Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Tied

United States Military Vehicle General: Guns, G*vins, and Gas Turbines

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

Is it just me or does the idea of a pick-up truck made by volkswagon make you want to puke in your mouth a little?  I'm sorry, it's not a pick-up truck, it's a "lifestyle utility vehicle."

 

https://www.engadget.com/2018/03/28/volkswagen-goes-full-america-with-its-truck-concept/#/

 

A truck for show and not hauling a load of something that would get it dirty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ramlaen said:

 

So many US SHORAD systems being looked at and tested right now has me a bit amiss on what might actually be adopted.  This is the first time I think I've seen the above, and I want to say there's two other systems based on the JLTV (one similar to the above and the other with the Avenger turret.)

 

But I suppose another thread here might be more appropriate to continue in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

DSArdVp.jpg

 

Grease gun in service far past when it should have been.

It's not like they really wear out.  

(or saw enough use to wear out).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Meplat said:

It's not like they really wear out.  

(or saw enough use to wear out).

 

I suppose so.  Ian seemed to like it well enough in his Forgotten Weapons video where he fired one.  I suppose it's a better option than a pistol.   How many grease guns were US tanks equipped with?  I seem to remember reading that during the Iraq war that US tankers only had two M4 carbines per vehicle, meaning two of the crew had to use pistols if they were operating dismounted.  Am I remembering this correctly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

I suppose so.  Ian seemed to like it well enough in his Forgotten Weapons video where he fired one.  I suppose it's a better option than a pistol.   How many grease guns were US tanks equipped with?  I seem to remember reading that during the Iraq war that US tankers only had two M4 carbines per vehicle, meaning two of the crew had to use pistols if they were operating dismounted.  Am I remembering this correctly?

 

I remember speaking with a M1 crewman who said the same thing. He also said it just depends on the crew. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

I suppose so.  Ian seemed to like it well enough in his Forgotten Weapons video where he fired one.  I suppose it's a better option than a pistol.   How many grease guns were US tanks equipped with?  I seem to remember reading that during the Iraq war that US tankers only had two M4 carbines per vehicle, meaning two of the crew had to use pistols if they were operating dismounted.  Am I remembering this correctly?

At least one, usually near the driver.  I used to (used to) have a few  "loadout" books describing what was authorized/required on U.S. armor dating from the early 80's, and I remember just about every armored vehicle seemed to have one M3A1 stowed.  (Lesson for the day-"Don't loan out manuals, regardless of how mundane. People will run off with the weirdest shit").

 

I still have some docs for the M88 ARV, and it shows stowage for the M3A1.

 

As to the piece,( other than the mags,) they are one of the simplest SMG's you could hand to a poorly/hastily/utterly uninterested in learning how to use it  individual, and have it still be reasonably effective.

 

The mags are a dual column,single feed, which makes loading them a pain. Luckily, the loading tool is a part of the gun.  As is the cleaning rod, barrel wrench, oil bottle, etc..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly, we were issued 2 M3A1s per tank. I swear that picture could have been from a unit I was in. At least we did look like that in 1984 when I was in Germany, C Co 1/70 AR part of 4th BDE 4th ID in Wiesbaden. Dirty winter coveralls and rubber boots, check.

 

We had a M3A1 get eaten by the turret monster once, bent it to about a 90 degree angle. Turned it in to the armorer, he just shrugged and told us that they wouldn't even charge us for the damages. The grease gun was so cheap the Army didn't care if one was destroyed.

 

Another time I was in a small arms demonstration class (in1987) and got into an argument with the sergeant instructor about the grease gun, he was saying that they weren't in use any more, & I was telling him that I was issued one just a few months earlier. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever wrote this article seems to have a misguided impression of how the M7 was used; https://dailygazette.com/article/2018/04/09/m7-day-75th-anniversary-of-schenectady-s-wartime-celebration



The British needed a weapon that could contend with the German army's fearsome 88-millimeter gun. ALCO, which& was already building medium-sized tanks for the Allies, began turning out the M7.

The tank killer offered fury and power: The 105-millimeter gun could hit targets 7 miles away.

 

 



The M7s were an immediate hit with the Allies -- especially after their guns began hitting German tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yikes. It took me a while to work through the confusion while going through the article:

  • But that picture is a Sherman, not an M7 tank.
  • But the M7 tank was an International Harvester product, not ALCO.
  • But the M7 tank was armed with the 75 mm gun M3, not a 105 mm gun.
  • But that picture is of a howitzer motor carri...oh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By Mighty_Zuk
      I realized we don't have a topic for a proper discussion of what future AFVs should look like, in the style of a general AFVs discussion rather than country-specific threads.
       
      I spotted a revived potential need for future MBTs - a coaxial autocannon to replace the coaxial MG. The reason? An APS neutralizer. 
      Here's my short post on why I think it should happen:
       
      I didn't add it there, but I see lasers as a potential alternative. However, I don't think they're viable because of the power required to properly neutralize an APS's components, especially if these components are dispersed, or worse yet, effectively camouflaged. An autocannon will be able to disable not only the APS but other external components all at once. 
      Similar to the engagement method showcased by Russia where they fired 2 Kornet missiles (almost) simultaneously to defeat an APS, a hypothetical mode of operation could include firing a burst of 2 KETF shells at a target prior to firing a main gun shell.
       
      An additional alternative could be to use a single main gun ABM shell that would initiate outside the scope of the APS's engagement range (e.g engagement range is 30m so it initiates at 50m), but it would have 2 main issues that are a longer time to kill a target and a greater consumption of ammunition (up to a 3rd of ammo would have to be allocated to ABM munitions strictly for anti-armor operations).
    • By Sturgeon
      I'll start off with a couple Pathe videos:


       

       

       

    • By EnsignExpendable
      Volketten on the WoT forums posted some XM-1 trials results.
       
       
      Compare this to what the Americans claimed the XM1 will do:
       

       
      Seems like the XM1 really didn't earn that checkmark-plus in mobility or protection. 
       
    • By JNT11593
      So National Geographic has a mini series airing right now called The Long Road Home. I'm curious if any else is watching it right now. The show is about black Friday, and the beginning of the siege of sadr city in 2004. It's filmed at Fort Hood with cooperation from the U.S. Army so it features a lot of authentic armor. The first couple of episodes feature Bradleys quite heavily, and starting with episode 4 it looks like Abrams starting getting more screen time. It's pretty cool if you want to see some authentic tanks and vehicles as long as you can stand some cheesiness and army wife shit.
       
      Edit: Just realized I posted to the wrong board.
       
×
×
  • Create New...