M551A1. Yes. The Sheridan. It was a damn antique in 1990. Every was more advanced.
uncensored dd-214 or it didnt happen
3/73 AR and that's as specific as I am going to get.
Blow up anything cool?
Only old M48 hulks. About the coolest thing. Everything else was just a plywood target.
What did it smell like?
Hard to remember. The regular caseless main gun rounds have a distinct smell I will never forget. The cannon power has the regular smokeless smell, but there was something sweeter but more choking.
Honestly its a waste, notice how nobody today is trying to pursue or advance the concept. Main reason is APFSDS works better than ATGMs because there's no APS, hard or soft, that can counter a high velocity rock. And if you're going through the issue of bringing a tank to the front might as well give it the best shells it's gun can sling for far cheaper than much more individually expensive missiles that tend to have worse capabilities and have numerous countermeasures. Plus with advances in FCS technology most tanks today can send a shell just as accurately as any guided missile
The BFD with the Shillelagh was it's 4000+ meter range. Can't say how far it will really go, but it's 4000m+. And, of course, missiles have the same penetration at any range.
LOL.. different anon, but my first ride was an M1 slick in early '87. Swapped it for a shiny new M1A1 in mid-'88. Getting older is better than not getting older!
11 months ago
Anonymous
>Old gen X gay
Facts. But old guys know things.
Did they issue you M3s as well?
Yup. 2 per vehicle. Usually issued to the driver and loader. Fun smg. Ugly as sin.
https://i.imgur.com/Pa0MNwy.jpg
82nd museum? That Sheridan is all over the place. Desert tan, at the time D Co was new on the MTOE, it has the old VN era smoke launchers, and still has a search light. The Desert Storm tanks were M551A1 TTS. They took the tank thermal sights from an M60E3 and just gave it a reticle for the 152mm gun. The museum probably just took a tank from storage and painted it.
M551A1. Yes. The Sheridan. It was a damn antique in 1990. Every was more advanced.
[...]
3/73 AR and that's as specific as I am going to get.
[...]
Only old M48 hulks. About the coolest thing. Everything else was just a plywood target.
[...]
Hard to remember. The regular caseless main gun rounds have a distinct smell I will never forget. The cannon power has the regular smokeless smell, but there was something sweeter but more choking.
[...]
The BFD with the Shillelagh was it's 4000+ meter range. Can't say how far it will really go, but it's 4000m+. And, of course, missiles have the same penetration at any range.
Nope. Most of the Iraqi armor I saw was taken out by air power, artillery, AH-64, and the 24th ID. Look at that famous chart of the ground war. The 82nd moved through the area the 24th ID mostly cleared. We had a couple of machinegun engagements on some hold outs. One guy insisted on being the first combat use of the Shillelagh, so he fired into a bunker of some Iraqis that refused to surrender.
Honestly its a waste, notice how nobody today is trying to pursue or advance the concept. Main reason is APFSDS works better than ATGMs because there's no APS, hard or soft, that can counter a high velocity rock. And if you're going through the issue of bringing a tank to the front might as well give it the best shells it's gun can sling for far cheaper than much more individually expensive missiles that tend to have worse capabilities and have numerous countermeasures. Plus with advances in FCS technology most tanks today can send a shell just as accurately as any guided missile
>Honestly its a waste, notice how nobody today is trying to pursue or advance the concept.
there was a barrel launched atgm for the abrams that saw field testing
Hard APS can "counter" a long rod penetrator, but only enough to reduce its on-target effect. It still hits the tank but it might only penetrate 3/4ths of the armor instead of reaching the crew compartment.
>Honestly its a waste, notice how nobody today is trying to pursue or advance the concept.
>Honestly its a waste, notice how nobody today is trying to pursue or advance the concept.
there was a barrel launched atgm for the abrams that saw field testing
>there was a barrel launched atgm for the abrams that saw field testing
The israelis have some too.
The idea is you can hit harder with a long range HEAT warhead than you can with an APFSDS. So while the APFSDS is the king of short to medium engagements the gun launched missile is there to give the tank the range of missiles tank destroyers and ATGM teams.
The israelis have those as "universal" missiles, they replace everything from old 105/106mm guns/recoiless to Mavericks and Hellfires.
The issue of diameter is solvable the original Spike is 130 mm like a lot of ATGM (helicopter mounted for exemple). The US use 180mm missiles... for logistical reasons, not because there is a real need with modern explosives to have missiles this big.
It is my sincerest hope that railgun-launched hypersonics revive first the battleship and then (after a period armored forward drone control vehicle dominance) the heavy tank.
No. Only because of the compromises that have to be made to fit in a barrel and be able to load from a turret. It limits length and diameter as well as chamber pressures compared to an externality mounted rocket tube.
we should bring back battleships with gun launch antiship missiles
yes it's entirely pointless no I don't care
The amount of autism it would take to try and make 16-inch gun-launched tomahawks a thing is so amusing I almost want to see someone try.
