Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

M-84 ws M1A1

Discussion in 'Post-World War 2 Armour' started by sinissa, Dec 30, 2006.

  1. sinissa

    sinissa New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    570
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Actualy tank crews r usualy smaller mans,not taller then 175 cm,but that was not the rule.Im 193cm and i can fit in M-84,but i dont know how i can act in longer engagments.Bouth doctrines got their advantages and flaws,and depends of terain what will proowe betther.Dont forget that 1 man+ is bigger turet,heawyer tank and slower,and naturaly bigger target.If u ask me,perfect tank will be 1m tall,with no crew and gun enough powerwfull to blast any otther conventional tank :bang: but that is SF for now :cool:
     
  2. Jens Knudsen

    Jens Knudsen New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    331
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Denmark
    via TanksinWW2
    hmm....the same on-going discussion about which tank is better, today it mostly come down to the crew of the tank, you can have the best tank in the world but would not be any good if the crew s**k using it....

    I would anytime goes for a tank with 4 crew members, since 4 pairs of eyes see better the 3 pairs and to see the enemy is importen if you want to kill him

    The most powerful weapon in a war is not the tanks, its information, know where you enemy are, know what he is up to, know where your own forces are etc. if you know all these things you will have the advantage already before the fighting begins

    So you can have the best tanks in the world, but if the crew s**k and you dont know where to use it so it do most damage on the enemy its no good
     
  3. sinissa

    sinissa New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    570
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Yep,ur completly right,it was shown in arab-israely war.But i dont think that loader see much anyway...:)
     
  4. Jens Knudsen

    Jens Knudsen New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    331
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Denmark
    via TanksinWW2
    the loader does see anything, he has his own periscops and he use them to look out when on the move, he is only busy with the canon when in combat.
    I talked with a guy when I was in the danish army and he was a loader on a Leopard 1A5 (it was before we got Leopard 2A5) and he told me that loading the canon was only one out of many jobs he had, he also had to be looking for enemies while on the move or not in combat, it were only when in combat that he was busy with loading the canon (some of his other jobs were to re-fill the tank with ammo and, together with the gunner, make sure that the canon are in working condition)
     
  5. sinissa

    sinissa New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    570
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    I did not know that fact,tnx for info Jens.
     
  6. smeghead phpbb3

    smeghead phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,269
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Melbourne, Orst-Ray-Lia
    via TanksinWW2
    Are the cannibalistic tendencies of the T-72 autoloader fact or an urban myth? AFAIK tank crews have to be pretty darn careful no matter what tank they're in, and every year tanks all over the world eat hundreds of innocent fingers...

    Is the T-72 actually more dangerous in this respect? Or is it just that the worlds first autoloader (suprisingly!) resulted in the worlds first autoloader related-injury...
     
  7. Gryle

    Gryle New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    148
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Myth. During normal operation there is no reason for the gunner or commander to interact with the autoloader. The only way to get your arm taken off is to move the protective guards out of the way and deliberately put your arm in the path of the shell/charge/rammer. It's a fairly simple device in terms of operation, it's not some killer robotic arm that randomly grabs tubular objects from within the turret to load the gun with.
     
  8. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    "Sir, the enemy tanks are out of ammo"
    "How do you know?"
    "They've fired two arms and a leg at us sir!"

    :lol:
     
  9. sinissa

    sinissa New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    570
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Actualy i newer heard for accident like that,and ur M-84 use auto-loader allso.And i dont see ur point coz u can loose finger if u put it in rifle chamber but why whould u do that?
     
  10. Jens Knudsen

    Jens Knudsen New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    331
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Denmark
    via TanksinWW2
    The auto-loader have been around for maybe 30 years by now, there might have been some problems with it in the begining and accidents where people have lost an arm through the time, but you know accidents happens like with anything else, in most cases its a question about traning and use of the equiment

    But I still go for a human loader, I still think its better to have 4 pairs of eyes to keep a look out for the enemy (special when the enemy can pop-up anywhere with a RPG or other anti-tank weapon)
    There is always a risk that the loader get killed, but it dont prevent the tank from fighting on another from the crew can load the gun, there is also the risk that an auto-loader get damaged and jam and if that prevent you to get to the granats so you can load the gun by hand, then the tank are not much worth anything

    then you might say its better to lost an auto-loader then a human loader, well yes it is, but when you "play" war you risk losing men, so the best would be to not having wars at all
     
  11. Che_Guevara

    Che_Guevara New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Davy Jones's locker
    via TanksinWW2
    Welcome ot the Kindergarten :D

    I´ve painted a picture, hope you like it =)
     
  12. Blaster

    Blaster New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    via TanksinWW2
    I don't think you can away with that, Che Guevara, although I'm done making any explosive outbursts. If one of the mods don't catch you, I'm gonna' ignore this.
     
