>leave the kingtiger to me
>>65175001>a column of IS-2s? >I will take care of that
>>65175001>Churchills? I've seen worse
>>65175001>Abrahams? Consider it done
>Let me have a take at those P-51s
>>65175031looks fun
>Super Pershing?>I'll solo
>>65175031the sovl train
Hungary can into panzer 4
>>65175035i like the effort put into making the text nice
If you want some great vehicles, look up the Spanish Civil war
FAI CNT coming through
Spanish hovercraft?
I come from a world you may not understand
>>65175055Turan me beloved
It really took far too long for bow machineguns to be removed. Especially since the majority the bowgunner had no sights and had to watch tracers through an unmagnifed periscope, that couldn't see the target well anyways.
>>65175083>Especially since the majority the bowgunner had no sightsisn't that just something the US did?German bow gunners had high quality sights and even soviet bow Machine Guns did either have telescopic sights or a iron sight (according to Red Orchestra 2 at least)i still think that removing bow machine guns was a mistake yes i know there is the argument to be made that it weakens the armour but why not attach one on the outside? Increases the combat power in a hull-down position too
>>65175097>yes i know there is the argument to be made that it weakens the armour but why not attach one on the outside?an externally mounted bow gun?
>>65175031These suck so bad. Any quad is better.
>>65175070Dont let the ukies see this
>>65175099yesmaybe like picrel
>>65175106Could be worse.
>>65175097>i still think that removing bow machine guns was a mistakeHow so? Can you make an argument for where modern tanks would be more effective with bow-mounted guns than without? The US Army in trials with the Sherman concluded that 75mm HE (not to mention more modern 120mm+ guns) were much more effective at any range than machine guns, and, well, if you're using your tank in a fixed position and sustained manner where the bowgunner might be useful (enough time on target at close enough range to get reasonable hits/suppression), that you're misusing the tank in a fundamental way, utilizing it as a fixed element rather than an exploition tool and a high-explosive lobber.
>>65175108unironically: WHY wouldnt it work?just put something on top to protect it from drones
>>65175110terrible idea
>leave the landmines, infantry, mechanized brigades, artillery, drones, cruise missiles, jets and the combined intelligence of the western world to me
>>65175113>How so? Can you make an argument for where modern tanks would be more effective with bow-mounted guns than without?more firepower and if the main target is to the side or at the rear you can still exert at least some damage / suppresion into the direction you're movingI've seen a couple of videos where tanks engage anti-tank teams head on and seems like a extra machien gun would've helped a lot therealso don't new Abrams have a top mounted remote-controlled machine gun?
>>65175116why?0 downside
>>65175097>isn't that just something the US did?Early Shermans had fixed guns only the driver could aim but the gunner shot.Guns - Yes please.You will see plated over openings on early ish.
>>65175118the fucking helmet always gets me
>>65175131if a remote controlled MG is going to be added then how about not placing it in the worst possible position, put it on top of the turret instead
>>65175136i was under the impression that the turret already has one
The introduction of RWS on tank turrets doesn't seem to be progressing very well. Perhaps the difficulty lies in how to integrate them with increasingly necessary APS and anti-drone sensors.
>>65175140is two turret MGs beyond the realm of possibility
>>65175154they might end up shooting eachtoher (unless you place them ontop of eachother)>>65175110is simply like 10x cheaper
>>65175136>if a remote controlled MG is going to be added then how about not placing it in the worst possible positionRussian design would like a word)))(I'm just shitposting, and your quote reminded me that, oh yeah, Soviets did build rear-facing MGs into some of their turret designs, and I never quite figured out why.)>>65175128I'm not an expert on modern tanks, but I'd semi-confidently say that "pintle-mounted machineguns being electronically controlled by the commander" have been a think for a while. Could be full of shit, but considering how they were a thing during WW2 (IE Hetzer), it doesn't seem like that hard of a concept to design and build.I now get where you're approaching this idea from in terms of efficacy for the bow gunner. In that scenario, AT teams in the bushes with short-range weapons, a bowgunner could indeed prove useful, but then it comes a matter of deliberation for "just how" useful and worthwhile that bowgunner would be in terms of the overall weapons system. How long would those scenarios typically last? For how many minutes would the machinegun be effective, would his inclusion warrant the more cramped space and less overall internal space for ammunition and fuel, and would it compromise the armor scheme to a point that it wouldn't be worth it? Either way, fun conversation.
>>65175061more like fat cunt
>>65175167>and I never quite figured out why.in ww2 they often just drove over trenches and continued their push (other armies proably did that as well)now if you just roll over someone but dont follow this up with infantry it's possible that someone sneaks out of the trench you just passed attacks your tank from the rear
>>65175001>You don't have to like it>This is just what peak performance looks like
>>65175173wait a minute!those aren't British soldiers
>>65175113Wasn't a bentagon beformer who got a stick in his ass about the bow machine gun for sweeping roadside ditches? That would almost make sense for an armored spearhead before ATGMs.
>>65175175Wogs will steal anything good
>>65175167> "pintle-mounted machineguns being electronically controlled by the commander" have been a think for a whileamericans use it and apparently KF 51 Panther is supposed to have one tooLeopard 2A7+ has 360 remote controlled MG turret but they seem to be rare?remember a video from 7 years ago I watched where they interviewed german tank commanders and showed how they would prepare their tank for an ambush positionthey removed the top mounted mg 3 and placed it a couple meters to the side to engage possible aerial targets ...
>>65175180>In December 2018, Hungary ordered forty-four 2A7+s (sub-variant 2A7HU), making them the second operator of the improved version, after Qatar.lmfaoand this still seems to be the case in 2k26
