Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
Recruiting for Blood and Guts: Modern Military PbP (done recruiting for now)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ragboy" data-source="post: 2514604" data-attributes="member: 4151"><p>If you were Infantry, then I understand the frame of reference ('yella' for buttoning up, etc). I always respected the crunchies. I'm going to use the term 'tank' in the following, but I mean either the M1A1 (which I have the most hands-on experience with) and the Bradley. They both have very similar fire control systems, and with the exception of the loader on the tank and infantry on the Brad, similar crews/tactics. </p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>Okay, so absolutely not, and I can tell you precisely why. </p><p> </p><p>When you are training on the tank, you learn to shoot with fire control from the gunner's station, from the TC station, and completely manually (ever cranked an M1A1 turret 360 degrees? You don't want to). With fire control (from gunner or TC station), you have to be 70-80% accurate or you can't even sit in the seat. Manual from the TC station is not possible with any degree of accuracy. Manual from the gunner's station, you have to be 45-50% accurate. Like 50% is doing VERY well. And that's with the tank completely still. In my four years, I knew one gunner (mine) that could consistently hit over 50% using the manual system. And I stress, the vehicle cannot be moving at all. Here are the main reasons why you want to use your fire control system for target acquisition and putting steel on steel: </p><p> </p><p>* Laser Range Finder - Accurate ranges out to about 4000 meters IIRC</p><p>* Turret Stabilization - Shoot on the move at a moving target with uncanny accuracy (I watched tanks/Brads consistently score catastrophic kills at 3000 meters, at night with both target vehicle and shooting tank on the move [2500 meters for the Brad])</p><p>* Thermal Sights - Hot spot = Kill. This sight has great resolution, even during the day and through any 'weather' (German fog, Saudi/Iraqi dust/oil fires, etc. </p><p>* Support Systems - Everything from wind to temperature adjustments, calcs on ammo type, etc. </p><p>* TC 'independent' sight - The TC can lay the gunner on a target, disengage his sight, lay on another target and once Target 1 is a smoking wreck, punch a button and Wala! Gunner's on Target 2. </p><p>* New stuff I'm not aware of... I've been out for over 10 years now... Heck...almost 15... ug. All kinds of namby-pamby video screens and cup holders (now who sounds old school?). </p><p> </p><p>Here's how the chain of responsibility goes: </p><p>TC: Lay on the target for the gunner (meaning get the target in the gunner's sights), command ammo, drive speed, direction, etc. Spot the next target, </p><p>Gunner: Kill what he's told to when he's told to. </p><p>Driver: Drive </p><p>Loader: Load (in the M1A1) -- both driver and loader have some target acquisition duties, but these are minimal and once the shooting starts, they're doing their jobs exclusively.)</p><p> </p><p>At the ranges you're talking about for a typical engagement (especially out in the middle of the desert), 3000 meter spotting and shot is not going to be possible, even with a manual sight (IIRC the M1A1 is sighted manually to 1000-1500 meters...). These are direct-fire, big-bore mobile sniper rifles (for lack of a better analogy). </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>The main gun/coax can be fired from whereever the gunner or TC happen to be, as long as they can reach the cadillacs and pull the trigger. But, again, I'd put forth the 'why,' as above. You can do all the eye-balling and Kentucky windage you want, as long as you're willing to answer to your commander when you can't consisently hit a moving vehicle at 2000 - 3000 meters and have to stop everytime you fire the main gun or coax. And you can keep poking your head out of the hatches with binoculars as long as you don't mind getting hit in the head with everything from hot lead to chunks of rock. I knew a couple of TC's that preferred the hatch open, until we started taking artillery fire...then everyone was 'yella' <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> I knew one driver that drove with his hatch open all the way through the war, but that was because he was extremely claustrophobic.</p><p> </p><p>Another reason for having the hatches closed in a combat situation is that the NBC overpressurization system doesn't work unless the hatches are sealed (not sure if the Bradley has this...think it does). You want that working when they drop nerve agent on you...Unless you like dancing the herky-jerky for a few seconds, then filling your drawers and dying really really ugly. </p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>I'm not absolutely certain on the hatch position options on the Brad commander hatch (I'm googlefu lazy today), but on the M1A1 tank commander's hatch, you had Open (hatch 90 degrees to the turret top), Closed (totally sealed), and (can't remember the damn term -- but...)'half-open', where the hatch was parallel with the turret top, but lifted out of the commander's hole. Basically all that did was give the TC enough room to view through his periscopes (due to the bulky CVC helmet) and not get his fat head blown off (or a mortar dropped on him and everyone in the tank). I know the driver, gunner, TC and 'passengers' on a Bradley have copious periscopes to look through, so if close-in