  13. Ossian phpbb3

    Ossian phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,431
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bonnie Scotland
    via TanksinWW2
    But you didn't ignore it! :roll:
    (Blaster vanishes in a puff of logic)
     
  14. Gryle

    Gryle New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    148
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    You may be right about the extra pair of eyes, it may depend on the situation and nature of the operation I couldn't really say.

    If the loader get killed yes another crew member could take his place, but who? it can't be the driver, and if you load the gun you are presumably going to want to fire it so it can't be the gunner, which only leaves the commander - arguably the most important member of the crew especially if you value having good situational awareness, as would be provided by an extra pair of eyes.

    Not to mention the fact that there is very little room inside most tanks and that the loaders body will most likely still be occupying his position and it's always been very difficult to extract wounded crew from armoured vehicles, and where would you put his body in the meantime?

    If the loader was killed inside the tank then you have a much more serious problem than "who's going to load the gun": Someone just penetrated your armour.

    As to the reliability of autoloaders, the countries that have taken to them show no signs of wanting to give them up. Whether you can get at and load ammunition into the gun in the event of an autoloader failure depends on the design. For example, the T72 has manual cranks to operate the mechanism in the event of a failure of the electromotors and I believe it's possible to just manually load the gun, albeit at a slower rof.

    Yes the autoloader like all mechanical things can get damaged and jam. So can the breach of the gun its loading, so I propose the return of the muzzle loader. :)
     
  15. Che_Guevara

    Che_Guevara New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Davy Jones's locker
    via TanksinWW2
    It was no offense against you, just a joke about the situation. You just made a post and the others react not nice, so it´s not against you.

    Regards,
    Che.
     
  16. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Personally I see this as a humourous comment, not an attack, though it could be seen the other way. I am inclined to allow it to stay, but to ask that this sort of thing is an exception. This ruling will not constitute any kind of precedent for other such pictures/comments.

    Blaste, Che is right, it supports you rather than attacks you.

    And of course, it is such a flattering picture of me! :grin:
     
  17. Jens Knudsen

    Jens Knudsen New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    331
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Denmark
    via TanksinWW2
    I dont know what other countries do in their army, but in the danish army all crew member get some degree of training to operate all positions in the tank (also goes for the rest of the army, all infantry train on all the weapons the infantry have) and they also train for the event that one crew member should get killed/injured, the danish tank uniform is designed to make it easier to evacuate crews from their tanks, there are some straps on the uniform so you can pull the crew member out of the tank.
    and if the tank get penetrated, well then I dont want to sit in it even if it have an auto-loader or a human loader, you usually end up pretty bad then.
    you can much easier replace a crew member then a mechanic thing on your tank.

    so when all come to all, I would much rather have that extra pair of eyes to look out for the enemy, which increase my chance to see him first and then get the first shoot on him, and in modern warfare, its mostly the first shoot that count
     
  18. sinissa

    sinissa New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    570
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Jens,i think when we consider modern AT shells,if u taks is penetreted in turet,where r comander and loader,r just commander (autoloader) i dont think that any of them will suriwe hit.
     
  19. Jens Knudsen

    Jens Knudsen New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    331
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Denmark
    via TanksinWW2
    yes, as said, if your tank get penetrated it does not matter what ever you have an auto-loader or a human loader, you pretty sure to end up in a bad way, the auto-loader will not safe you nor will the human loader

    But I still think that 4 pairs of eyes see more then only 3 pairs of eyes and it much better to see the enemy first then he see you first and with 4 pairs of eyes your chance to see him first is increased simply because you have a extra guy to look out for enemies
     
  20. sinissa

    sinissa New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    570
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Maybe,and what about rates of fire? I dont hawe any reliable information,but i realy doubt that human loader can do faster then autoloader.And that why T series tanks r smaller and lower sillhouette,and harder target to hit.
    Again,compromises:)
     

Share This Page