Couldn't they make the commander and the gunner take turns into reloading the cannon?If the cannon isn't loaded, then the gunner isn't doing anything.If the tank isn't firing, then the commander isn't doing anything.While the gunner is reloading, the commander can keep the aim of the cannon.While the commander is reloading, the gunner can keep the aim of the cannon.One less hatch on the tank. More room inside of it.
Find a hill, and sit on it
>>65630122they each need to focus all their attention on commanding and target tracking... you need to be at least 13 to post here
>>65630122
>>65630122Hey...
why not just have the commander do both the loading and shooting?>even more room in the turret or>you can make the turret smallerwhat could go wrong?
>>65630175Why not also make the commander drive? He should have the best idea of where to go, and he wouldn't even need to give commands.
>>65630177a weapon to surpass metal gear..
>>65630177This is an excellent idea, in fact it would enable the commander to focus on commanding other forces.
>>65630122The French tried that during WWII, and it ended up making them sluggish compared to their Kraut counterparts. Japanese also had to do that a lot by virtue of the fact their tanks were cramped clown cars even when compared to the Soviets.
>>65630211The russians also did this and it made their SA terrible and their reload rates comically slow until it was changed with a new turret design
>>65630122Extra crew men provide more redundancy, more crewmen also mean more hands to pull guard duty, repair and generally just assist in operating the tank.Commanders need to focus on communicating with other tanks and leaders, having a general picture of the battlefield, commanding the members of their tank, there's a lot to do. If you have him also reloading the gun, that'll mean he isn't doing all of that during the battle, which is quite bad.Loaders don't just load, they generally operate the secondary weapons on tanks as well, providing another set of eyes.>If the cannon isn't loaded, the gunner is adjusting the gun onto target>If the tank isn't firing the commander is directing the gunner and driver, talking to other tank commanders, and trying to figure out how survive>While the gunner is reloading, the commander is doing other stuff>While the commander is reloading, he isn't doing any of his duties
Imagine being a loader in the first gen m4.>Tank is about to explode, no hatch for you
having a extera character give the tank one more hitpoint
>>65630484this was, unironically, the reason for the hull machine gunner on the M4the germans originally had the hull gunner be the radio man, he was just given the machine gun so he would have something to do in combat when he wasnt using the radiobut the US developed FM radio with sufficient clarity that you didnt need someone skilled at speaking over radio to be understood, and sufficiently small enough that you didnt need someone to handle it full timeso that left them with a 5th guy who didnt do anything other than use a machine gunthey decided his role was co-driver now, and if the driver ever died he would be the one to remove the body and take over the controlsthey doubled down on this position with the M26, where the co-driver had a spare control station and could override and drive the tank himself without leaving his seat
What shitty ass post-soviet shithole do you live in?
>>65630626Some redundancy is good, but I question how well it worked in practice. From what I've seen of the interior, neither the M4 or M26 has a solid barrier between the crew in the hull. Something that takes the driver out is probably going to also going to affect the co-driver too.
>>65630410the M4 had a floor hatch for removing spent casings that could be used to escape, it was even used in reverse, picking up wounded people safelya lack of escape hatches was also a problem in general, the crusader tank and panzer IV both only had one hatchthe panzer IV did have ammo loading hatches that you could escape from, so if we count those then we can include the ammo ejecting hatch on the M4the T-34 was, surprisingly enough, given a two-hatch turret in 1942
>>65630122a commander loading is a commander not monitoring their surroundings and coordinating their crewa gunner loading is a gunner not tracking the target
>>65630122loader is called the loader because he sucks the loads out of the driver, gunner and commander
>>65630726Lol
>>65630241the turret itself was arguably what made it so bad, before the 1943 turret added a cupola for the commander, and periscopes for both commander and loader>commander has only a telescopic sight and a side-facing vision slit>loader has nothing except the vision slit>co-driver has only the machine gun sight and nothing else>driver has only direct vision slitthe new turret helped the commander by giving him the ability to see to his sides when buttoned up, but the co-driver was forced to see the entire outside world through a soda straw through every model
>>65630122>Couldn't they make the commander and the gunner take turns into reloading the cannonGunner's field of view is too restrictive, it's on the Commander to have situational awareness and guide the gunner on target, and the driver around obstructions.>>65630626Helps having the extra for maintenance (track tensioning/replacement, topping off ammo).
People should play squad 44, it is the best tank simulator ever.You can't see shit as a gunner. While the commander has a wide view of stuff.
