Chieftain's Q&A 14. Ares cannons, IFV Missiles, and exposure times.

and we are back yet again another quiet month still waiting for the coveted vaccine to hit i have a slew of places on where to go this now i note that the tank farm in knoxville virginia also known as the museum of americans in wartime or the virginia museum of military vehicles has cancelled their september event so i'm not going to that one i also note that the new national museum of military vehicles up in wyoming has had their opening event already which i have obviously missed so i look forward to going up and checking out what they have at some future time it's just phase one that they've opened though the post-war building apparently hasn't been built yet and if this gets out quickly enough the australian armor and artillery museum are live streaming their armor fest this weekend if i don't get it that quickly enough hopefully there is a replay you can go watch aussie land's internal borders are closed as i understand it so if you're not in queensland virtual attendance is your only option uh by the way people are confused about the ford versus holden reference i mean it's not all that obscure if an irishman knows about it other matters folks are saying that they are not being notified when i release a video all i can say is if you subscribe ensure that the little bell icon is enabled i have no other suggestions i mean i do find it interesting i was i was having a look at uh military history visualize numbers and it's kind of like he's got this a half million subscribers in any video has let's say usually on two thousand views and it's the same one myself i'm on 160 000 and the average video gets 50 000. so there's a lot of subscribers that aren't watching the stuff i don't know how much of it is simply because they don't know what's out there anyway also a note for those of you trying to track me down on facebook i have a chieftain page and a nicholas warren page if i don't know you from adam no offense but i'm not likely to accept a friend request from you on my personal page nothing personal it's where i update friends and family on life events share photos of the kids that sort of thing if you have sent me a request and i haven't responded please consider withdrawing the request and move it to the the official chieftain facebook page link in the description below and hopefully that means that i can actually narrow down and figure out the people i do know and i have managed to miss them so far simply in the deluge right i'm going to start off now the admin stuff is out of the way by going back to the previous q a and i am fascinated by all the responses to my question to you guys about the ability to triangulate on a modern frequency hopping radio answered varied from not easy to possible if you're going up against a first-rate enemy with more on the latter end of the scale than the former now unfortunately there seems to be very little actual engagement or debate between the advocates of each position so if you just hit comment and post it individually go back to the video and expand the comments threads and see if you guys can sort out the reality between you i have a suspicion from what people have been typing but i always like to see it actually getting hammered out i have also been provided with an answer to the question on the power output of the m1's turbine engine if not fueled with standard jb8 which of course is only standard after the 80s apparently the fuel flow is controlled by the entry temperature gauge so whatever the amount of fuel is required to produce sufficient power that the exhaust gets at the correct temperature is the amount of fuel which gets dumped in the end result is that the power output remains the same just that fuel efficiency will vary thank you to peter stickney for that answer finally i have been reminded of the m44 armored utility vehicle which is powered by a horizontally mounted continental radial engine so it does see that mechanically it could happen however this is not a small vehicle capable of carrying 27 passengers with a lot of mechanical stuff under the floor of the passenger compartment given the volume requirements of a tank i'm still not sure i see the visibility of such an installation so okay that was a surprisingly long return visit the previous q a surprisingly long intro uh but i do appreciate all the various subject matter experts chiming in it's actually interesting if you go back to the previous q a videos or even some of the other videos i've done and you read the comments how many are veterans from the 70s and 80s it's there's a lot of knowledge in there that people are sharing go back and have a look at them if you have a lot of spare time anyway on with the questions as ever priority does go to those on patreon subscribe star but i do take some from other sources including youtube comments it's just i'm not guaranteed to get around to them and i shall start with warlord titan tiberius they have a couple of bottles of those actually from my epic space marine days back in the 90s i actually have a very surprising amount of metal models for various different games upstairs and storage and it is an opinion question do i think it's important for current ifvs to carry anti-tank multi-purpose missiles anti-tank slash multi-purpose and he notes that cv90 doesn't carry them but then some variants do come with a pretty big gun i.e the 40 millimeter arguments on this vary back when the bradley was entering service infantry battalions and m113s came with an echo company equipped with m-901 itvs so all of a sudden the battalion's anti-tank firepower quadrupled when the bradley showed up and also it allowed a reduction of about a dozen vehicles actually a little bit more if he came to support ones this means that the planners and battalion didn't need to anguish over where to send the itvs to support the infantry design companies so that was one less problem that they had to deal with on the other hand you now have the interesting question of non-complementary effectiveness the purpose of the ifa is to support the infantry with their 300 meter effective range but 300 meters is barely minimum range for the tow missile so you want the bradley to be about three kilometers away from whatever it is that's shooting out with the tow which also of course is further away than the cannon will shoot this means that inherently there is a conflict which means that one system or the other can be you know questionable or at least not best utilized just how far back are you willing to place the bradley from the troops now unfortunately i have never been in a mech infantry company and the manuals for the infantry platoon or the company team do not seem to provide any definitive answers doubtless there are some 11 mics occurring again talking about old people 11 mike went away a long time ago equivalent people uh watching this who will be able to opine and how they use their brad leaves but anyway it was a little bit easier for me when i was a cavalry commander if the bradley is the primary firepower and it's not just a supporting asset for the dismounts um long argument over what is more important in a recon troop is it the disbands is it the bradley but we can come back to that another time now i guess personally to a large extent it's a matter of better to have them than not at least as long as they don't take up too much room in the back for infantry in their gear tow is not a small missile the difference was split by martyr which basically borrowed the missile launcher handed up from the dismounts in the back and you attach it you know to a point by the hatch however is a very small missile i am a little bit surprised that it has taken so long for javelins to be mounted onto vehicles the army is now starting to fit them to strikers this gives a good tank killing ability not as far as tow no but far better than milan using a missile in common with the dismounts so the troops can share the vehicle's ammunition supply the press release indicates that the missile will be used to support the troops by engaging defending vehicles before the assault or in the counter-recon role where there is no time to dismount but this is something of a special case anyways striker units don't come with much organic anti-armor capability these are apcs even a bmp is something to be