Supertanks?!?!
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
I think four (commander, gunner, loader/operator, driver) is now the standard at least for a western MBT the exception is the French Lerclec which has three, the T-72, T-80 and T-90 have a crew of three (I assume they have done away with the loader position out of preference for an autoloader).
The Chinese Type 98 had four as did the early version of the Type 99 however later versions came with an autoloader and the crew was reduced to three.
The Japanese type 90 has a crew of three.
The South Korean K1A1 has a crew of four.
Last edited:
Yossarian
Forum Resistance Leader
Not really, thought process there seems to be that reliablity is everthing.
If I was inside a steel box unable to look outside with projectiles bouncing off the sides, the last thing I would want to worry about is a jammed autoloader.
With years of testing and the budgets that tank development has i am sure reliable autoloaders that perhaps have two differnt feeds for shell selection could be made. The extra per would make sentry duty, maintenence and the like less arduous so maybe thats where the justification for the extra space comes from
KevinTheCynic
Active member
In regards to the auto-loaders and selection of ammunition, there's a few ways that selection of different shell types can be achieved.
1. The auto-loader ammo store has reserved slots for the different shell types and the gunner literally hits the button for the desired shell and that shell is loaded.
2. The auto-loader has no reserved slots and the crew have to decide what shell type to load the ammo store with before a fight.
3. The ammo store is filled with the most commonly used shell type but the crew can replace/refill slots on the ammo store so that if, for example, HE is desired but there's only AP loaded into the ammo store, the crew remove the AP shell next in line to be loaded with the desired HE shell.
Now having said that, I know this from some theory on the subject but I couldn't tell you specifically what tank (or even what country) uses what method. From what I recall, the T72 has option 1 and the gunner selects what shell he wants to use and the ammunition carousel rotates to place that shell in line for loading.
How much less time this takes compared to a human loaded is debatable but what having an auto-loader does achieve is a reduction in size and weight of the tank and with a lower superstructure the Soviet belief was that their tanks would be harder to see and somewhat harder to hit.
P.S. This page has some internal diagrams of the T72, I found it when I was checking my info for the above and if you go to pictures 6 & 7 on the page, there is a description of the auto-loader and ammunition carousel that explains things better than I did.
http://panzerfaust.ca/AFV interiors/t72a.html
1. The auto-loader ammo store has reserved slots for the different shell types and the gunner literally hits the button for the desired shell and that shell is loaded.
2. The auto-loader has no reserved slots and the crew have to decide what shell type to load the ammo store with before a fight.
3. The ammo store is filled with the most commonly used shell type but the crew can replace/refill slots on the ammo store so that if, for example, HE is desired but there's only AP loaded into the ammo store, the crew remove the AP shell next in line to be loaded with the desired HE shell.
Now having said that, I know this from some theory on the subject but I couldn't tell you specifically what tank (or even what country) uses what method. From what I recall, the T72 has option 1 and the gunner selects what shell he wants to use and the ammunition carousel rotates to place that shell in line for loading.
How much less time this takes compared to a human loaded is debatable but what having an auto-loader does achieve is a reduction in size and weight of the tank and with a lower superstructure the Soviet belief was that their tanks would be harder to see and somewhat harder to hit.
P.S. This page has some internal diagrams of the T72, I found it when I was checking my info for the above and if you go to pictures 6 & 7 on the page, there is a description of the auto-loader and ammunition carousel that explains things better than I did.
http://panzerfaust.ca/AFV interiors/t72a.html
Last edited:
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
Well I learn something every day, I always thought it was the tank commander that made the shell and target decision.
Here is a video of the T-72 autoloader in action...
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTzobtVjqPs"]T-72 Autoloader At Work - YouTube[/ame]
Last edited:
KevinTheCynic
Active member
My time in armoured vehicles was limited to the M113 family and a brief dalliance with a working Centurion that the unit had as a parade piece.
So... I can't state this with total authority but as far as I know, most Western armies allow the gunner to pick targets but the tank commander is also looking for targets and will over-ride the gunner's choice if he sees a higher threat.
Also, the tank commander in the more modern Western tanks can locate a target and then lock the gun to that target because the gunner's sights are slaved to the commander's sights.
As for who selects the type of ammo to be used, I should have been a little more explicit :-(
For the auto-loader situation, the gunner would probably select whatever was appropriate for the target he's tracking but whether that is decided by the commander or the gunner I don't know. However, once the decision to use a specific ammo type is made, the gunner will use his controls to have the auto-loader select the desired shell.
KevinTheCynic
Active member
I saw what looked like a fricking huge tank when I was in Utah and one that looked similar in Alabama. One of my buddies also claims to have seen a similar tank in Australia.
At a guess, I'd say it was one of the Abrams MBT family as Australia has them in service now (replacing the Leopard 1 variant we had). In comparison to older Western tanks the Abrams, Challenger and Leopard 2 appear to be pretty damned big - it's probably that boxy shape of hull and turret that makes them look larger.
Yossarian
Forum Resistance Leader
If your enemy has projected air dominace over the battlefield you can forget that.
m551sheridan
Active member
we've come a long way baby
m551sheridan
Active member
yepper, was because of these new-fangled toys that I got out of SheridansSo has the other guys.
m551sheridan
Active member
I have to admit I wanted to see more of that vid... was a mite *roomy* in there... We did have a Sheridan *burn into* the drop zone once.... rumor had it that because we couldn't get the parts we needed for it they decided just to get a new one.... left an impressive hole... turret was over that-a-way a skosh.
Yossarian
Forum Resistance Leader
Ever seen a Soviet Tank up close? Clammered onto a T 62 at muesum once...
I understand the low profile concept but I couldn't imagine having to spend any length of time squeezed inside one of Comrade Khrushchev's Fighting machines.
Which considering the idea of a super tank which is this threads namesake, it better have standing room in it.