Probably still useful even in late 80s? given how many m60 and leopard were in service
Alternative History Armoured Fighting Vehicles Part 3
- Thread starter Claymore
- Start date
- Status
It was in too limited numbers to be really useful. Kruschev believed in nuclear forces so a lot of promising armour vehicles were largely abandoned. Personally I doubt it would have been all that useful, they would have been better spending money on developing a proper heavy tank...
Honestly unless we get the whole Russian archive system dumped in a western nation its going to be hard to figure out things given the nature of Russia and the Soviet Union.
Yep, the Soviets produced enough MBTs and heavies to afford to skip a casemated tank.
There was only a brief proposal for the Kugelblitz, all other small radars were only used in naval mounts.
Source
From that, the discussion indicates it was likely the Rettin radar system, which was only trialled on a static mount, and only with 2 cm guns (it was a strange location to mount the radar dish):
Source: 2cm Flakvierling 38 Rettin 00 by Calum Melrose, on Flickr
More details also found here.
The only other small radars mounted on the actual guns (not just the directors next to them) were the radars used on 40 mm Bofors and 3"/50 guns on naval mounts, for the US it was the Mark 26 radar used on the Mark 63 director (similar to the Mark 51 but on the gun itself):
Source
That's for the 3"/50, the Bofors 40 mm Mark 4 mounting also had a similar variant. But both of these were likely post-war (the 3"/50 was certainly a postwar gun). The British similarly had the 40 mm STAAG mounting with a Mark 262 radar, but this was also likely post-war. The only radar-equipped naval mount to see service for much of WW2 was the STAAG's predecessor, the Mk IV Hazemeyer mount with a Mark 282 radar:
Source
It was the most advanced mount at the time, but unreliable.
Those are torsion bars, so they don't fit into the "springs equivalent to straight-line forces" classification. They are, however, the only type of torsion bar external to the hull, as well as the only type that suspended 2 wheels for each torsion bar instead of 1.Also, you had the Porsche geared units, description here
Porsche Suspension
A blog about World War II era archive documents, primarily dealing with armoured warfare.www.tankarchives.ca
Wasn't later discovered that the German night fighters were using the signals from this system to home in?
Perhaps this gets discovered and the system abandoned by Bomber Command
And / or statistically it is found that 'unarmed' Lancaster's with the turrets removed and fewer crews making them faster etc were more likely to return from missions (Leonard Cheshire allowed his crews to do this when he was a Wing Commander) and as a result Bomber Command start to send unarmed Lancaster's
In OTL the German night fighters were homing in on the village inn radars used on the tail turrets. More importantly the German's were able to track the H2S radar signal virtually from the time the bombers took off. RAF Electronic discipline was a disaster. Statistically the most important defence turret RAF heavy bombers was the stern turret. Both the Mid upper and front turrets were not worth the weight and the drag.
How about this as an ATL?
In Vietnam, the Marines were very pleased with their M50 Ontos. It could travel where bigger tanks couldn't, and had impressive firepower. However the Marines (and Army) needed something to lay down suppressive fire where often targets could not be seen due to the dense jungle, (and provide protection to the gunners). Some inventive maintenance troops cobbled up an idea that was quickly “kicked upstairs” and retrofitted in the field. The results were the M50-A1 and A2. The A1 removed four of the cannons (upper two on each side) and replaced them with four M134 Miniguns, like those used as door guns on helicopters. The A2 model removed all cannon and mounted six M134s (this version was nicknamed the “Weedwacker”). These models were a big success, used to defend fire bases and airfields, as well as point suppression. The VC and NVA feared them greatly after suffering some terrible losses during assaults on on US bases. Quickly the types were modified to have the mini gun ammo boxes inside the chassis. An M3 model was also developed mounting two or four M12 20mm gun pods.
Sorry I don’t have the tools (or skills) to draw them.
ric350
In Vietnam, the Marines were very pleased with their M50 Ontos. It could travel where bigger tanks couldn't, and had impressive firepower. However the Marines (and Army) needed something to lay down suppressive fire where often targets could not be seen due to the dense jungle, (and provide protection to the gunners). Some inventive maintenance troops cobbled up an idea that was quickly “kicked upstairs” and retrofitted in the field. The results were the M50-A1 and A2. The A1 removed four of the cannons (upper two on each side) and replaced them with four M134 Miniguns, like those used as door guns on helicopters. The A2 model removed all cannon and mounted six M134s (this version was nicknamed the “Weedwacker”). These models were a big success, used to defend fire bases and airfields, as well as point suppression. The VC and NVA feared them greatly after suffering some terrible losses during assaults on on US bases. Quickly the types were modified to have the mini gun ammo boxes inside the chassis. An M3 model was also developed mounting two or four M12 20mm gun pods.
Sorry I don’t have the tools (or skills) to draw them.
ric350
marathag
Banned
Knew a guy who was on subs in the Pacific from 1941, started in an SBoat, ended in the Fleet boats with Radar.
He described Radar very simply. You have eyes, that's like your microwave radio receiver.
Your Radar Transmitter, that like a flashlight.
In a dark room, everyone with eyes open, can tell when you flip that Radar on.
Radar Receiversas mostly passive devices, while Transmitter is active, broadcasting Radiowaves.even though not on the exact wavelength, you will get indicated signal that someone is broadcasting, and can tune to get an estimated heading.
So he said the game was, don't turn on the Radar Transmitter till ready to open fire
Yes quite
I recall that even as late as 1942 it was still very misunderstood - for example at 1st Savo it was treated exactly like a flashlight in a dark room when perhaps it should not have been!
On an SS definitely only used absolutely only when necessary
Does anyone knows someone where I could commission the designing of a fictional tank for my project ? Preferrably ones who has been in the military.
No, that's not the kind of problem I have :/ I can do it as well, it the drawing/design/excetera part that I need.
I thought @Claymore might have worked on something like this before, so I had a look at the completed models thread.
Updated Stug design
Now that we know it's possible to design a 1980s style StuG, the next challenge is to see what else would fit on a similar type of mounting. Would an assault gun version of this be more cool than credible?
M110
I don't have a line drawing of a mini-gun but I do have a 20mm Vulcan but unfortunately not a front view pic.
This should give you a rough idea of what your idea would look like.
I personally think this would've torn up the jungles of Vietnam most efficiently.
- Status