concerned about dragoons notwithstanding those are the strikers with the 30 of which there aren't actually all that many i can imagine though cases where a conventional company team which is the american term for a company-sized element creating by mixing tank and infantry platoons would find the addition of tow missiles very handy a platoon of m1s in an anti-armor ambush is good a platoon of m1s supported by eight tow missile launchers is even better sure the dismounts at this point are only bystanders but it does allow the removal of a whole bunch of heavy armor at long range i have great respect for the 35 millimeter and 40 millimeter guns especially with modern ammunition but there is a reason why tanks currently come with 120s the doctoral employment issues can thus be written off as just adding flexibility to the commander use it or don't use it it doesn't cost anything to not use it if you have tanks or well-equipped dispense along and it might be one of those things that you may never need but if you do need it nothing else is going to do so you start looking at the effects of a missile system on the vehicle does it add too much weight does it add too much cost not every country has a military budget of the u.s does it take up room in the back does it affect the top heaviness or deter traverse or anything like that of the vehicle if so maybe it's not worth it the 40 millimeter on a cv 9040 is a big round it is is it worth having not as many of those in order to make room for a missile reload or three of them or is it worth installing the entire missile system if you don't bother carrying any reloads because the thing is more important to carry cannon or troops now there is the argument that the missile can fire warheads other than anti-tanks such as thermobaric the effect of which upon enemy fortified positions your infantry may well find pleasing the russian missiles are well advertised for this capability for example and i'm not quite so convinced especially given just how damn capable and lethal modern ife ammunition has become especially if you bring a tank along it seems to me that if you're going to bring a missile it may as well be for dealing with enemy tanks so short version of the long answer to its question do i think it's important i wouldn't go as far as to say that do i think it's a good idea yes is it the end of the world if it's not fitted probably not just folks have to think a bit harder about where to assign assets time bomb 757 i had mentioned that the sound of my own cannon firing from within a tank is actually fairly quiet how noticeable are other sounds of battle from within a tank such as rifle fire how noticeable are non-penetrations of various calibers hitting your tank's armor i note he does quantify that as qualify that as non-penetration presumably penetration will be noticed fairly well it all really depends a lot on the quality of your headset the bose vic-3 noise cancelling ones i had were very very good indeed if something went boom nearby you could hear it but the pop of rifle not so much as for various things hitting you i can only say that individual small arms will not be noticed i have previously mentioned how i didn't realize that somebody hit it by two inches from my nose and i also recall having to radio the tank in front of me that something had hit him because i saw the impact in a cloud of dust as it entered the sponson bin he didn't know about it either now these will be rifle caliber ramps i have happily enough not been hit by anything bigger than the 7.62 so i cannot give a personal experience of bigger stuff i suspect however that 20 millimeter or more will probably be noticed adam schindler what are the advantages or disadvantages of main gun versus coax versus autocannon are there situations where it might have been in an m1 and wish for an autocannon or if it was in the bradley where i wanted the main gun well not really no this goes back a little bit to the previous question by giving a missile to an ifv if it needed something bigger than a 25 millimeter the toe will probably do the job without requiring a tank to show up certainly there are points of difference you'll only fire one or two tows but you can lob five or six heat rounds from a cannon in short order the smaller cannon will engage a larger number of smaller targets more rapidly than the 120 will but the 120 will take out more big ones you want to annoy a bunch of troops especially behind cover the 25 millimeter does fine at a slightly longer range and at less cost than canister if there's one big advantage that 25 millimeter has over the tanks cannon it's the ability to shoot upwards at folks in multi-story buildings otherwise i'm not sure i can think of any particular time when i felt to myself gee i wish i had an autocannon in iraq probably part of the reason that they started getting dropped from tank armament after the 1970s the space just didn't merit the few times that you wanted it that said there was one time which we seemed to have missed with the coax and the frag from the 25 millimeter might have done the job but we actually at the time just attributed to missing and didn't think about anything else on the other hand short of being subjected to mass attack by heavy armor i similarly can't think of many times where i wish i had the 120 millimeter although that would have really been more in the simulator as i never took a bradley on operation so if you want to commit pinpoint destruction of a number of tough targets use the cannon for widespread destruction of medium targets at medium range the auto cannon and for localized destruction of softer closer targets to coax in the case of both vehicles i will say that range control tends to get a bit pissy if you engage the 600 meter troop targets with the 25 millimeter i didn't see the problem personally they went down fortunately we are supposed to work in combined groups i will say that i found the 20 millimeter to be an absolute hoot to shoot although i never really seem to get the the thing in or out of the vehicle without drawing blood uh the 120 firing damage is awesome the interesting question now with the advent of remote weapon systems is where to put the 50. a good remote weapon station has a thermal imager and a stabilized fire control system the argument for putting the caliber 50 as a coax such as the clerk has or the 762 used to come down to which do you think would most need the gunners fire control system but now that is no longer the case now it seems to me it's more a matter of how much volume is taken up inside the turret how big a silhouette you want outside the turret and asking just how much ammo you want in the gun before you have to reload we may have to wait until the advent of the next generation of tanks before we see which way the decision maker is going to go on that one especially if the remote weapon station is fully integrated into the computer system of the tank and it can be operated by any other couple of the crewmen alexander h what can i tell you about the tank rampage in san diego in the 90s not much that isn't publicly available anyway military vehicle theft does seem to be a little bit more common than you might think and it is not confined to modern equipment there was a t-34 which was nicked from a world war ii memorial during some protests back in about 2006. i am aware of german and british vehicles including one guy who apparently thought it would be a good idea to drive a stalwart back to the uk from germany i am led to understand that this was beyond the story's capability and of course there was the recent weirdness with the m1063 in virginia but that one wasn't stolen from a motor pool what's interesting about the theft in san diego is that nelson took the third tank he tried the first two did not start now i don't know why the tanks were there maybe they were in for maintenance but it was an armory it's the armory still exists and if it was in a working fleet one must ask questions about whether the first two tanks didn't work now it's not as if it's particularly difficult to drive and start a modern tank but it will take you a couple of minutes of staring at the controls before you figure it out however in this case nelson knew what he was doing the interesting question to be asked is what earth do you do to stop a tank after all police forces are not