Think bigger anon, if you're launching it from a 16" gun you can easily go scramjet
>hypersonic gun launched AShMs
>paired with guided nuclear shells
>and canister shot
Goddamnit I made myself horny again
>semi-armor piercing discarding sabot, nuclear
This makes my cruiser the big cruiser
>seeing an entire coastline erupt into nuclear fire from a single broadside and feeling the shockwave from all those explosions rock the entire ship
Would almost feel as good as teamkilling the Scout.
Almost.
I have actually fired a Shillelagh. AMA.
Sheridan or M60A2?
How was it compared to anything you later crewed or crewed in the past?
M551A1. Yes. The Sheridan. It was a damn antique in 1990. Every was more advanced.
3/73 AR and that's as specific as I am going to get.
Only old M48 hulks. About the coolest thing. Everything else was just a plywood target.
Hard to remember. The regular caseless main gun rounds have a distinct smell I will never forget. The cannon power has the regular smokeless smell, but there was something sweeter but more choking.
The BFD with the Shillelagh was it's 4000+ meter range. Can't say how far it will really go, but it's 4000m+. And, of course, missiles have the same penetration at any range.
Did you get to go to Desert Storm?
Yes. The homosexual in that pic was in C Co.
Nope, A co. I just looked at the water cans. A30. But I remember him personally.
holy frick you're old.
And I say that neutrally.
>Verification not required.
LOL.. different anon, but my first ride was an M1 slick in early '87. Swapped it for a shiny new M1A1 in mid-'88. Getting older is better than not getting older!
>Old gen X gay
Facts. But old guys know things.
Yup. 2 per vehicle. Usually issued to the driver and loader. Fun smg. Ugly as sin.
82nd museum? That Sheridan is all over the place. Desert tan, at the time D Co was new on the MTOE, it has the old VN era smoke launchers, and still has a search light. The Desert Storm tanks were M551A1 TTS. They took the tank thermal sights from an M60E3 and just gave it a reticle for the 152mm gun. The museum probably just took a tank from storage and painted it.
American Heritage Museum in MA.
Did they issue you M3s as well?
uncensored dd-214 or it didnt happen
Blow up anything cool?
Blew up an m81e2
what's that?
M81E1 was the 152mm gun/launcher on sheridans and m60a2
What did it smell like?
are the missiles fragile ?
I somehow imagine they are stored in cotton wool crates
More fragile than main gun rounds. More robust than your laptop. The biggest problem was ensuring the nose cap didn't get dented. Its fuse is PIBD.
thank you for your cervix
Have you engaged in combat against iraqi armor?
Nope. Most of the Iraqi armor I saw was taken out by air power, artillery, AH-64, and the 24th ID. Look at that famous chart of the ground war. The 82nd moved through the area the 24th ID mostly cleared. We had a couple of machinegun engagements on some hold outs. One guy insisted on being the first combat use of the Shillelagh, so he fired into a bunker of some Iraqis that refused to surrender.
Honestly its a waste, notice how nobody today is trying to pursue or advance the concept. Main reason is APFSDS works better than ATGMs because there's no APS, hard or soft, that can counter a high velocity rock. And if you're going through the issue of bringing a tank to the front might as well give it the best shells it's gun can sling for far cheaper than much more individually expensive missiles that tend to have worse capabilities and have numerous countermeasures. Plus with advances in FCS technology most tanks today can send a shell just as accurately as any guided missile
>Honestly its a waste, notice how nobody today is trying to pursue or advance the concept.
there was a barrel launched atgm for the abrams that saw field testing
Hard APS can "counter" a long rod penetrator, but only enough to reduce its on-target effect. It still hits the tank but it might only penetrate 3/4ths of the armor instead of reaching the crew compartment.
But everything you said is correct though.
>Honestly its a waste, notice how nobody today is trying to pursue or advance the concept.
>there was a barrel launched atgm for the abrams that saw field testing
The israelis have some too.
The idea is you can hit harder with a long range HEAT warhead than you can with an APFSDS. So while the APFSDS is the king of short to medium engagements the gun launched missile is there to give the tank the range of missiles tank destroyers and ATGM teams.
The israelis have those as "universal" missiles, they replace everything from old 105/106mm guns/recoiless to Mavericks and Hellfires.
The issue of diameter is solvable the original Spike is 130 mm like a lot of ATGM (helicopter mounted for exemple). The US use 180mm missiles... for logistical reasons, not because there is a real need with modern explosives to have missiles this big.
It is my sincerest hope that railgun-launched hypersonics revive first the battleship and then (after a period armored forward drone control vehicle dominance) the heavy tank.
Wait for railguns. You wouldn't even need the entire missile to fit between the rails, just a magnetic bit at the bottom.
man i wish i could draw
id love to just pump out sketches of tanks/vehicles/gear just to scratch that itch in my head
Then you are limited by the size of a barrel when rockets are perfectly capable of being launched on their own.
Since the range for missiles now is so massive, what difference does it make to fire vertically or from a movable barrel?
BANEBLADE
No. Only because of the compromises that have to be made to fit in a barrel and be able to load from a turret. It limits length and diameter as well as chamber pressures compared to an externality mounted rocket tube.
would she be classified as a shortstack?
It's a bit like anal. Depends whether you're on the giving or receiving end.
>lust provoking image