Army equipment that should have seen service

Hi everyone!

This thread is similar to the "Ships or Aircrafts that should have seen service", but involves this time Army equipment: guns, calibers/cartridges/ammo, AFVs, helicopters or any army aviation aircraft, if you have this much knowledge even electronic equipment like radars!

It can be equipment that is outright better than what was procured instead, replacements that should have happened but never did, or just equipment that adds new capabilities to the country getting it. Alternatively they can be equipment modifications. Ideally these proposals may be grounded in reality regarding budgets, or something a country had the intention to procure but didn't, so something plausible if you can. Or you can have fun!

An example from me: The BGM-71 TOW missile should have kept a 152mm warhead instead of the 127mm one of the early models. This reduction in caliber had been made at first to control the weight of the missile. However this also limited the actual penetration so much so that the missile actually had trouble defeating the composite armor of T-64 or T-72 tanks of the era. Moreover the weight reduction actually was fairly low, only around a kg or less. If, as I assume, the 152mm warhead was more powerful, then it would make sense to keep this warhead in spite of the heavier one. Given that TOW-2 and later went back to a 152mm warhead that shouldn't be hard to achieve.
 
Let me write something before wiking does it ;) Obviously, I'd start with ww2 gear.
- a 'double-size' MG FFM - about 25mm, 200 g M-shell @ 700 m/s, 550 rd/min, 50 kg, for aircraft
- 'MK 105' - 30mm, 330g M-shell @ 750 m/s, 500 rd/min, 100 kg, for aircraft and as Flak;
- 88mm gun-howitzer and AT gun; 128mm gun-howitzer and AT gun that uses Naval round, same ammo for Flak
- light gun that uses 81mm mortar round (not unlike the PAW 600)
- M1 Garand designed around .250-3000 cartridge and with a detachable 15 rd box mag, accompanied with a full-auto version with a heavier barrel and with 30 rd mag
- M1 Carbine always as full-auto, with muzzle brake and good stock, cartridge being the .25 in
- a full-auto SKS with 30 rd mag
- G3 and FN FAL designed around .250-3000
- UK- and US-made Oerlikon FFL instead of Hispano

More later :)
 
The British Rifle No9, adopted in 1952, Killed by the American insistence on NATO adopting a full power rifle cartridge. We all know how that panned out!!
1584555025675.png
 
During WWI a single Whippet Medium tank was converted to have suspension and a Rolls Royce Eagle engine. It could do 30 mph but the project was killed off due to the expense. It would have been interesting to see all surviving Whippets given the same conversion post war.
1584556335867.png
 
Last edited:
While certainly an interesting weapon it might have been a bust given that it was a first generation bullpup and might not have done great in field conditions.
It was definitely a bit too complicated and expensive. A FAL in .270 British would be good and you still get a shorter and lighter weapon over the OTL FAL. It would also still be standardized. As a sidenote if .270 gets adopted it implies the US chose the cartridge too.
 
The US adopts the FN-FAL instead of the M-14. A small number of FALs were made by Harrington & Richardson for trials purposes, and performed well, but failed due to the "not made here" syndrome.
 
It was definitely a bit too complicated and expensive. A FAL in .270 British would be good and you still get a shorter and lighter weapon over the OTL FAL. It would also still be standardized. As a sidenote if .270 gets adopted it implies the US chose the cartridge too.
I think you mean .280. The .270 died very early in the process.
 
Partially because the US wanted a hotter round but I'm talking about 7mm British in general.
The .270=6.8mm not 7mm.
The .280 was the 7mm, they just rounded up the inches to make it seem bigger for US consumption. Frankly the Brits should have just adopted the US 126 grain .276 Pedersen bullet for their .280 cartridge.
 
Last edited:
To continue:
- a decent LMG for Italians in ww2, be it in 6,5mm or in 7,35
- British army 'piggybacks' on the naval 6pdr 10cwt instead of making their own separate design; the 3pdr Vickers instead of the 2pdr, later with Littlejohn adapter
- a 'magnum 25 pdr' as gun-howitzer and AT gun
- French continue with 8mm Ribeyrolles
- a Flak designed around the hotter, Kriegsmarine 3,7cm round for Germany
- a 2-engined version of the AH-56 Cheyenne
- the Mi-8/Puma/Chinook/etc. with pusher prop
- an APC and SP 25pdr on a hull based on Vickers light tank
- Vickers light tank armed with 3pdr as tank-buster
 

Driftless

Donor
My old standby for this kind of thread.....

T-92 Light Tank (USA)

Innovative, very low profile design, with front engine and rear hatch. It could have spawned other vehicles (air-portable SPG, mortar carrier, TOW launcher, etc) Similar in concept to the later British FV101 series that serve ably for two decades.

The T-92 got pushed to the side by US Army concern that the Soviets were fielding an amphibious light tank. The T-92 was eventually superceded by the often troubled M551 Sheridan.
 
Last edited:
Canada should have gotten the Multi-Mission Effects Vehicle, getting rid of the ADATS with no replacement meant that Canada has no AA capability above a MANPAD.
 
The Luftwaffe fields the Heinkel He 277, which had all the advantages of the He-177 without the spontaneously-combusting Engine layout of the latter. A prototype put through flight tests was said to have handling comparable to a fighter.

1584560673328.png
 
The E-5 Rutscher on the Panzer I chassis, but as an assault gun and equipped with a 105mm mortar like the Nebelwerfer 40. Later the French turned the 60mm mortar into a turret gun for their armored cars and now there are a bunch of 120mm smoothbore mortar turreted weapons capable of direct and indirect fire.
 
1584561336301.png


This had possibilities. One with the 3.7" Howitzer used on the close support tanks would have been useful as well.
 
Last edited:
Top