normally equipped with anti-tank weapons in this case of course he screwed up he high-centered the vehicle and then got shot by officers who opened up the turret hatch but what if he hadn't high centered it's an interesting problem and one which also cropped up in colorado in 2004 during the killdozer incident reportedly in both cases the thinking was that they could call up a local military base and ask for them to send an attack helicopter and use an anti-tank missile in most countries this would be a fairly reasonable solution assuming that they could fill out all the required paperwork to get the missile out of stores quickly enough i have a similar complaint actually about all those older videos about the gold repository in the fort knox protected by 300 tanks on the base yeah there's absolutely no way that the d.a civilian at the amber supply point is going to authorize the release of ammunition not requested 90 days in advance in thamus and his supervisor who could authorize the exception of policy would likely be on a scuba diving holiday in mexico at the time anyway for those of you who don't know the u.s has a rather strict law against the use of federal troops for law enforcement purposes there are a large number of loopholes including regarding federal property so the san diego tank rampage might have fallen under one of these exceptions but imagine being the post commander at fort carson and being asked by the state police to spin up an apache because the town of granby was being destroyed by a tank and there was nothing that they had to stop it of course haymer forgot to think about ancient cooling which is a problem a lot of world war ii tank prototypes had actually and the kill dozer problem eventually also solved itself but by the rules the governor himself could have called and the army would have had to say no a lot of phone calls would have to be made between state and federal officials likely declarations of emergency made and so on before help could be sent probably by that length of time a national guard apache crew could be found if he happened to fill out all of our paperwork of course for the missile in the meantime the killed overdriver is probably wondering why he's being left alone of course there is the argument of better to seek forgiveness than ask permission and hope that some public necessity doctrine might perhaps be applied but those are the rules mr b dacey who is my cameraman for inside the hatch do i have a normal crew i'd say about half of the wargaming ones mostly the ones from europe are done with a crew who fly out from minsk to meet me wherever i am the primary cameraman is normally the same and more often than not there's the same producer there's only one or two assistant cameramen to play as well i get to play scriptwriter and co-director as well as presenter or talent as it's called in the trade not necessarily a good talent point but anyway that's what they call it the ones that were filmed in the us were done by a local crew either in-house for the early ones or a contractor for the later ones the ones in cairns were filmed by a local contractor as well editing is normally done by minsk i expect that wargaming is actually going to restart the support for filming at least for vehicles relevant to their product we're only paused right now due to covet it seems that those appeals for folks to try the game using the link i provided at the end of the last batch of videos actually worked sufficiently to attract management attention the ones from rock island or arsenal and were done by me myself and i in my one-man band capacity when on vacation that's where the patreon or subscribe star support comes in i fly to wherever it is with a large suitcase with nothing but camera equipment light panels spare batteries and so on my clothes and the actual camera which costs no small amount of money are in my carry-on at rock island for the internal shots i borrowed joel a local employee to hold the camera for me but i've gotten a bit better since with small cameras and magnets and clamp mountings and so on and so forth i do not have the ability skill or time to do great adjustments on the camera itself and that's why i got a pricey-ish one with a good reputation for autofocus and low light settings and so on i do the editing at home on a pc which really definitely needs upgrading but in any case i am reserving some vacation time for my personal trips regardless of what wargaming decides to do robert henry elston what does an engagement sound like in a tank how are the decisions made as an ammunition when to leave when to put a second round in how has the engagement process changed since world war ii you might think it's simple but it's got enough variables the section on fire commands in my government manual i have upstairs from 2005 is 19 pages long i'm not going to go through it here only the highlights as near as i can tell the general concept of an engagement process seems reasonably consistent across all nations probably because what we've ended up with it's simple it works and it's hard to come up with anything better the basic components of the fire command are the alert the target description the target direction target range the weapon to be used and the command of execution not all of them need be used but i can't think of any examples in which anything other than those six items are added there will be some minor variances in verbage or sequence so for example today an abrams commander would say gunner coax troops in order to instruct his gunner to well shoot those chaps over yonder with a coaxial machine gun the doctrinal fire command in world war ii for a sherman commander would be gunner does caliber 30 to do precisely the same thing the tc is supposed to announce a fire command even if he's firing his own weapon as loud unexpected noises in the tank when in the middle of a battle can negatively affect the composure of a crew inside so for example he'll yell caliber 50 before firing a machine gun or announce load or from my position depending on if it's a three or four main crew before the on the way of is pulling the trigger on the main gun uh by the way for timings on the way bang so you pull the trigger with the the y in way the british of course have their own phraseology they say finn instead of sabo and firing instead of on the way it used to be firing now with the trigger on the w but the latest fire control system in challenger 2 implements a slight indeterminate delay while the fire control system makes sure that everything is in perfect alignment before sending the electrical impulse to fire off the round obviously when conducting steam gunnery more information like distance and direction is required so it would have been commonly used in world war ii when the laser range finder is working there's no need for the tc to waste time in estimating range for the fire command so it's dispensed with today normally but if necessary directions to include traverse left or right can be added and of course on an m1a2 the word designate is used to announce that the direction and range to the tank in question that you are about to see is what is about to show up in the center of your reticle after the turret finishes spinning another difference from world war ii is in the responses the world war ii gun we manual only mandates verbiage from the commander today the gunner has to actively announce that he has acquired a target in the loader that the gun is armed then after the round is fired a sensing is usually provided both world war ii and today telling the gunner where they were round went and what to do about it now unfortunately in the world of two manual but sadly not in the modern one is left a hair is no longer an authorized adjustment it was in world war ii and finally the engagement has to be terminated be it by cease fire in the u.s or stop in the uk the decision to put a second round into the target is normally based on the effect on target if it hasn't caught fire or changed shape the chances are that you're going to issue a re-engaged command instead of ceasefire as for how to decide what to shoot with the manual does this for you so you look up the manual it says sabo at tanks and tank light targets heat at light armored vehicles and field fortifications canister from mast dismounted personnel and so on the last question is