Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I have a few questions about the French FL-11 turret mostly used on the Panhard EBR ad on a few AMX-13 hulls.

  1. How was the turret controlled/driven? By the rotation speed on this video(https://youtu.be/F4aXdDNLgUY) I suspect that at least the horizontal drive was electrically driven.

  2. Did the gunner and TC have a duplicate set of controls?

  3. What were the sights used by the gunner?

Any photos of the interior would be greatly appreciated. I only found some pictures from the PrimePortal, but they do not show much.

jw7I1ef.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2023 at 7:29 PM, Cheburashka said:

How was the turret controlled/driven? By the rotation speed on this video(https://youtu.be/F4aXdDNLgUY) I suspect that at least the horizontal drive was electrically driven.

 

Given that it was a vehicle from the 50's I sincerely doubt that it was electrically driven. An electrical drive will be smoother and have more torque than an hydraulic one, but it won't be inherently faster.

 

The FL-10 turret (long 75 mm) was hydraulic so I see no reason for the similar FL-11 to be any different.

Spoiler

PanhardEBR_FL10_11dujardin1.jpg

 

On 5/2/2023 at 7:29 PM, Cheburashka said:

Did the gunner and TC have a duplicate set of controls?

 

On that topic I won't be categorical, but I very strongly doubt it. The hunter-killer concept came much later around the 80s to 90s (Leopard 2, M1A2, AMX-40) and even later for Soviet/Russian designs. Keep in mind that the original concept behind the EBR dates back to 1938-1939 (The prototype wasn't using the FL-11 turret, but it already was an oscillating one) and was updated and put in production in 1951.

 

https://www.chars-francais.net/2015/index.php/engins-blindes/blindes-a-roues?task=view&id=78

 

Spoiler

p201%2001.jpg

97da4389-7db6-4211-9672-c961db7c437b.jpe

p201%2007.jpg

p201%2006.jpg

 

FCS on tanks weren't even a thing back then (only on ships and some AA guns).

 

On 5/2/2023 at 7:29 PM, Cheburashka said:

What were the sights used by the gunner?

 

APX-L 852 x5,8 direct vision scope + 2 periscopes for situational awareness

2 Iron-sights (one for the commander and one for the gunner) for rough pointing of the gun

8 periscopes for the tank commander

 

https://www.mvcgfrance.org/le-b-r-panhard-mle-51-ou-la-revanche-de-la-roue/

 

As for photos of the interior, there are some of the 90 mm conversion of the FL-11 here, but the turret is in a very bad shape :

 

https://chars-francais.net/2015/index.php/liste-chronologique/de-1945-a-1990?task=view&id=41

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

https://imgur.com/a/xs5pgoN

AMX-30 at the Gunfire museum.
Rather inconsistent, the LFP, mid front plate and a small section of the UFP attached to the mid plate are all cast.
The UFP is made up of about 5 parts, the section close to the nose/midplate, this is one big cast piece together with part of the LFP, then there's a middle section which is just under the driver's hatch, this seems to be made of rolled steel and only about 50mm thick as opposed to the ~65mm cast section, both of these are roughly at 68°.
Then there's two plates next to and around the driver's hatch, this area is also 50mm thick but at about 75°, both of these are probably rolled steel but the one in which the driver's hatch sits has a cutout for the cast driver's hatch.
This hatch is quite weird and has some cavities in the frontal portion where I wrote "15-20" because there seems to be some mechanism on the inside.
For the driver's hatch itself there's about 40mm of cast steel, rather heavy (and perhaps grimed up).

Around the turret ring it's a ~15mm plate, didn't get to check on the engine deck unfortunately.
The rest of the hull is fairly "normal".

The turret is a disaster frankly, the mantlet had lots of cavities and was very hard to measure, the whole roof including the bit above the mantlet is only 20mm thick, it's thickest parts are only around 45mm thick around the rangefinder, all the rest is less, generally between 40 and 30mm.
Rangefinder itself is around 20mm for both the housing and the cover.

I have pictures from the inside as well, the internal height was just 170cm for the loader, his station was rather "crowded and none of the periscopes he has access to are easy to use or see much, the deadzones are probably around 20m or so.

