robotic vacuum cleaner and the PackBot UGVs that the Army has been using to clear bombs and explore suspected terrorist hideouts in the Middle East — is now working with agricultural equipment manufacturer John Deere to build a cargo-hauling robot.
The M-Gator is a six-wheeled, diesel mini-Jeep that soldiers use to schlep about 1, pounds of gear. IRobot wants to have a robotic version ready by next year, so it can show it off to the Army and try to get funding for a full line of the vehicles, which would work as mechanical pack mules.
The company hopes to be in production by By then, the armed Talon will have been in operation for about a year, if all goes according to plan. And for those of you who might be worried about the robot getting loose with a “runaway gun,” Tordillos orders you to relax. You’ve got to have these,” he said, waving a set of small, silvery keys, which fit into a lock on the Talon’s briefcase-sized controller.
A single switch causes the robot to reboot and return to safe mode.
He’s concerned about what the armed UGV represents for the future. On the one hand, this could make our flesh-and-blood soldiers so hard to get to that traditional war — a match of relatively evenly matched peers — could become a thing of the past,” he said. We could be the ones that wind up looking like Terminators, in the world’s eyes.
One in the nose would detect incoming RPGs and fire off a counterstrike. A second sensor, in the rocket’s side, would go off when the RPG comes within range.
A Fistful of TOWs
The FCLAS would then detonate, letting loose a hail of explosive fragments, destroying the grenade in the process. The whole attack and response would take no more than a few seconds. tods
Friday, February 16, Miniature Painting Videos.