when is it time to leave outside of the problem of well if you stay somewhere for five minutes and you might get artillery landing on you you are talking about exposure time and there seem to be three different theories on this i was talking to one leopard two crewman who said that in whatever army he was in i can't recall they didn't care about exposure time when it was time to engage you drive up to your hold down position start shooting and you don't stop shooting or reverse into cover until everything in front is dead obviously a rapid deconstruction of the enemy force was considered most desirable and it does actually have quite an emotional effect on yet to see your colleagues rapidly becoming combusted or reconfigured evidently the threat of return fire was considered to be outweighed by the offensive capability or maybe they just assumed that the turret armor on the leopard 2 at this point was good enough when i started tanking the us philosophy on such matters was that it was desirable to duck back into cover if there was any question on where the next target was but ultimately the most important thing about the scoring system on gunnery tables was how quickly targets got knocked down if you had three targets and you found them all you stayed up for as long as it took to kill all three of course you could fail if you stayed up for too long in the whole exercise because you just kept missing as a cumulative percent of start to finish of exposure time gets deducted but the emphasis is still primarily on how fast you can kill the enemy then about 2010 there was a change in emphasis which i recall took some of us quite some adjusting to get used to pass fail was now no longer predominantly determined by how quickly you could kill a target but instead by how quickly the target could kill you there was a hard limit to how long you could be in a whole down position and that limit was determined by how far away the target was and the type of target if you stayed up above that length of time you failed period we started instructing our drivers to start counting to a set number after we pulled up and if they reached it they would hit the gas in reverse no matter what was happening in the turret perhaps this is a reflection of the increased dangers of top attack missiles maybe it's a change in emphasis to it's better not to be hit in the first place no matter how good the armor is but it is now to the point that an exposure is usually only five or six seconds just long enough to yell fire reload fire again then duck back assess and given that as i say you train as you fight and fight it's a train i would have to assume that in the case of world war iii or korean war redux whatever that is how a modern american tank crewman will fight charles charange obviously i have an interest in tanks and ships anything else maybe the napoleonic or french and indian wars if so any thought on doing any videos in these areas to a large extent what you see is what you get i have enthusiast levels for aircraft trains and firearms but not anything one would call above average in terms of military history the falcons is probably the area i would most recommend studying it's a full-on war involving land sea and air logistics amphibious assaults and so on yet it is small enough that an enthusiast can fully grab their heads around it plus there is a heck of a lot of books on subject in english from all sorts of people who are there including at least one from the opposition's point of view i have it here somewhere so i got 100 days from admiral woodward i've got uh it's down here somewhere battle of the falcons by hastings see harrier over the falklands by sharky ward be cautious of that one i i get the feeling that if it was up it was up to sharky to control everything he would have wanted single-handedly no offense if you're reading if you listen to this it's just the way the book comes across um here it is the argentine fight for the malvenus by martin middlebrook so that's the that's the argentinian side he went to argentina in a lot of a lot of interviews will i do a video on the falcons probably not it's well covered already and i'm not sure what i can contribute to the discussion that hasn't already been well dealt with and no i've not yet been to gettysburg although i do have a good reason to go which hopefully you'll find out in a few months once i start flying again hugo u as the asymmetry of certain torsion bar configurations ever cause legitimate problem with the mobility or reliability of the vehicles not if you follow the instruction manual if you don't know what i'm talking about it relates to the fact that in most torsion bar vehicles if you look at them from absolutely perpendicular the wheels on one side are further forward than the wheels on the other side and this is because any torsion bar which is the full width of the vehicle the majority are goes from you know left to the right all the way obviously cannot share the same physical space as a torsion bar going from the right side to the left side so you have to offset them and this is the asymmetry one speaks of presuming thus that they drive and idler wheels are mirrored on the two sides that means at the very least one track will have a different angle of approach or departure to the other so for example if the left wheels are further forward the run to the idler is steeper than on the right side but conversely the run to the sprocket is shallower now in some cases it doesn't really matter on the m1 the angle is even out well enough that the overall length of the track run front and rear is more or less the same so they're the same number of links per track 78 on the left side 70 on the right such is also the case for the m551 but then if i can't find a dash 10 for an m60 i have heard it said that there are fewer track links in one side than the other on an m60 which isn't actually impossible given that the rear one to the sprocket seems to be quite a bit steeper than the one to the idler but i want to see it in the manual we definitely need to consider removing a link or two on two sites is if you're short tracking since you no longer have the compensating idler to provide that difference so on the m551 manual for example you see that if you're short tracking you need two links fewer on one side than on the other the rumor is that if you don't keep one side shorter than the other the tank will tend to drift to one side now this doesn't seem to make any sense to me what actually should be affected is attract tension the rate of progress on the track for each revolution of the sprocket is going to be the same there may be an initial drift to one side as the slack is taken up but once that's done the tank should run straight and that's about the extent of it to my knowledge the only other oddity i would mention is that the german solution world war ii to this problem on some vehicles was to reverse the support arms so that on one side they trailed and on the other side they leaned forward which probably simplified production and logistics but it may have had at least some effect on obstacle crossing capability there is probably a reason why the idea fell out of favor and doesn't seem to come up much anymore commas are carl with the russians only getting about 100 t14s so far in fairness does right metal's 130 millimeter gun have no real purpose or market anymore and who would purchase it anyway presumably the next fringe or german tank would be a shoe-in but demonstrator is a challenger too is there any performance data on the 130 last question first i don't have any information on the 130 51 that you guys don't reinventile claim an increase in 50 of kinetic energy i too do find the choice of challenger 2 as a test bed to be a rather curious one maybe it was easily available since the british do seem to keep downsizing the fleet and pretty much all the spare leopard 2s have been snapped up on the secondhand market i don't see the british being the launch customer for it though part of the problem is that the challenger to use unique ammunition and it's not going to do them any favors to again be a unique ammunition user now it's possible that there is a built-in upgrade path in the challenger 2 lep proposal to go to the 130 if desired much as there was the intent from the beginning to put the 120 dda bombs later on but that would