>>65630122Commander>Gunner>Driver>Loader, the new guy has to start somewhere so important things like getting a brew on are a Loaders responsibility.
>>65630122>hadhttps://youtu.be/bD0hbBQXCc4?si=287tKKuEaXIK2foh&t=9
>>65630825that was something that they tried to resolve over time, though they never did quite reach the level they wantedthe M4 sherman is an inverse case where it started out with a wide-view 1.4x periscope but no telescopic sight until mid-1943 with the addition of a 3x direct sight for precision aimingthe end of the war eventually had the gunner equipped with a 1x wide sight, a 5x telescopic sight, and a 6x periscope gun sightthe T-34 also did give a 1x periscope to the gunner, though unlike the M4 sherman one it was fixed rather than a unity sight
let's give this useless OP 500 replies
>>65630991
>>65630915>1.4x periscope but no telescopic sight until mid-1943 with the addition of a 3x direct sight for precision aimingIt really took that long? Why? When did Shermans finally get cupolas?Germans are other oddity. Why wouldn't you want a wiiiiide 1x periscope for gunner in addition to high magnification gun sights? Even Japs figured that out.
>>65631515>Why?a lot of pre-war tanks had a periscope instead of a direct sight, you can see that the chi-nu doesnt have any openings on the turret for a telescopic sight because it was linked to a periscope instead of a direct sightthe M4 was actually designed in a hurry and was designed before any US division had seen combat, so they didnt get any feedback on it until after the first batch were sent to the british in north africathe british told them that a telescopic sight was an absolute priority, and in a rare moment of actually meeting demand as it arrived, the telescopic sight was marked "urgent" meaning that any M4 not already on a box to europe was to be sent to a factory to get one>When did Shermans finally get cupolas?mid-1943, although the atlantic ocean meant it was late 1943 before they were common placealthough the replacement for the 1.4x periscope was a 6x periscope, which was actually so good that the 3x direct sight was considered a backup to it
>>65631517Chi-Nu's gun sight was through that hole.All Japanese tanks had a direct sight. Only in SPGs they had periscope sights.
>>65631522i must be mistaken, because i read somewhere that the gun was linked to the periscope on the roof and the hole was for the machine gun, but i guess i was wrong
>>65631539Chi-Nu only had machine gun in hull and another for AA-mount. I'm not sure if they really carried two.They wanted to mount their new machine gun into turret (this time frontally), but aircraft guns took priority.
>>65630177too busy driving to look for targets
if there was no loader the gun could only be fired once
1 more guy is better for everything.
>>65630635>What shitty ass post-soviet shithole do you live in?Latvija. Is of cold, so very cold, and yet no potato
>>65630122Thinking too hard. Tanks are already a useless invention, some tard genuinely thought it'd be funny to put a slightly big gun on a gay car so it can break down every 5 seconds for no reason and get everyone inside killed as fast as possible. Genuinely probably the worst idea anyone ever had
>>65630646The side hatches on the Panzers ended up being pretty nice for those in Africa.Interestingly, the T6 concept did have side hatches on the hull. Doors on tanks are one of those things I think crews would have appreciated, but it was rarely done. Understandably so once you realize they're creating weak points.
>>65630828the hull gunner was even lower than the loader, so its obvious why that position was eventually removed
>>65630241Idk man the soviets were really good at Sexually Assaulting people.
>>65630122>While the gunner is reloading, the commander can keep the aim of the cannon.>While the commander is reloading, the gunner can keep the aim of the cannon.it is the time lost in handing off duties like that which makes the speed difference between 2-man and 3-man turrets in combatif you read tank crew memoirs, you'll realise that the gunner is tracking the enemy tank 100% of the time and constantly making adjustments to do so using the turret and gun controlsalso without the commander providing additional situational awareness, drivers tend to run into obstacles much more often, and the whole 4-man crew don't notice new threats when they are trying to work the gun, avoid obstacles, and keep track of the enemy which they are duelling
>>65635439The awareness of a tank from the 50's or 70's vs what would be possible in a modern clean design is incomparableManned turrets are obsolete, manual loading is obsoleteYou'll never spot anything first, thats why you have 24/7 observation drones
>>65635735>a tank from the 50's or 70's>a modern clean designwhich of these is OP's M4 Sherman supposed to be, pray tell?
>>65637960He's a video gamer, anon.
>>65630122commandering and gunnering are full time jobs>>65632132>they kept the dual fixed forward MGswhat the fuck did they expect to use those for?
>>65643057You see, it's quicker to switch to the next MG than try to reload the last one.
