Y SG armour dun use 50 cal?
-
One suggestion on why a 0.3" MG is preferred than a 0.5" MG is that the rate of fire is better for the smaller calibre gun. More ammunition can be carried around as well.
The primary function of a 0.5" or bigger gun is on an armoured vehicle is traditionally for AA role. Good against attack helicopter as well. But I suppose, the chance of infantry ambush with light anit-tank weapons is higher and possibility of a vehicle defending against an AH or GAP successfully is low, therefore, the 0.3" weapon is a more useful weapon for an IFV. In any case, against a softskin or another IFV, the 20 - 40 mm gun will be better and possibly with enough elevation, can be used against an AH. -
I remembered we were told that butt is removed because of the danger of the swinging long wooden type butt hitting the face of the tank commander if the GPMG is not lock properly or the secure latch failed if the GPMG got hit by tree branches. Tank commander do not always have one hand holding the GPMG all the time when vehicle on the moves. That's why we use the short butt version.Originally posted by Chemineer72:[quote]Originally posted by spencer99:
I think the SM1's GPMG have the butt removed becos it is more easy the the TC to get out of hatch and not in the way... -
Thanks! You answered a lot of questions!Originally posted by Chemineer72:One suggestion on why a 0.3" MG is preferred than a 0.5" MG is that the rate of fire is better for the smaller calibre gun. More ammunition can be carried around as well.
The primary function of a 0.5" or bigger gun is on an armoured vehicle is traditionally for AA role. Good against attack helicopter as well. But I suppose, the chance of infantry ambush with light anit-tank weapons is higher and possibility of a vehicle defending against an AH or GAP successfully is low, therefore, the 0.3" weapon is a more useful weapon for an IFV. In any case, against a softskin or another IFV, the 20 - 40 mm gun will be better and possibly with enough elevation, can be used against an AH.
Of course! The "stripped down" GPMG is the same as the CMG! Not only is the butt and bipod not there, even the front sight has been moved back towards the receiver!
Does this mean that for both the CMG and the commander's MG, you would have to aim by using tracer bullets?
BTW, where are you from? You referred to the GPMG as a .30.
American?
The .5 is traditionally AA. though you're right that these days it has merely nuisance value against heavily armoured AH or fast-flying aircraft.
Still, the .50 is good for getting at infantry behind less well-protected cover in urban areas. The .50 will punch through walls that may stop a GPMG.
Of course, against fast-moving unarmoured or light armoured vehicles when the main gun is too slow or overkill. -
Another theory...?Originally posted by skyfire:I remembered we were told that butt is removed because of the danger of the swinging long wooden type butt hitting the face of the tank commander if the GPMG is not lock properly or the secure latch failed if the GPMG got hit by tree branches. Tank commander do not always have one hand holding the GPMG all the time when vehicle on the moves. That's why we use the short butt version.
Well, here's a Primus with a full GPMG ready to hit the vehicle commander in the face.: )
Here, the Bionix turret is seen to mount either the full GPMG or the CMG.
-
But like tat, TC how to aim with the small butt ?Originally posted by skyfire:I remembered we were told that butt is removed because of the danger of the swinging long wooden type butt hitting the face of the tank commander if the GPMG is not lock properly or the secure latch failed if the GPMG got hit by tree branches. Tank commander do not always have one hand holding the GPMG all the time when vehicle on the moves. That's why we use the short butt version.
I think quite pain after 21 12 21 12 haha
Mostly gpmg swing is got hit by the vegetation, trooper manning the mg behind usually tio more, coz the mg is point outwards.
Wat are the chances that the mg butt will fall off when the veh is bashing ?
My VC fren lost his butt back in thailand, he nv got it back, signed tons of xtras for tat. -
[quote]Originally posted by moca:
Thanks! You answered a lot of questions!
Of course! The "stripped down" GPMG is the same as the CMG! Not only is the butt and bipod not there, even the front sight has been moved back towards the receiver!
The gas regulator of the CMG is also designed differently.
Does this mean that for both the CMG and the commander's MG, you would have to aim by using tracer bullets?
It is still possible to aim using the built-in metal sight. Another reason that I can think of for using a CMG for a tank commander is that it is directly replaceable for the true coaxial MG tandem with the main gun when needs arises. In addition, common spare parts and barrels. The GPMG barrel cannot be used for the CMG.
BTW, where are you from? You referred to the GPMG as a .30.
American?
I am not an American. Just thought that some people may not realize that a 7.62 mm gun is the same as a 0.3" gun.
The .5 is traditionally AA. though you're right that these days it has merely nuisance value against heavily armoured AH or fast-flying aircraft.
