Author Topic: Tank question  (Read 907 times)

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
Tank question
« Reply #15 on: February 22, 2005, 10:33:45 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Finrod
My day simply would not be complete without at least one Norwegian drive-by Nilsen.


Where can I find a norwegian lutefisk drivein-by? Would like to try one of those lutefisk one day. What do they charge, and do they come in different sizes?

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Tank question
« Reply #16 on: February 22, 2005, 10:38:26 AM »
It was removed to lower the profile of the tank.
The isrealis actually removed it from the M60s, I dont know that it was actually removed in US service.

Offline Finrod

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 384
Tank question
« Reply #17 on: February 22, 2005, 10:45:53 AM »
brother, I was Ghost Troop 2/2 1987 - 90. Went with them to the gulf.

Nilsen, you must understand that the cause of all this is simple...its because a vest has no sleeves.

The notes we got in the 80s was that the cupola was removed to lower the profile of the M1. The M60 was actually a pretty good tank, particularly the A3 but it was very large.

Offline Monk

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
Tank question
« Reply #18 on: February 22, 2005, 10:58:39 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Finrod
brother, I was Ghost Troop 2/2 1987 - 90. Went with them to the gulf.
 
Get outa here - Fox, same times.

Offline Finrod

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 384
Tank question
« Reply #19 on: February 22, 2005, 11:04:31 AM »
No Chite! I was part of the crew that came over from 3-35 AR across the street when ya'll were so short NCOs. I used to run with Richardson and Bouday.:D

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
Tank question
« Reply #20 on: February 22, 2005, 11:14:31 AM »
Ahh, I get it now finrod.

Thx :)

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
Tank question
« Reply #21 on: February 22, 2005, 11:50:36 AM »
i love you rodfin, you da man.

you still need to give me tanking lessons...
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline bigsky

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 964
Tank question
« Reply #22 on: February 22, 2005, 02:24:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by SunTracker


You can see by this picture that both the commander and gunner have to be exposed to fire their weapons.

isnt that the first m1 that is on display at the patton musem at ft. knox? oh BTW i was  in L trp 3/3 ACR and was one of the lucky ones who got out just before the gulf war.
"I am moist like bacon"

Offline SunTracker

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1367
Tank question
« Reply #23 on: February 22, 2005, 08:31:35 PM »
Ok, so we got finrod saying that the commanders 50 can be electronically fired.  And VOR says that this feature was removed on later M1s.  And in a book I just read on M1s in Gulf 2, it doesnt mention tank commanders firing from a buttoned up position.  In fact, it talks quite a bit about tank commanders firing shortened m16s (M4s) from the commanders hatch.  So maybe the 50 was removed all together.

Offline Dnil

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 879
Tank question
« Reply #24 on: February 22, 2005, 09:33:46 PM »
Thunder Run suntracker?

Offline JoOwEn

  • Parolee
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 157
Tank question
« Reply #25 on: February 23, 2005, 01:30:14 AM »
tank commanders suppose to command the tank not spend his time shooting at enemy soldiers with the machine gun.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Tank question
« Reply #26 on: February 23, 2005, 02:07:41 AM »
M1 and M1A1 could fire commanders pintle 50cal remotely from inside.

The M1A2 cannot because of a new cupola design. Why was this dropped, I dont know.

As I understand it US tankers fired M4 carbines in Iraq becuse sometimes the 50cal was overkil and provided too much penetration after hitting the intended human target in close urban ares.

Offline Finrod

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 384
Tank question
« Reply #27 on: February 23, 2005, 05:54:24 AM »
This is actually starting to become sorta funny.  The commander's 50 is fired by electric cylanoids (spelling). There are no "butterfly" handles on it. The comander fires from inside the tank. Now I stopped being in an armor battalion, except for a 2 month period last year, so things might have changed but Tank Table6, 7 and 8 both have a 50 Engagement from a buttonned up position. That would be sorta hard if it weren't possible.  You asked the question, got your answer, now you want to debate the answer. As far as firing an M4 from the hatch, Grun asnwered that question.

Bigsky...yep thats the original on display at the Patton Museum at Knox.

Offline Finrod

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 384
Tank question
« Reply #28 on: February 23, 2005, 05:54:59 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Finrod
This is actually starting to become sorta funny.  The commander's 50 is fired by electric cylanoids (spelling). There are no "butterfly" handles on it. The comander fires from inside the tank. Now I stopped being in an armor battalion, except for a 2 month period last year, so things might have changed but Tank Table 6, 7 and 8 all have a 50 Engagement from a buttonned up position. That would be sorta hard if it weren't possible.  You asked the question, got your answer, now you want to debate the answer. As far as firing an M4 from the hatch, Grun asnwered that question.

Bigsky...yep thats the original on display at the Patton Museum at Knox.



emailed one of my old buddies, and yes we still fire from a position in the tank. The controls have been somewhat reworked but the fundamental engagement has NOT changed.

Offline SunTracker

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1367
Tank question
« Reply #29 on: February 23, 2005, 06:35:17 AM »
How does the tank commander fire the 50 caliber from both a sitting and standing position if it only has electric controls inside the tank?