probably only happen when a nato standard to the 130 was agreed upon it's not as if this is the first proposal to go to something bigger than 120. the 140 has been around for a while and that gun's development didn't certainly lead to mass obsolescence of the 120. as you can see these are really big rounds so capacity and weight are going to be a serious concern in the tank as long as 120 millimeter ammunition development is considered to be capable of keeping up with requirements the 130 isn't going to go any further than the 140 did caleb engelhardt why did the u.s decide they needed to switch the design specs of the ft from metric to american for the m1917 simple enough just to make it easier for the factories a lot easier just to grab a standard american bolts from the standard american manufacturer and use standard american rulers it worked the other way as well bt2s were built to american measurements the bt3 was a bt-2 tank designed with metric measurements in mind to make it easier for the soviets to build the soviet army considered all of them to be bt-2s regardless which is why the distinction is often overlooked but it does actually beg the question of how long the american spec bt2 stayed in service because i can only imagine the confusion in the mechanic hangers when you need an imperial screw but you grab a metric one off the shelf also will i ever get around to doing it inside the hatch on the american heavies t30 34 28 or 29 i certainly intend to ask now they're getting a new building soon and they're moving into it so far it's really been an unwillingness to deal with public affairs officers and besides we wanted to give them time to get the tanks preserved and undercover and also t28 tracks put together before asking benedict wagner wants to know my assessment of the armored forces of both sides of vietnam and if there are any books i can recommend honesty no i've not spent much time on it it is well known that the us and north vietnamese armored forces squared off only once at ben het and the fight between bd 76s and m48s wasn't exactly fair less well known is that there were actual proper tank battles between north and south vietnamese armored units not many but they did happen such as at dongha where the arvin m48s knocked out 16 t-54s for no loss north vietnam never really did quite figure out tank tactics let alone combined arms tank tactics their eventual victory was due to other factors the aussies brought some centurions along for a bit as well but they never actually engaged in tank on tank action they were however highly successful when used as infantry killers and this book in a matter of year canister on fire by bruce cameron is uh it basically covers the career of every single tank sent overseas the initial thought that tanks wouldn't work well in vietnam was fairly soon proven false and though the m551 did gain a reputation for being a little bit more vulnerable than a proper tank not reasonable enough it was also realized that they're actually pretty damn mean opponents fred benton wants to know my thoughts on the xm 274 canon and the aail key fred benton wants to know my thoughts on the xm274 canon and the aai key i'll start with the canon in the initial documents it was described as a hyper velocity 75 millimeter automatic cannon with an expected rate of fire in excess of two rounds a second there are four points of interest in this initial design especially considering the time period of the 1970s the first is the fact that it used cased telescope ammunition which is a concept folks have been working on for nearly 70 years and is only now barely getting fielded the idea is that it's volume efficient you can have more rounds and less space the next oddity is that it feeds rounds facing straight upwards and the round will get fed to a feeding disk next to the gun's casing and this disc would then rotate the round so as to align it with the gun before the round was then sent into the chamber area you can imagine how quickly this part is moving for around every uh two rounds a second on the plus side it also means that the gun will very easily feed from anywhere from negative 15 to plus 85 degrees of elevation the next point of interest is that the round wasn't to be pushed forward into the chamber as much as the gun chamber would move forward around the round and pick it up as it goes past the description called it a chamber sleeve finally in order to keep the recoil force down the gun was fired out of battery during recoil run out by having the mass of the gun still moving forward at the time the round is ignited it knocks the recoil forces down from about six tons to about one and three quarters there's about five inches of play in the run out in between when the round is fired and when the gun is slowed down enough the forward movement is stopped now you can imagine some of the interesting theories which come from this and so for example one option would have been to feed the gun to a hollow trunnion on a dual feed system injection could be out the feed slot for the other round type that what that isn't going in on an external amount a pedestal mount the rounds could be fed up through the hollow support arms however as you can imagine things didn't really work out that well in practice stabilization for example would be an inherent problem as the gun will be constantly cycling not stopping for even a fraction of a second to fire the round it meant that the center of the balance of the gun would be constantly shifting forwards and backwards with an expected rate of fire of 121 rounds per minute that rapid balance shift combined with the constant tonnage of recoil force inherently puts a flaw into the design heat dissipation was also a serious concern the barrel is going to get hot feed systems had to be simplified as well if you look at the aries cannon as it was actually installed on a high mag or rdf you'll see that has a dedicated ejection port at the top and the idea of a chamber sleeve was replaced by a rotating chamber which moved to vertical to receive the next round and which also aligned it with the ejection port so the next round will be pushed up into this rotating chamber the spent round well that casing would now be pushed out by the new round coming in at the top and then the chamber will rotate to a line to whatever the gun's elevation was then it will lock the high mag these had a special counter recoil system inbuilt so the gun was fired in battery and indeed it seems that the idea of firing out a battery had to be dispensed with entirely as there would be no way of keeping the chamber aligned with the feed mechanism as the gun was in motion the full feed system from magazines seems to be reduced to a cylindrical six round magazine and the rate of fire reduced to about one round a second that said hs tvl had a 26 round feed system by this point though the whole rdf program had become more of a design proof of concept in the test bed than a full practicable vehicle which was intended to enter service so what do i think of the lk in particular the concept of the design is fine overhead weapon stations are now very definitely a thing which has become accepted the mechanics of stabilization for the external mount are actually easier than in the turret mounting because it means that since you don't need to leave any room behind the gun for recoil of any such thing the center of gravity of the whole shebang can now be placed more to the rear i can only imagine the stress of six plus tons of recoil pulses every second on those support arms though especially at the full angle of traverse in elevation a solution to the heat problem was not implemented slightly annoying is the matter of vision and observation which aside from the primary site up top needs to be worked on the bigger question though really is what the hell is the point of a 75 millimeter gun which fires two rounds a second or it doesn't turn out one round a second especially on a smaller vehicle with limited ammunition supply they did try the concept with a 90 millimeter gun as well basically an enlarged and improved version of the ares 75 it actually worked fine an average rate of fire of 1.5 seconds per round in burst mode and they also took special care to address the heat problem claimed to have gotten a handle on it again though to one end the port indicated that