friendlies or civilians are an issue, you can see just fine through them. If these soft targets are more than a couple hundred yards away, however, you're better off with the TC's sight. </p><p> </p><p>And the less politically correct response to your collateral damage question (especially if the civilians are close in or mixed up with your targets) is that you're basically using a sledgehammer to open walnuts, and trying not to hit the pecans on the same table. Both of these weapons (120mm and 25mm) fire a depleted uranium needle, or a big basket of greek fire, accurately to 2500 - 3000 meters. When that needle hits up to and including several inches of steel, it goes right through. When the basket hits the steel, it punches through and explodes. I watched an M1A1 kill two T-55's with one shot. (Both 'turrets flying through the air Hollywood explosion' catastrophic kills). The Bradley is comparable on lightly armored vehicles. If there are civilians mixed up in that area, collateral damage ain't preventable, unless you just don't fire. And you don't perform 'suppressing fire' with a tank/light tank main gun unless you're expecting the kill something. In fact, on the coax engagement during gunnery, if you accidently fire the main gun at the troop targets, you pass the engagement, as the troops were 'suppressed.' </p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>I was in for four years loading/driving/shooting M1A1's, but I was in different Cav units in Germany and Saudi/Iraq. We worked very closely with the Scouts in their Bradleys. As far as performance, gunnery, etc. I know quite a lot about the Brad, but I have very little hands-on experience. I've done and/or seen the following:</p><p> </p><p>* Shot the main gun and coax (twice)</p><p>* Drove it from point A to point B in a motor pool</p><p>* Helped pull the pack (engine)</p><p>* Sat in the back and played poker until my eyes bled.</p><p>* Changed the track (once -- much easier than an M1A1...)</p><p>* Watched one melt to the tracks when it was hit by a Hellfire missile fired by the unit's brigade commander...not a shining moment. </p><p>* Watched many many gunneries and field problems (it keeps up nicely with the M1A1)</p><p>* Watched it in actual combat.</p><p> </p><p>On the M1A1, I've done everything you can do with it, including running over a car (demonstration for the Germans), blowing off the first two roadwheels on a landmine, driving it where it was vowed 'not possible for a tank that heavy', pulling every single nut, bolt, cable and hose (and putting them back on...the correct way!) etc... But I digress... </p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>Absolutely. When you're not in combat, you drive hatch open, tank commander and loader hanging out the top of the turret waving at beautiful women, etc. It's the best way to see/drive/maneuver/look at beautiful women. Those pictures were most likely taken in that situation. I'm not saying NO ONE drives into battle with their hatch open; I'm just saying that NO SANE PERSON does.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ragboy, post: 2514604, member: 4151"] If you were Infantry, then I understand the frame of reference ('yella' for buttoning up, etc). I always respected the crunchies. I'm going to use the term 'tank' in the following, but I mean either the M1A1 (which I have the most hands-on experience with) and the Bradley. They both have very similar fire control systems, and with the exception of the loader on the tank and infantry on the Brad, similar crews/tactics. Okay, so absolutely not, and I can tell you precisely why. When you are training on the tank, you learn to shoot with fire control from the gunner's station, from the TC station, and completely manually (ever cranked an M1A1 turret 360 degrees? You don't want to). With fire control (from gunner or TC station), you have to be 70-80% accurate or you can't even sit in the seat. Manual from the TC station is not possible with any degree of accuracy. Manual from the gunner's station, you have to be 45-50% accurate. Like 50% is doing VERY well. And that's with the tank completely still. In my four years, I knew one gunner (mine) that could consistently hit over 50% using the manual system. And I stress, the vehicle cannot be moving at all. Here are the main reasons why you want to use your fire control system for target acquisition and putting steel on steel: * Laser Range Finder - Accurate ranges out to about 4000 meters IIRC * Turret Stabilization - Shoot on the move at a moving target with uncanny accuracy (I watched tanks/Brads consistently score catastrophic kills at 3000 meters, at night with both target vehicle and shooting tank on the move [2500 meters for the Brad]) * Thermal Sights - Hot spot = Kill. This sight has great resolution, even during the day and through any 'weather' (German fog, Saudi/Iraqi dust/oil fires, etc. * Support Systems - Everything from wind to temperature adjustments, calcs on ammo type, etc. * TC 'independent' sight - The TC can lay the gunner on a target, disengage his sight, lay on another target and once Target 1 is a smoking wreck, punch a button and Wala! Gunner's on Target 2. * New stuff I'm not aware of... I've been out for over 10 years now... Heck...almost 15... ug. All kinds of namby-pamby video screens and cup holders (now who sounds old school?). Here's how the chain of responsibility goes: TC: Lay on the target for the gunner (meaning get the target in the gunner's sights), command ammo, drive