SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post - Why the Iraqis had a problem with US tanks at night

Skybird · 07-26-12, 11:57 AM

More feedback was given, and by actual and former Abrams tankers. The two main points:

The claimed connection/link between the ballistic computer and the TC's .50 is bollocks (as I silently assumed, but I did not know it for sure and so dfid not comment). The gunner can give verbal feedback on range (from lasing the TC'S targhet with hgis own sights, and calling out the number) to help the TC adjusting the elevation of the MG, but that's it. - The gunner using the coax by his own sights, that is somethign totally different now. But the coax has even more dispersion, I believe I remember to have read that somewehre, and to the layman that I am that makes sence: it is a smaller callibre.

The TC's .50 is an area supression weapon, they say. First salvo hits have been reported - but not beyond 600 m, and only at targets the size of a truck. Beyond that, repeated salvos are almost guaranteed to be needed, correcting after each salvo.

The mounting on a Abrams, it was also said, does not compare to the stabilised, solid attitude the gun is provided with when using a dedicated tripod for sniping. There is too much vibration, even clearance. - And as was already said: ammunition with less dispersion, and scopes.

If there still are doubts about these doubts about that original story, I have nothing more to say on that and I would recommend you head over to their forum and engage the guys there. Some of them did and still do all that tanking stuff in real life.

07-26-12, 11:57 AM	#10
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,663 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	More feedback was given, and by actual and former Abrams tankers. The two main points: The claimed connection/link between the ballistic computer and the TC's .50 is bollocks (as I silently assumed, but I did not know it for sure and so dfid not comment). The gunner can give verbal feedback on range (from lasing the TC'S targhet with hgis own sights, and calling out the number) to help the TC adjusting the elevation of the MG, but that's it. - The gunner using the coax by his own sights, that is somethign totally different now. But the coax has even more dispersion, I believe I remember to have read that somewehre, and to the layman that I am that makes sence: it is a smaller callibre. The TC's .50 is an area supression weapon, they say. First salvo hits have been reported - but not beyond 600 m, and only at targets the size of a truck. Beyond that, repeated salvos are almost guaranteed to be needed, correcting after each salvo. The mounting on a Abrams, it was also said, does not compare to the stabilised, solid attitude the gun is provided with when using a dedicated tripod for sniping. There is too much vibration, even clearance. - And as was already said: ammunition with less dispersion, and scopes. If there still are doubts about these doubts about that original story, I have nothing more to say on that and I would recommend you head over to their forum and engage the guys there. Some of them did and still do all that tanking stuff in real life. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.