Armored Fighting Vehicles version M4 - are we going with that? Sure, man.

[Weirdo]

...somehow none of our troops were bored enough to try"

Those must have been some damned scary sergeants, that the troops never once got that bored. :o

[DoctorMonkey]

Those must have been some damned scary sergeants, that the troops never once got that bored. :o

I think it would take a lot of bored to do something that dumb

[Charlie 6]

I think it would take a lot of bored to do something that dumb

Nah, not that much at all.  It is usually preceded by a Lt saying, "in my experience," a Major saying, "I've been thinking," or a SSgt saying, "check this shit out."

[DoctorMonkey]

Nah, not that much at all.  It is usually preceded by a Lt saying, "in my experience," a Major saying, "I've been thinking," or a SSgt saying, "check this shit out."

Most of my military friends are doctors so tend to focus on things like the fights between camel spiders and scorpions and more importantly the average of 6 squaddies hurt capturing the beasts

[ANS Kamas P81]

For the record, the shell alone in the Soviet ML-20 is as long as the complete round in the Shillelagh gun.  That doesn't account for the separate propellant charge, nor does it account for what's very likely an immense difference in barrel pressure.  3.8 to 16 pounds of propellant on the Soviet round (and a one hundred pound-plus complete shell!) versus the Shillelagh...yeah.

[Matti]

For the record, the shell alone in the Soviet ML-20 is as long as the complete round in the Shillelagh gun.  That doesn't account for the separate propellant charge, nor does it account for what's very likely an immense difference in barrel pressure.  3.8 to 16 pounds of propellant on the Soviet round (and a one hundred pound-plus complete shell!) versus the Shillelagh...yeah.

Thanks! So I guess the recoil of 152 mm soviet round would kick Sheridan flying with faster speed than the shell itself.

[glitterboy2098]

Me me! I have a question! Can the 152 millimeter gun fire the rounds used by Red Army in Second World War?

doubt it.
first the breech is going to be the wrong shape and design. the M81E1 gun on the M551 is a caseless weapon, while the 2A36 gun is Cased.
second the M81E1 gun is a low velocity weapon, so not only will the breech be sized wrong for the high velocity ammo of the 2A36, odds are the barrel is not going to be reinforced enough to handle it.

firing the Sheridan's M81E1 with the low velocity HEAT shells already shook the tank's chassis so bad it would break down faster. firing shells from the 2A36 would probably result in it cracking in half on firing.


edit: and i just realized the 2A36 is a post WW2 weapon.. from the 70's. oops. but still.

[Matti]

Nah, not that much at all.  It is usually preceded by a Lt saying, "in my experience," a Major saying, "I've been thinking," or a SSgt saying, "check this shit out."

ROFLMAO! By the way, wanna see what Sheridan replaced? Check this shit out!

[HobbesHurlbut]

a self propelled 90mm AT gun?

[Daryk]

Dismount!?  That's HILARIOUS!! :D

[Kidd]

That's some epic recoil there.

So like, when the Sheridans went to Vietnam and Iraq and so on, they could work, but at a rate of like 30s/shot? And presumably the guns broke down faster than on other tanks?

[VhenRa]

Most of my military friends are doctors so tend to focus on things like the fights between camel spiders and scorpions and more importantly the average of 6 squaddies hurt capturing the beasts

I am surprised... I thought the Squaddies would be too busy thieving everything.

... eh, I suppose capturing camel spiders and scorpions counts, somewhat, as theft.

[ANS Kamas P81]

So like, when the Sheridans went to Vietnam and Iraq and so on, they could work, but at a rate of like 30s/shot? And presumably the guns broke down faster than on other tanks?

That's pretty much it, yes.  Plus the guns broke everything ELSE on the tank; shaking loose all kinds of components not related to the gun at all.

Still, I can't help but think something like these would be murder in an urban environment; get them into parking structures and firing from all sorts of positions.  They're pretty small, though unarmored, it'd be like the jeeps with the TOW or recoilless rifles.  Fast and quick to relocate, one big whack of a gun....not much protection, though.

Question for the tankers, is the 120mm-class gun really that much of an improvement over a 105mm, or can the smaller gun still perform even against top-tier armored targets these days? 

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Was the Sheridan still in use in Desert Storm?  I thought it was retired well before then.

[Kidd]

Question for the tankers, is the 120mm-class gun really that much of an improvement over a 105mm, or can the smaller gun still perform even against top-tier armored targets these days?

Briefly, yes it is. 105mm is only going to work on like, early model T-72s and below and side-aspect armor.

Was the Sheridan still in use in Desert Storm?  I thought it was retired well before then.

Yes with the 82nd Airborne. Fired off a couple of Shillelaghs too.

[PsihoKekec]

It was posted on earlier version of this thread that Canadian test of basic T-72 failed to achieve frontal penetration with 105 mm, though newer ammo might be good enough for that.

[Kidd]

It was posted on earlier version of this thread that Canadian test of basic T-72 failed to achieve frontal penetration with 105 mm, though newer ammo might be good enough for that.

With ERA on? And yeah new ammo helps a fair bit.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Briefly, yes it is. 105mm is only going to work on like, early model T-72s and below and side-aspect armor.Yes with the 82nd Airborne. Fired off a couple of Shillelaghs too.

Looks like it mostly shot gun emplacements, based on a Google search.  I shudder to think of what would have happened if a Sheridan went up against a T-72.

[chanman]

With ERA on? And yeah new ammo helps a fair bit.

No, standard East German late-80's models with the additional turret armour but no ERA. I think everyone got in a bunch of testing on those surplus hulls. All the usual cruft was removed from the tanks for testing and penetration with the 105mm and even the 120mm ammo available at the time was unreliable at best.

Presumably that did a lot to spur everyone to move up to 120mm and develop better ammo for them. 105mm only really seems to show up in numbers on wheeled AFVs, and some light tanks, presumably with no expectation that they would be taking frontal shots at any modern MBTs any time soon.

Might still take out an Arjun, but I did specify modern MBT

[Kidd]

The future looks a little less exciting than we thought... Mobile Experimental High Energy Laser, to be used for shooting down drones

[DoctorMonkey]

are those drone-kill marks on the side?

[Kidd]

are those drone-kill marks on the side?

Its still experimental. I'm guessing all that other stuff on the Stryker is range instrumentation

[Matti]

The future looks a little less exciting than we thought...

So what did we thought? Walking mechas or something?

[Weirdo]

Not an AFV, but if you want sexy + lasers, go look up the USS Portland.

[Kidd]

Not an AFV, but if you want sexy + lasers, go look up the USS Portland.

Exactly!

[Matti]

Not an AFV, but if you want sexy + lasers, go look up the USS Portland.

Done. Page don't say anything about lasers.

[Daryk]

Off the top of my head, I think he meant USS PONCE.

EDIT: And PONCE's wikipedia page references PORTLAND...

[Matti]

Done. Page don't say anything about lasers.

Found the right ship

[Weirdo]

Protip: Unless you're in the wrong wiki entirely, if an article talks about a WWII heavy cruiser, you're not gonna find any mention of lasers.

[Orin J.]

Cut him a break, who hasn't confused the real world with their homebrew rules from time to time?