speed, direction, etc. Spot the next target, Gunner: Kill what he's told to when he's told to. Driver: Drive Loader: Load (in the M1A1) -- both driver and loader have some target acquisition duties, but these are minimal and once the shooting starts, they're doing their jobs exclusively.) At the ranges you're talking about for a typical engagement (especially out in the middle of the desert), 3000 meter spotting and shot is not going to be possible, even with a manual sight (IIRC the M1A1 is sighted manually to 1000-1500 meters...). These are direct-fire, big-bore mobile sniper rifles (for lack of a better analogy). The main gun/coax can be fired from whereever the gunner or TC happen to be, as long as they can reach the cadillacs and pull the trigger. But, again, I'd put forth the 'why,' as above. You can do all the eye-balling and Kentucky windage you want, as long as you're willing to answer to your commander when you can't consisently hit a moving vehicle at 2000 - 3000 meters and have to stop everytime you fire the main gun or coax. And you can keep poking your head out of the hatches with binoculars as long as you don't mind getting hit in the head with everything from hot lead to chunks of rock. I knew a couple of TC's that preferred the hatch open, until we started taking artillery fire...then everyone was 'yella' :) I knew one driver that drove with his hatch open all the way through the war, but that was because he was extremely claustrophobic. Another reason for having the hatches closed in a combat situation is that the NBC overpressurization system doesn't work unless the hatches are sealed (not sure if the Bradley has this...think it does). You want that working when they drop nerve agent on you...Unless you like dancing the herky-jerky for a few seconds, then filling your drawers and dying really really ugly. I'm not absolutely certain on the hatch position options on the Brad commander hatch (I'm googlefu lazy today), but on the M1A1 tank commander's hatch, you had Open (hatch 90 degrees to the turret top), Closed (totally sealed), and (can't remember the damn term -- but...)'half-open', where the hatch was parallel with the turret top, but lifted out of the commander's hole. Basically all that did was give the TC enough room to view through his periscopes (due to the bulky CVC helmet) and not get his fat head blown off (or a mortar dropped on him and everyone in the tank). I know the driver, gunner, TC and 'passengers' on a Bradley have copious periscopes to look through, so if close-in friendlies or civilians are an issue, you can see just fine through them. If these soft targets are more than a couple hundred yards away, however, you're better off with the TC's sight. And the less politically correct response to your collateral damage question (especially if the civilians are close in or mixed up with your targets) is that you're basically using a sledgehammer to open walnuts, and trying not to hit the pecans on the same table. Both of these weapons (120mm and 25mm) fire a depleted uranium needle, or a big basket of greek fire, accurately to 2500 - 3000 meters. When that needle hits up to and including several inches of steel, it goes right through. When the basket hits the steel, it punches through and explodes. I watched an M1A1 kill two T-55's with one shot. (Both 'turrets flying through the air Hollywood explosion' catastrophic kills). The Bradley is comparable on lightly armored vehicles. If there are civilians mixed up in that area, collateral damage ain't preventable, unless you just don't fire. And you don't perform 'suppressing fire' with a tank/light tank main gun unless you're expecting the kill something. In fact, on the coax engagement during gunnery, if you accidently fire the main gun at the troop targets, you pass the engagement, as the troops were 'suppressed.' I was in for four years loading/driving/shooting M1A1's, but I was in different Cav units in Germany and Saudi/Iraq. We worked very closely with the Scouts in their Bradleys. As far as performance, gunnery, etc. I know quite a lot about the Brad, but I have very little hands-on experience. I've done and/or seen the following: * Shot the main gun and coax (twice) * Drove it from point A to point B in a motor pool * Helped pull the pack (engine) * Sat in the back and played poker until my eyes bled. * Changed the track (once -- much easier than an M1A1...) * Watched one melt to the tracks when it was hit by a Hellfire missile fired by the unit's brigade commander...not a shining moment. * Watched many many gunneries and field problems (it keeps up nicely with the M1A1) * Watched it in actual combat. On the M1A1, I've done everything you can do with it, including running over a car (demonstration for the Germans), blowing off the first two roadwheels on a landmine, driving it where it was vowed 'not possible for a tank that heavy', pulling every single nut, bolt, cable and hose (and putting them back on...the correct way!) etc... But I digress... Absolutely. When you're not in combat, you drive hatch open, tank commander and loader hanging out the top of the turret waving at beautiful women, etc. It's the best way to see/drive/maneuver/look at beautiful women. Those pictures were most likely taken in that situation. I'm not saying NO ONE drives into battle with their hatch open; I'm just saying that NO SANE PERSON does. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
Recruiting for Blood and Guts: Modern Military PbP (done recruiting for now)
Top