el cid again -> RE: Editor-Distributed data injection capability? (1/26/2007 5:00:28 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Dili quote:
Just so. And the reason a two man turret is probably superior today is that you no longer need a loader at all. The Japanese autoloader permits 100% higher rate of fire (faster than other system) than we can achieve. There wasnt autoloaders in T-34 or Sherman and there are pros and cons today about 3 or 4 tank crew. First is that the human loader can put the round on the gun fast enough for gunner when changing targets, gives more flexibility and one more pair of eyes and arms , autoloaders dont have all amno ready to fire, one less thing to fail/break in combat. The autoloader advantages are: not afected by loader fatigue; less logistical strain and manpower due to less one crew per tank . T-64/72 were the first MBT to have 3 tank crew and autoloader didnt give them any noticeable advantage. Israel with Merkava 4 have an autoloader but retained the 4 crew. Just for posterity: T-34 and Shermans were comparable tanks. To begin at the end, I agree with you. They both shared the same fault of gasoline power too. They had very comparable weapons - although both eventually mounted a variety of guns. The Sherman was more reliable in long distance conditions. The T-34 was more reliable in very cold conditions. The T-34 introduced a superior concept in turret shape. Protection was roughly comparable - except there were more shell traps on the Sherman - and being taller it was more likely to be hit. The Russian autoloader is actually slower than a manually loaded system. So are others. Only the Japanese one is faster. The fastest time to retarget requires you NOT use our fire control system - or indeed any fire control system: invented by IDF - it is simplicity itself: for any target from minimum range to 3000 meters, do not find the range: use a standard elevation (which always has the shell within 6 inches of a line of sight to that range), put the cross hairs on the target and shoot. Not popular in the US Army, I saw this in action in the Middle East (in a war we were not in - so don't ask what we were doing there)* - and there can be no doubt: the Israelis are right. Shooting faster matters. Which means the Japanese are right - shooting twice as fast - not bothering with complex fire control solutions at all unless the target is above 3000 meters away - is a showstopper. Literally. In one action in Iraq this last time around, a 2 vehicle platoon (one Bradley, one Abhrams) encountered a dug in company of Soviet tanks: before it could be supported by a second platoon the platoon had taken out most of the company. The reason was the deadly effect of the chain gun on the Bradley - using depleted uranium rounds: I never knew you could kill an MBT with those. I happened to "witness" this action as it occurred - although I was not there - a miracle of modern electronics. The action makes me wonder if I might be wrong and Rumsfield right? Maybe we don't need tanks after all - if a Bradley kills them! * When the President of Israel (I didn't even know Israel had a President - he is head of state - sort of like a King is) decided he had to say "thank you" - he wrote a letter - addressed to only two US Navy sailors - in which he said just that - without saying what for! He said "thank you for your sense of closeness during our crisis")
|
|
|
|