M18 and M24

[Thog]

Couple notes;
1) The 76L54 was a decent, if not exceptional, gun.  What made it a menace was that it could fire a tungsten cored round.  If we had M18's (or M10's, or M4A3/76's etc) with a limited supply of tungsten rounds, it would be more appropriate.  Figure maybe 5-8 tops, plus standard APBC.

2) The choice of even a 75L34 would work if the objective is to keep the armor on par with a MkIVH.  Especially considering the speed improvement any American tank would have vs. a MkIV, you probably wouldn't want a HV gun on it as well if you want to keep things balanced.  If you introduce heavy armor (say, a Tiger or KV series), then a 76mm armed Sherman or Ami-TD would work.  The MkIV would still likely fall out of favor.

3)  I spoke with a WWII vet who was a TC in an M18.  He was one of the black tank crews in the Battle of the Bulge.  He loved the speed, but the lack of armor got allot of his friends killed.  Basically he felt that the M18 was a fast way to get to the battlefield and die.  Partly this was because most engagements he was in occured at less than 200meters and from ambush, both when he was ambushing and when he was ambushed.  This range makes the M18's speed irrelavent, and leaves it up to 1st shot (turret traverse, optics, and crew skill) and armor thickness/slope.  In AH, things would not work out that way on the tilted-billiard table that the terrain is right now.  And it'll be awhile before they can do much about that I suspect.

Thog

[funked]

 

You're missing something in this debate. What? Easy; attacking structures. A 76mm gun would give a nasty wallop to nearly anything.

Flakbait gets it!

Brady, from what I've read M18 crews could fire on the move because of the gyrostabilizer.  Sure Ostwinds could kill it, but they'd have to get in range first, and they can kill Panzers quite easily anyways.

[Jack55]

How about a British-American AFV

SP, 17pounder M10
"Achilles"
 http://www.mobilixnet.dk/~mob75281/profiles/achilles/achilles.htm


Or for amphibious operations

Sherman DD tank
 http://www.kithobbyist.com/AFVInteriors/dd/dd1.html

[Thog]

Funked, according to the TC I talked to, the gyrostab was very overrated.  He said it was usually disabled by the crew because it didn't work as intended.  In fact when I asked him what he would have wanted to see in a tank, he said an effective gyrostabilizer, a good rangefinder, and better armor.

When I replied that he was essentially describing the M1 tank, he asked what that was.  Turns out he hadn't paid attention to any of that since about 1962 when he left the Army (he was in since '42).

So I wouldn't be inclined to put too much into a gyrostabilizer for the M18.  I suspect that the effect is overmodled in Combat Mission is well.

Did I just use that word?  Man, somebody frigging shoot me....

Thog

[brady]

  Yes all the stories I have read point to the Gyrostabilizer as not being used, it broke down and was seldom repaired,and that is true for any type of tank it was mounted on.
  Also as pointed out earlier TD types commonly carried more AP than HE,and as far as tungston Carbide cored AP rounds, the Germans had them as well, although they were issued in smaller numbers do to a shortage of that material in Germany.
  Another point and one maybe some of u can help me with,since some of my reference books are halfway across the state ,is to the best of my knowledge the German 7.5cm  kwk L48 was a very good gun quite capable of killing  all US tanks(with the exception of the JUMBO)from the front at a decent range, also I am under the impression that the 76mm tube on us tanks was in most respects so close in performance to it's German counterpart as to be considered equal to it.
 Sooo it's HE shell should be about as effective as the German one in game terms/?
 Another point those high speed base takeovers could be easily interdicted by strafing fighters against the M-18's open top.
  Their are so many Tanks that could be added taht would be balanced for the one we currently have such as a M4A2, or a T-34/76, I suppose that this is half the fun though debating these issues, after all that's why I spend an hour a night hear before I fly

          Brady

[Thog]

Brady, the references I have indicate that the US 76L54 and German 75L48 are both at about 5.7 or 5.8 kgs for an HE round.  This means they're roughy equivilent, with some variance for casing thickness and explosive material.  Figure close enough for anyone but the supremely anal-retentive (eg, much of this board).

The M18 would do well, but would require carefull handling to survive.  The 76mm gun with standard APBC would penetrate a MkIV at 1500 meters or less most of the time.  But anything bigger than a .50cal would kill a M18 at any angle, almost any distance.  It had about 15mm of armor in most places.

Agreed on the tank types.  HTC isn't getting into anything like the Panzer Elite or Combat Mission level of detail, but they do a pretty good job with the vehical models.  Still, I suspect it's somewhat easier to add vehicals than aircraft, if only because the FM details on an aircraft are so much more finicky than anything but the internal layout of a tank.  Hope to see more sometime soon.  Like a heavy (Tiger or KV), a fast mover (M18, M5, T-70, Puma), an assault gun (M4-105, M7, Hummel, Stug42), and a TD (Jagdpanther, JpzIV/70, Hetzer, Marder or Su-85).  

Also looking for Elvis, but not holding my breath...

Thog