mechanically the system was to be recommended presumably the reason we haven't seen the airy system in the last 30 years is more doctrinal and since we're talking about guns it is time for gun of the month and i'm moving away from the pistols to something a little bit longer this is a sig 556 i have this thing for being an early adopter of kind of weird guns and it's i like it i have to say it it has its flaws but if the zombie apocalypse were to happen this is what i would give the wife uh it it was supposed to be a basically a civilianized americanized version of the swiss army uh service rifle and well they made a few changes to it not too many but a few one of the big problems i have is it is incredibly nose heavy the the rifle itself is it's as near to a a nato ak-47 as you're going to get so if you open it up here if you open it up by use of the simple it's a two-piece hinge just like on that on an ar and you just pull out this little locking thing here and you can pull out the bolt and you can see that the bolt is basically an ak-47 type design it's a rotating bolt there's no star chamber so it's a lot easier to clean [Applause] it's very easy to disassemble now i did replace the forward takedown pin with a uh with another one do i have this right way around i'll drive this upside down i have it upside down it came with a different charging handle which was angled up a little bit which is kind of problematic especially if you mount an optic and the the guys say they decided to to make this horizontal version that you could install instead if you wished a nice little feature at the front is if you start getting stoppages you get more gas just by twisting a little knob on the front here it is a piston system that's that's what makes the front of this really dang heavy so as you can see i put a uh what they call this thing a grip pod on the front and a standard sort of side by one two by four and you know if you're in a defensive position which because the wife is not going off the hunter gathering uh in the zombie apocalypse just bipod it and the trigger on this is absolutely wonderful for a stock trigger that's when the swiss have done wonderful things of this trade this i i cannot say enough nice things about the trigger on this rifle um the the hand grip is a little bit bulky it's it looks very plasticky uh it's not really much else to be said ambit extra safety um the mag release is not an ar-15 mag release i have discovered because when i tried to convert it from california back to back to free state which by the way once i got once i got the pieces done it was really dang quick the parts are not interchangeable magazines are it's your standard usgi type magazines the backup sites are well not great for starters they're kind of hard to get at and you almost you need to pry it out almost in order to get to the backup site which i think is a bit of a flaw honestly a little peep site front side okay that's a little bit easier not much to it very simple uh of course sig no longer make these after after after a while they realized that especially this front tactical grip was not selling well so they changed it back to a more traditional looking forward hand grip i think i do still prefer this i think that if i recall they made a swap version later well i could say marketing which had a a rail front grip but it was a much better front grip than this overall it's actually horrible that's probably the other reason the other reason why i use the uh the bipod on the front is okay i've got big hands i can hold it smaller people probably not so much but anyway so uh the serial number is less than ten thousand uh i have to say this this is always a favorite when i bring it to the range it's just so much fun to play with anyway onwards andrew m why chieftain well since it roughly means a chap at the top and why not stroke my ego a bit it's got celtic roots which is nod to at least half of me chieftain is the first tank i ever drove and i just generally like the look of the tank so why not is there an equivalent to the turret monster in turretless vehicles and that's actually a dangle question not having operated turretless vehicles much i don't know i do know that turretless vehicles can still bite especially if you have a rear ramp or a hatch or cupola with a caliber 50 on top but i don't know what they call the thing josh conte given how much low intensity urban stuff everyone's been dealing with over the last couple of decades are we still better off with tracked vehicles or do i think we should be moving more to strikers humvees etc i don't know why you guys keep asking me opinions about these things it's not something i can exactly research anyway there are two different questions being asked here i think one is if heavy armor is good for low intensity operations like peacekeeping counter insurgency and so on and the other is if they actually work in the urban environment to begin with the answer to both questions is yes perhaps a bit counter-intuitively especially given the thinking of the 90s and early 2000s a heavy vehicle especially a tank has two effects firstly it is a statement of interest secondly it is a statement that if you really want to take us on you better come prepared because we won't be a pushover we found it interesting that insurgents in iraq were quite content enough to take a crack at a bradley supposedly a more reasonable vehicle for the role than a full-on tank no matter how impractical the tank was supposed to be that's not to say that a tank is the solution to all problems it may be the solution to all problems but i'm not saying there is much to be said for something like the humvee with the low recoil bushmaster or you can just say mark 19 but it's also a very useful thing to bring along the second issue of urban terrain is the problem that everything tends to be up close and personal with less chance of spotting a threat before it shoots you be it low intensity or stalingrad redux a vehicle as well armored as a tank is going to give you a chance at taking that initial knock as a follow-on are the days of the 105 millimeter gun as a primary tank weapon over yeah probably even on light tanks we've gotten to the point that we can mount 120s it becomes then more matter of the ammunition supply if you don't need the raw power of 120 such as let's say you're an assault gun and i'm going to include the m8 or whatever the new gdls light tank is that the name will lose me right now you can carry more 105 instead useful especially probably on smaller vehicles with less ammunition space now i'm not saying that everything with a 105 is now obsolete an m60 a3 tts can still mess up your day but i can't see any new tanks being built with it his last question is if we would do well by dragging m60s out of storage and using them as cheap already made infantry support guns i don't really see the point if we have enough m1s in the system especially as new ammunition is being implemented and the tank holes already are in storage awaiting refurbishment andrew sebastian many moons ago on a specific site there was a brief discussion on using hydro pneumatic suspension only on the first or last couple of road wheels in order to lift them up on a turn reduce turning friction making the tank more mobile the ztq15 light tank seems to have such a system is it viable for future vehicles for those who have not watched my tanks 101 video it is a matter of length to width ratios the longer the track length in contact with the ground compared to the width of the vehicle the harder it is to turn if you think about it in a really long vehicle you're talking about scraping sideways quite a few feet of linear travel there is an inherent conflict then between the desire to get a tank to be able to turn and the goal of getting the longest possible track length in contact with the ground in order to reduce ground pressure now this is a problem known since the earliest days of tanks if you look at a british world war one tank you will see that is actually balanced on the center road wheels only the ones on the ends only come into contact with the ground if the ground is soft you sink down and you need more ground pressure yes i can hear it so can everybody on the camera we are now pausing a brief a brief introduce michelle yes i can hear her so can everybody who's watching you want to say