Commander's seat is alright, his main periscope lacked the bottom mirror/periscope bit, but the 360° ones were all there, he has slightly better field of view than the loader, even for the loader's side, but the periscopes were at an uncomfortable height with no more adjustment on the seat to go up.

The gunner's station is very cramped and the main FCS/sighting system wasn't present, he has a side looking periscope which is unusable unless you stand up (quite slippery floor even with boots!), the unity sight same thing and the seat had no real adjustment.
His shoulder was right up against the (depressed) gun and the recoil guard will move with it, perhaps you would get used to it, but it seems rather worrying.
Even though the gun seemed to be fully recoiled and elevated, it was quite difficult to get from one side of the vehicle to the other.

Overall "ergonomics" seem to be almost an afterthought and the armour scheme is quite strange, some areas are not "bad" but many others are simply horrendous.
That 20mm thick angled roof right above the mantlet for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always found the stabilization system on the AMX-32 and early AMX-40 extremely odd. The gun is stabilized by slaving to the commander's SFIM 580, but this sight does not have access to the rangefinder or ballistic corrections of the FCS, so there's still not really an ability to fire on the move. Was the intention just for the commander to slew the gun onto the target while moving and then come to a stop to let the gunner go through the firing sequence?

 

I think they later added a base stabilization to the AMX-40 but it all just seems convoluted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BaronTibere said:

I always found the stabilization system on the AMX-32 and early AMX-40 extremely odd. The gun is stabilized by slaving to the commander's SFIM 580, but this sight does not have access to the rangefinder or ballistic corrections of the FCS, so there's still not really an ability to fire on the move.

 

That's the way I always understood it.

 

1 hour ago, BaronTibere said:

Was the intention just for the commander to slew the gun onto the target while moving and then come to a stop to let the gunner go through the firing sequence?

 

I think so. It is a rudimentary way of having an hunter-killer capability which needs a commander input (preferably from a stabilized sight) that can override the gunner commands and put the gun directly on target without the commander having to hand-over the target to the gunner manually (which takes precious time).

 

The exact definition of an hunter-killer capability depends on who you ask but generally the goal is to shorten the time between target acquisition (commander) and firing on it (gunner or in an emergency directly the commander). More modern system allow the commander to queue targets in the FCS and the gunner can just switch from one to the next with acquisition done (mostly) automatically.

 

It is a capability that most 1st and 2nd (and even some 3rd) gen MBT lacked (The Abrams only acquired it with the A2 version in the 90s for example).

 

The system on the AMX-32/40 allow for shorter firing sequences (less than 10s as stated in the video) and "some kind" of gun stabilization when the tank is moving (by continuously slaving the gun to the commander sight).

 

True it wasn't a full stabilization system since the tank still had to stop for the gunner to fire at longer ranges. But at "combat range" (<1000~1500 m) the commander could just fire on the move without any kind of elevation or (much) lead corrections since at that range an APFSD trajectory is mostly flat and will reach the target in less than 1s (minimal lead corrections required). It allowed the tank to react much faster in case of a close range encounter (assuming that it was the commander who spotted the target).

 

1 hour ago, BaronTibere said:

I think they later added a base stabilization to the AMX-40 but it all just seems convoluted.

 

Well remember that no tank had a full "fire on the move" capability until the 90s anyway. Mostly gun stabilization was a way to allow for a quicker firing sequence after coming to a full stop or was mostly limited to firing only in the frontal arc at a much reduced speed (see below at around 0:50) :

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Alzoc said:

Well remember that no tank had a full "fire on the move" capability until the 90s anyway. Mostly gun stabilization was a way to allow for a quicker firing sequence after coming to a full stop or was mostly limited to firing only in the frontal arc at a much reduced speed (see below at around 0:50) :

That's simply incorrect.
AOS like cadillac-gage stabilisation did allow fire on the move capability, albeit in a limited fashion.
However, vehicles like Leopard 2 and M1 (to a lesser degree) would have no issues firing on the move and were not limited compared to vehicles from the 90s.
Once the "gun follow sights" FCS/stabilisation method was used, the accuracy was more than sufficient to reliably hit targets on the move.

On the WP side similar systems were used as well.

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...