Still, the .50 is good for getting at infantry behind less well-protected cover in urban areas. The .50 will punch through walls that may stop a GPMG.
This is agreed.
Of course, against fast-moving unarmoured or light armoured vehicles when the main gun is too slow or overkill.
The CMG with AP rounds will be suitable. -
One suggestion of using either a CMG or a GPMG will be the intended purpose of the weapon - whether it is to be mounted for vehicle role only or if needs arises, it should be dismountable.
For SPH, other than knowing the operational doctrine of SPH battery it is difficult to guess the real reason of using a GPMG instead of a CMG. It may be possible that GPMG for the SPH to be dismounted for area defence purpose during a fire mission. May be the simple reason is the armskote has only the GPMG and not the CMG. -
It does seem to me that there is no real doctrine other than "what's available".Originally posted by Chemineer72:One suggestion of using either a CMG or a GPMG will be the intended purpose of the weapon - whether it is to be mounted for vehicle role only or if needs arises, it should be dismountable.
For SPH, other than knowing the operational doctrine of SPH battery it is difficult to guess the real reason of using a GPMG instead of a CMG. It may be possible that GPMG for the SPH to be dismounted for area defence purpose during a fire mission. May be the simple reason is the armskote has only the GPMG and not the CMG.
If you look at the pics of the Bionix I posted, there is sometimes a CMG and sometimes a GPMG on top of the 25mm turret.
The ATTC Bronco I have also seen with either a CMG or GPMG.
But with the AMX-13 SM1, since the 70's, I have seen only the CMG, though I wouldn't rule anything out. -
[quote]Originally posted by Chemineer72:
I am not an American. Just thought that some people may not realize that a 7.62 mm gun is the same as a 0.3" gun.[/quote
Actually - to be a.nal - a 7.62 x 51mm NATO gun is technically not the same as a .30 gun.
.30 refers to the WW2 US 30-06 rifle/MG round.
.30 also refers to the WW2 M1 carbine.
And the 7.62mm NATO is different from all the WW2 7.62mm rounds even though the calibre is similar.
.308 Wincester is the other name for the 7.62 NATO calibre.
So in order to avoid confusion, 7.62 NATO is not referred to as a .30.
There is also a WW1/WW2 MG commonly referred to as the .30 cal and that's the M2 Browning's little brother the Browning M1919.
The .50 continued to be called that because neither the gun nor the ammo had changed since its inception.
For the same reasons of avoiding confusion, the Soviet Dshk is referred to as a 12.7mm HMG, the term .50 is seldom used when referring to the Soviet HMG. Even though the calibre is the same diameter, the rounds are different. -
Okay this topic drifting further and further away.
The Coaxial mg (with a smaller butt) is used *inside* the SM1 tank and outside with the 25mm ULTRA.
The rest of other gpmg places are all suppose to be the standard GPMG with bipod and butt.
I dont know about the bionix 25/30mm.
Commander MG is always to be one with the butt. The gun swings if you dont lock the pintel in place.
Let me know if i'm wrong. thanks. -
[quote]Originally posted by moca:
...
Actually - to be a.nal - a 7.62 x 51mm NATO gun is technically not the same as a .30 gun.
...
Thank you for enlightening me.
-
Actually, we are very much ON topic, we are still talking about the V.Com's turret MG.Originally posted by CM06:Okay this topic drifting further and further away.
Please look at the pics and url of pics I posted of the AMX-13 SM1, they are always butt-less and bipod-less and according to one poster, is a CMG.Originally posted by CM06:Commander MG is always to be one with the butt.
Let me know if i'm wrong. thanks.
Please have a look and tell us if this is a CMG or something else. Thanks. -
-
ok i cfm with my fren CMG is like the ones posted in the pix by moca.
cfm no butt
Plus he say TC no need aim one, just shoot the mg only.
so shiok, gun he oso no need to clean haha -
okay now i learn something...CMG X 2 for sm1.
I suck. -
Please allow me to shed some light.
The reason why the SM1 coaxial and turret mounted MG are without butts is to enable them to be mounted within the tiny turret itself, there isn't enough space for the butt. Both are wthout butt so that they can be interchangeable should one in the turret is spolit the other can be dismounted and take over.
This of course creates the problem of inaccuracy when fiing from the turret but MG is not meant to be accurate as they are to engage area targets. The TC must have hand on the MG to prevent it from swinging around while on the move.