hi come on camera not at all unusually it is still before midnight i i the way this works out i'm usually recording these things through till one in the morning and she's given up and gone to bed it's just a matter of the workload i'm afraid between the between the day job and you know do this in the evenings i really wonder how other folks like drakenfeld manage to do it i don't know where they get the time okay seems to stop coughing onwards now go find a photo of the t14 on mata as it's taking the corner you will see that the inside number one wheel is raised off of the ground actually the number one wheel is a little bit odd either way when the tank fires the number one wheel seems to be fixed in relation to the hull and so it actually does leave the ground more than the other road wheels which are sprung so the idea is certainly practical the t14 is by no means a small tank either so one can't blame them for looking at it that said i don't recall ever having any particular trouble in turning my m1 or m2 my initial thought is that it strikes me as a needless complication and increase in weight but there obviously is a reason that the russians and apparently chinese have done this overall then i have to reserve judgment engineers better paid than i am to debate this such matters have apparently in at least these instances concluded that the system is worth it make of that what you will buying coaches do i play any historical miniatures other than 40k it's a history future history will happen i have a shed load of one to three hundred miniatures for command decision and i play harpoon on the very rare occasions that i can find a couple of players and sufficiently at the time which reminds me of here curious harpoon 5 just came out grim if i could replace any vehicle in the us's inventory with one from anywhere else in the world what would it be good question i could see removing a few bradleys in favor of cvrt's for the scout platoons but even the british seem to be going away for those for whatever reason realistically though i'd probably get rid of the avengers and replace them with something that can actually kill things like drones or helicopters some distance away us air defense is i think a little bit too reliant on the us air force i think would actually be better off developing our own things with combinations of anti-drone lasers guns and missiles but if we have to buy off the shelf the immediate thought is the panzer a vehicle a close second would be replacing the m109 with panzer bits that's 2000 or k9 there is probably a reason that everybody's buying those however that comes into caveats a i don't actually know how good the m109a7 is to begin with and there does seem to be a plan in place to replace the m109 with the m1299 which has been a 109 upgrade i'm not sure there's any particular plan in place for the new battlefield air defense vehicles though which is as far along as the artillery plan nachtel firokesi has seen a photo of a complete bii layout or caes for commonwealth folks that's all the tools that come on the tank for an m18 tank destroyer and sees only four devices handheld right angled light emitting and i honestly have no idea why there are only four given that they have placed five helmets cables and so on onto the layout presumably there generally were only four lights provided for the vehicle now in fairness unlike infantry who wear their flashlights the flashlights are stowed in designated holders around the vehicle so perhaps they just ran out of space for flashlight holders and figured four was enough or maybe they decided that somebody didn't need to see in the dark because always in the vehicle i don't know your guess is as good as mine i'll ask the lads at world war two army next time i'm talking to them satan how does an nbc system work in a tank normally by overpressure it's the technique used since the french fcm36 in the mid-1930s it's impossible to make a tank completely airtight i think it's impossible to make a tank completely watertight as well there's a reason that you don't see tanks take their time when they're doing snorkeling operations there is going to be a little bit of dripping however if the air pressure inside the tank is higher than the air pressure outside the tank it should keep all those nasties on the outside outside just in case so masks are still worn inside the tank at least in the u.s instead of an air filter canister though a long hose is used to have air forced through the tank's sebum system and filters and then into your mask so it's very easy to breathe you also have to attach a microphone by the way which plugs into your headset uh it's also used as a cooling system so it circulates air if you stuff the hose down your tanker suit or if you have a tie fighter vest you mentioned then the tank crew attire video of course decontamination is a process the paint is a special compound called carc chemical agent resistant coating normally the all clear is provided by somebody outside the tank who has better chemical detector gear than the you know the cheap little break it open the waiver round test kits that we've given but for some reason if you have to get out on your own and there are no external resources available to tell you if it's safe and you got to get your mask off without waiting until you can find somebody at a deconsider likes the process for taking the mask off and opening hatch can be kind of disconcerting for the new guy in an american tank now put it this way it begins with a commander aiming his sidearm at the loader and saying loader give me a weapon we don't tell new tankers this in training because otherwise they wouldn't know what's coming and might decide to get the drop on the gun or tc so for mods media and particularly games tend to depict heat rounds as having a fairly explosive radius and often they are considered the one-size-fits-all round if you can only bring one type along but given that the explosion is actually a cone to form a penetrator are folks just being misled by the high explosive in the name not really remember that for over a decade the abundance only had two rounds that it could fire sabo and heat that was it sabo was for use on tanks or tank like targets maybe fortifications while heat was used for everything else including troops and soft skins it's not as good as a hg frag round no but if you think about it the outer casing of the projectile is metal and that explosive force which is all aimed inward to form that jet courtesy of newton is placing an equal amount of force the other direction against the outside wall of the projectile the difference is that one direction is kind of coherent and cumulative and in the other direction it's inconvenient and just spreads the force and bits of metal with it in whatever direction also are there depictions of tanks in non-tank gains which mean my approval i don't know i can't think of any games that i might play that are non-tank games that have tanks in them unless maybe they're combat flight simulations and they're just plain targets the tank commander what's my opinion on the t26 e4 there's a reason that only 25 were produced i have a copy of a test report dated at april 47 which basically killed the project and you know what i think i will do is i will reserve this question for a dedicated video i'll be likely a short one on the t26e4 yes i know that one still exists it's in illinois and i have no idea what it's like inside or if the hatch is even openable if i recall correctly it didn't look like it was in great condition sort of the there's no glass in the periscope mounts and so on so an inside the hatch on the e4 is probably not coming if you're near cantigny let me know anyway for now the bottom line is that it was not considered fit for service and the report recommended that the whole project be abandoned as for what happened at dessau well add me to the list of folks who are skeptical of the king tiger claim tn sheep roger carrying on samuel fisher what is the purpose of a tracked motor carrier like the m1064 oh by the way some of the really annoying hell out of me it's one so many sleuths and they have to they're bent like this in the movies how hard is it to keep your hands straight it isn't hard what is the purpose of a tracked motor carrier like the m1064 what can it do that other vehicle mounted mortars such