Personal arms for tank crew
-
Singapore tank crews are armed with carbines. Our Isareli counterparts are armed with Uzi submachine guns. Which one do you think is more suitable for tank crews? My personal view is that i will prefer the carbines as the 5.56mm rounds have a longer range as compared to the 9mm used by the Uzis. Another reason is that the 5.56mm is used by the entire army so there will not be any problem with ammo compatability. Are there any other alternative arms used by the tank crews of other countries? Please provide info and comments, Thanks.
-
I prefer not to use any arms, so got 1 less thing to draw out from armskote.
-
Thats very true ditzy! Our carbines never use for live-firing mainly for drills. Still have to clean them together with the MGs, quite troublesome. But they are important to save our lives should our tank run into any trouble during war. As you all know the SM1 is very old already.
-
You're the type who at the most hopes the enemy scores an "M" kill, I on the other hand prays for a "K" kill.
-
M16 and small arms are for personal survival only if tank breaks down, falls into a hole or trench or runs out of gas in enemy territory but since tanks mostly move in convoys that likelihood is slim so the side arm will probably never see much action.
What they should do is give each tankee mebbe a handgun but install a few matadors insde each tank, so if tank breaks down at least tankee still can carry on fighting mah or worse case scenario save everybody the trouble & use the handgun on himself
-
I tot tankee still use their carbines for the your annual CTSS or whatever you call it today.Originally posted by tankee1981:Thats very true ditzy! Our carbines never use for live-firing mainly for drills. Still have to clean them together with the MGs, quite troublesome. But they are important to save our lives should our tank run into any trouble during war. As you all know the SM1 is very old already. -
I seriously doubt there is any space in the SM1 for even one Matador. But during war time the commander is supposed to be issued with a pistol. But i think the pistol like a bit useless since we already have the carbines.
-
For some reason, kiasu SAF wants the range results to be standardised based on the standard M-16. If tankees go there with their carbine their results might suffer. And SAF won't want that.
-
i suggested combat medics use sidearms instead of a stupid M16 since we're supposed to use it only for self-defense...
the brass didn't even want to hear about it.. -
We try not to, really, we try not to. Liddat, we got no chance to score marksman, si beh bo hua.Originally posted by gary1910:I tot tankee still use their carbines for the your annual CTSS or whatever you call it today. -
Hanor, the grenade holder is used to hold campbell chunky already, still got space for anti tank weapons.Originally posted by tankee1981:I seriously doubt there is any space in the SM1 for even one Matador. But during war time the commander is supposed to be issued with a pistol. But i think the pistol like a bit useless since we already have the carbines. -
Although we have grenade canisters in the turret, we are never trained to throw grenades from a tank. But i did heard that the older generation tankees are trained to throw grenades into an oil drum while on the move. The oil drum is to simulate a trench. Anyone been similarly trained before? Nowadays the grenade canisters are mainly used to store extra food!
-
for long range use the tank's machine gun....and for close combat use dual Uzis..better...Originally posted by tankee1981:Singapore tank crews are armed with carbines. Our Isareli counterparts are armed with Uzi submachine guns. Which one do you think is more suitable for tank crews? My personal view is that i will prefer the carbines as the 5.56mm rounds have a longer range as compared to the 9mm used by the Uzis. Another reason is that the 5.56mm is used by the entire army so there will not be any problem with ammo compatability. Are there any other alternative arms used by the tank crews of other countries? Please provide info and comments, Thanks. -
Ha ha ha.. Actually carbines for medics and signallers are probably a good idea. Scouts too. If the BRC can, I don't see why the unit scouts can't.
Are the grenade holders in the SM1 meant for frag or smoke? Seems like it's more useful for smoke, since if you're close enuff to throw a frag, you're more likely to get shot 1st. -
the israeli tank corp no longer use Uzi liao .... infact, in the entire IDF, the Uzi is almost never seen now .... save for the mini Uzis by some special units .... their tankees get the carbine too, same as us, CAR-15 actually ...
-
I prefer us combat medics going in using browning M2s.Originally posted by the Bear:i suggested combat medics use sidearms instead of a stupid M16 since we're supposed to use it only for self-defense...
the brass didn't even want to hear about it..
But seriously the enemy is going to shoot us anyway... might as well use a carbine -
Originally posted by DriftingGuy:
I AGREE WITH THAT! EVen though medics are 'covered' by the Geneva Convention as 'lifesavers' thereby 'immunized them from hostile fire'.
I prefer us combat medics going in using browning M2s.
But seriously [b]the enemy is going to shoot us anyway... might as well use a carbine [/b]
But Hey! Will you think the enemy on the end will seriously do that?!
-
Hahaha, I think if the enemy sees a medic, he might squeeze off first and go oops later. hAh.
-
If a medic shoots at you, would you retaliate?Originally posted by Shotgun:Hahaha, I think if the enemy sees a medic, he might squeeze off first and go oops later. hAh. -
Hmm...so tankees are not using the SAR21? Well, anyway...the moment tankess have to start using small arms to fight...thats it already.
Btw, if the tank gets crippled and the crew is not injured or anything, and they manage to dismount.Can the Commander's GPMG be dismounted to be used like any normal GPMG? -
Sidearms not much of use in combat really...I have found it difficult to fire accurately. Much prefer a rifle in combat.Originally posted by the Bear:i suggested combat medics use sidearms instead of a stupid M16 since we're supposed to use it only for self-defense...
the brass didn't even want to hear about it..
Theoretically medical staff are not supposed to carry rifles, just sidearms for self-defense. But during WWII nobody bothered with that aspect of the Geneva Convention...Also remember the US recently bombed a Red Cross depot even though the organization's symbol was painted big big on the roof.. -
We have experimented using SAR21 to replace the carbines but the last time i heard it is not very successful. I am not aware of the current status.
The MG which SM1 uses is the same as what the rest of the army uses. Each turret have two co-axial MG. It is called co-axial because it is specially modified to fit into SM1. Two major diffences is that the MG do not have a butt and the gas regulator is fixed. Removing the butt is crucial because of the close quarters in the tank, furthermore the co-axial MG inside the turret is mounted on and fired from a fixed bracket so there is no need for a butt. Now for the above question,we only abandon the tank when it is damaged beyond repair or have the risk of falling into enemy hands. We must 1st destroy the disabled tank as much as possible eg dropping grenades into the turret, thus there is little time to dismount the co-axial in such situations. Most importantly our MG cannot be fired effectively like a GPMG since it do not have a butt and gun mount. Hope i am of help. -
that's why I rather a "K" kill.