Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Tied

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

Recommended Posts

CROWS-LP is really small, I like it. 

Now they just need to make the loaders's transparent shields fold and the GWOT "tower tank" look will be a thing of the past.

(Also paint them green and send them to Europe to end the decades of tan)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, but Ramlaen suspects it's a new, compact version of the AN/VLQ-12 CREW Duke 3 antenna (the electronic boxes are under armor) or a replacement for it.

 

It's either that or it's an antenna for the upgraded IVIS POS/NAV system. I doubt it's for the JTRS radio, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still, it doesn't look like the RWS can be manually swung sideways much unless the gunner traverses the turret or the commander climbs out of his hatch and kneels next to the CITV turret. I guess he has to button down and remote-control the RWS to accurately hit a target that stands to the tank's three o'clock or six o'clock? (without traversing the turret - let's say the gunner is busy concentrating on another target)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Renegade334 said:

Still, it doesn't look like the RWS can be manually swung sideways much unless the gunner traverses the turret or the commander climbs out of his hatch and kneels next to the CITV turret. I guess he has to button down and remote-control the RWS to accurately hit a target that stands to the tank's three o'clock or six o'clock? (without traversing the turret - let's say the gunner is busy concentrating on another target)

 

 

You can very much manually traverse the CROWS manually. You don't fire off the side of the tank that's a no-no for any given weapon system unless it's a emergency. If you're having to shoot off your six of clock you're probably screwed anyway..... 

Share this post


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

 

 

You can very much manually traverse the CROWS manually. You don't fire off the side of the tank that's a no-no for any given weapon system unless it's a emergency. If you're having to shoot off your six of clock you're probably screwed anyway..... 

 

In an ideal scenario, yes, the gunner would traverse the turret in the direction of the threat and the commander can simply fire the forward-facing CROWS, but you can't expect every situation to be to your advantage. Urban combat, for example, can be extremely unpredictable with threats popping up anywhere at any angle because of the large amount of cover (I know you're going to argue that the tank commander should know better than roll into a locale where he can get boxed in, but for argument's sake, please bear with me). True, one would first assume the infantry would be the one to provide fire support in such cases, but again...we assume everything is going by the book and no bad surprises happen like with the T-72 below, which was hit on the right flank by a RPG-29:

Spoiler

 

 

Additionally, what happens if the CROWS' cameras are damaged/disabled and only manual operation is left? That doghouse mount becomes kind of a handicap as it restricts the manual traversing angle (without the commander climbing out of his hatch, I mean), doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't just turn the turret to face the threat you turn the whole tank to face the threat. Worst case scenario most TC's would just have the driver orient thank tank so he has an angle on the target. Also Taking on threats from multiple angles is why you have wing men.  Remember tanks always fight in a section as part of a Platoon (4 tanks). Each tank has a sector of fire to cover which in turn covers roughly from 10-2 on the clock. If you're getting shot by anything under that you're kinda fucked. Trying to base things off getting shot in the ass which is already bad business to begin is kinda silly. 

 

edit: Main reason why the CROWS on top of the dog house is so the TC can reach it with his hands from the TC's hatch and can load, unload and perform immediate action if necessary. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's one from my personal way back machine. Bon Jovi on a tank, 5/77 Armor, Mannheim Germany, 1984. We had a guy in our battalion, Terry Svejda, that was always going on about how he "knew" people in the music business. His dad owned a few music store in Chicago. He was a huge KISS fan and they were touring Europe, and he said he was going to get them to come visit our unit. Turns out he just got the opening band, Bon Jovi. 

 

2rpue4x.jpg

 

Terry is standing on the right in the black jacket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Renegade334 said:

Not the first time we see this kind of graphics. Last one I saw was a Abrams with the Trophy sponsons (early concept) but no armor pack either. Not sure what's the purpose behind leaving out the HAP-3/NGAP cavities.

 

Showing that it's possible to stuff all kind on armor package on those emplacement would be my guess.

The image probably come from a random presentation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, calling all people who actually know what they're talking about:

 

 

@N-L-M and I were debating whether the torsion bars on tanks with torsion bar suspension are interchangeable.  I pointed out that according to this article, the torsion bars of the Leopard 1 are deferentially pre-stressed.  Also, that the Tiger I had non-uniform torsion bar diameters.

 

N-L-M retorted that those are German tanks, and therefore anything silly and over-complex that they do is not necessarily reflective of other tanks generally.

 

 

 

So, anyone who knows, how interchangeable are the torsion bars on the different road wheel stations on a tank?

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...