as the m326 mss can't the purpose of the mortar is to provide rapid organic indirect fires so when i was a troop commander i had two mortar tracks so i didn't have to ask for any help or put myself on a priority waiting list competing with anybody else if i wanted any form of indirect support now with only two tracks it would not be improbable for one to be moving and only one to be set up so for constant coverage so we're not exactly talking a huge amount of firepower but it is enough for suppression or maybe a small smoke screen as for why a tracked vehicle are not a wheeled one the normal reasons apply the tractor vehicle will go more places off-road it may go more places faster and being armored it may stop some counter battery fire that a humvee with a dismountable mortar will not i also suspect that the m1064 carries rather a bit more ammunition i don't know how many in a humvee with an mss trailer can carry but the 1064 carries 69 raymonds dalton crore can i recommend books about pre-world war ii french tanks and doctrine now if you look at my doctrine video i have a little bibliography uh but uh a couple of things i have i mean i don't know if you speak french la marie blande francais volume one says may to june 1940 but it actually starts well before then is what a blender it's a simple book i mean the the pre-1940 is only 60 pages only 60 pages i guess that puts my relative definition to simple if you want on the tanks themselves edison the bobber tongue have the series a book called track story and you'll be happy to see that they come in two languages they come in the original french and they come with a translation in english the translation actually is pretty good i haven't noticed very many uh very many errors in the translation and they do most of the early french world vehicles so d1 fcm 36 sharp b1 samoa highly recommended common disk versions as well they do in not in focus they do an in focus type dvd as well as the track story dvds the the infocus ones if i recall more photographs um that's i mean that's what i've been using um probably zeloga has a few things in english but since i speak french it's the one language i do speak well enough that i can look at the original source material i can't really answer your question jacob furley what is my favorite dinosaur i don't actually have one i guess there is an argument for brontosaurus just because of controversy i like controversy sometimes however you will have noticed in the previous q a video little steg was lurking and this is rexy my daughter's favorite dinosaur he also mentions that belton cooper's book states that sherman crews were taking such high casualties that they had to reduce their crew size to three true or false i have the book i haven't asked myself to look this up uh however i won't say false because a i've known at this point i've been doing this long enough to never say this never happened but i do think that three would have been a very extreme case so if you have to drop somebody drop the bow gunner not too much of an issue but if you drop a second guy you down to a two-man turret crew and that strikes me as something of a matter of desperation so on a modern tank the commander has a fully capable gun sight and commander's override he can gun it's doable but on an m4 the only person head out of the hatch at that point will be the loader you who i guess could be the commander loader maybe if the dc swap patches if they ever did go down to three the chances are that it would have been only because every other tank in the company was already down to former cruise and i just don't see that happening often sam crawford what tanks would i take to vietnam probably the ones i went to anyway there's nothing inherently wrong with either centurion or m48 beyond maybe fuel consumption for the roles that they were performing if i were there i might prefer to have m60s but i can also understand why folks thought that the m60 should be going to germany or korea first it wasn't as if the m48s were not capable of providing viable service you know the only reason i really looked for it really though is to get the 105 millimeter going into play with a bigger hep round and white phosphorus around but even then that is questionable because as best as i can tell the beehive round for the 105 m68 wasn't introduced until the 1970s the 90 and 20 pounder both had canister or beehive and that was a very popular round not necessarily just for mass infantry but it was great at clearing away foliage so that you could see things that everybody else could shoot at yes i am aware that a 105 bee hyvron was in vietnam but it was for the howitzers and i don't think you could fire the firewood out of the l7 m60a kazuki k if i were to design a vehicle for urban combat would i put the turret forward or to the rear will the question be a matter of doctrine or packaging if i had to i would go with front mounted the the idea of reverse angling where you kind of you nose up to a piece of cover and then you angle out and then you come back out far enough for the for the gun to to see much easier said than done unless you're in a computer game i would think the problem with putting the turret forward though is that you're talking about seriously unbalancing the tank if you put any weight of armor on it so if the turret is here and you got thick armor what's at the back so if that were to happen you want a small probably unmanned turret maybe with a 30 millimeter at best in order to keep the weight down it should still be plenty enough to suppress while supporting assets getting into a more favorable position if not right kill whatever the problem is though the bigger concern though is that you're building a vehicle specifically for a single environment it's built like all those m wraps the us army bought and then started dumping because they're useless for anything else that is a substantial cost so unless it's really worth it i can't imagine very many militaries going for it also she wants to know what examples of vehicles created completely out of the ordnance loop might exist such as bob central or the ni tanks there are a number of instances of ideas being sent up the line such as driving the antenna underwater i mentioned a couple of q and a's ago or perhaps more reasonable ideas like fitting a 37 millimeter gun to a jeep the latter idea by colonel jones then at fort hood was considered good enough that aberdeen ran with it and gave the design a full trial colonel zurby's tank destroyer i think i mentioned before as well the with the steam pipe anti-tank rocket launchers there are certainly the field designs and arguably the ni would count made out of necessity for the parts at hand well probably a large number of the german armored vehicles after 1940 might count and a number that the soviets captured as well from the germans put into their own service six pounder on a jeep 37 millimeter on a scout car all sorts of ideas exist which may or may not be fielded in any numbers i wouldn't honestly be surprised if the first field modification of a tank came the day after rtr received its first tank that said anything made in significant numbers like the triple digits did tend to be the product of a professional design team the competence of that professional design team of course is open to contention witnessed the guys over marvin harrington from the last video finally from christopher ellier or elia sorry i'm gonna go ellie with the hockey playoffs on the way he'd like to ask who or what i would select for the three stars of world war ii i have no idea what he's talking about or even if he's talking about ice hockey or field hockey given it is august but if i'm going to go with three stars from world war ii the white star the red star and the blue sky with the white star i think that's good right i have been going according to my watch near nearly an hour and a half to two hours so there's a bit of editing for me to do i'll be looking to get this done out this weekend but we'll see i don't really have anything else to close off with so i hope you find it interesting and enjoyable and i will see you in the next one take care

Channel: The_Chieftain

Views: 96,276

Rating: 4.9681892 out of 5

Keywords: Ares hypervelocity, RDF Tank, Tank fire commands

Id: _pEgP3dYXSA

Length: 71min 30sec (4290 seconds)

Published: Sun Aug 23 2020