As to why the BX and Primus don't need a MG without butt is because they don't mount any MG internally. And for BX as they are infantry men should the BX be disabled, they can still dismount the MG and use as GPMGs. -
Who ever told you that the MG the TC no need to clean???Originally posted by I_love_my_toilet:ok i cfm with my fren CMG is like the ones posted in the pix by moca.
cfm no butt
Plus he say TC no need aim one, just shoot the mg only.
so shiok, gun he oso no need to clean haha
The whole tank crew only hve 3 personnel and they have to take cae of the servicing of the tank, the stores, POI, 3 carbines and 2 CMGs. That is not easy i tell you consider SM1 is very old and breaks down easily. SM1 also throw track easily when turning tight corners too fast. The CMG carries 10+ ammo boxes(each with 250 7.62 rds), after firing these blanks, cleaning the MG is certainly acnnot be considered as easy. -
Originally posted by tankee1981:Who ever told you that the MG the TC no need to clean???
The whole tank crew only hve 3 personnel and they have to take cae of the servicing of the tank, the stores, POI, 3 carbines and 2 CMGs. That is not easy i tell you consider SM1 is very old and breaks down easily. SM1 also throw track easily when turning tight corners too fast. The CMG carries 10+ ammo boxes(each with 250 7.62 rds), after firing these blanks, cleaning the MG is certainly acnnot be considered as easy.
not always 3, in fact 1 tank from each platoon comes with only 2 crews.
And such concidence that the CMGs from each of the 1 tank is the most fired one.
I really appreciate that 1 person to contribute more to the platoon.
As u said that cleaning the MG is certainly not easy -
It is near impossible to aim a MG - with or without butt - while the tank is rolling through rough terrain. The best option is still to use tracer ammo to guide your shots.
There are a lot of situations like WW2 aircraft, IFV firing port mounted M16, co-axial etc are usually fitted with tracer ammo as you can't really aim through the weapon sights very well.
So the tracers act as a guide to land your shots. -
C'mon, you take yourself too seriously...Originally posted by CM06:okay now i learn something...CMG X 2 for sm1.
I suck.
It's just a silly forum. -
I've postetd pics of the BX 25mm turret with both the CMG and the GPMG. So I am really beginning to wonder if this really is a case of "what's available"....?Originally posted by tankee1981:Please allow me to shed some light.
The reason why the SM1 coaxial and turret mounted MG are without butts is to enable them to be mounted within the tiny turret itself, there isn't enough space for the butt. Both are wthout butt so that they can be interchangeable should one in the turret is spolit the other can be dismounted and take over.
This of course creates the problem of inaccuracy when fiing from the turret but MG is not meant to be accurate as they are to engage area targets. The TC must have hand on the MG to prevent it from swinging around while on the move.
As to why the BX and Primus don't need a MG without butt is because they don't mount any MG internally. And for BX as they are infantry men should the BX be disabled, they can still dismount the MG and use as GPMGs. -
I think it would really help if we understand the purpose for having a butt stock in a weapon. Where does the buttstock get placed in a human body, and how does it help in its operations?
Then we ask, does a turret mounted gpmg with butt stock help the tank commander when he really needs to use it. -
buttstock is placed in between our armpit and shoulder areaOriginally posted by Shotgun:I think it would really help if we understand the purpose for having a butt stock in a weapon. Where does the buttstock get placed in a human body, and how does it help in its operations?
Then we ask, does a turret mounted gpmg with butt stock help the tank commander when he really needs to use it.
objective is to let our body absorb the recoil and acts as a support when firing...
So tat we can help better control of the weapon.
turret mounted gpmg with butt stock does NOT help TC coz
1) fire mg is to scare pple away, triggering most impt
2) on the move hard to aim, even main gun oso cannot lor
3) risk of getting slap by the butt -
In the early days, the AMX-13 used 0.5 HMG to simulate main gun firing due to budget constrains. The range of a 0.5 round is similar to that 75mm HE round. This HMG is being mounted on top of the main gun on a small T-shaped platform, near the loop. You can see this in the 1st pic provided by moca earlier on.
-
Originally posted by tankee1981:
Please read the paragragh in bold,thanks
Please allow me to shed some light.
The reason why the SM1 coaxial and turret mounted MG are without butts is to enable them to be mounted within the tiny turret itself, there isn't enough space for the butt. Both are wthout butt so that they can be interchangeable should one in the turret is spolit the other can be dismounted and take over.
This of course creates the problem of inaccuracy when firing from the turret but MG is not meant to be accurate as they are to engage area targets. The TC must have hand on the MG to prevent it from swinging around while on the move.
As to why the BX and Primus don't need a MG without butt is because they don't mount any MG internally. And for BX as they are infantry men should the BX be disabled, they can still dismount the MG and use as GPMGs.
