Jump to content


Modern day Magazine fed tanks


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

EmberTheDragoness #1 Posted Feb 10 2015 - 18:55

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 6617 battles
  • 589
  • Member since:
    09-11-2011
I know The so called Auto Loaders in WoT are as a rule. Not auto loaders (As far as I know there are really only 4, The SU-101 being one) WHat I'm wondering about is the Mag fed guns. And out of the Modern examples I can't think of a better one than the Leclerk. Which has an 18 round drum for the 120mm cannon. Are there others with as extreme of examples like that? OR are the French just special

Bodik23 #2 Posted Feb 10 2015 - 18:56

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5749 battles
  • 221
  • [BLZAN] BLZAN
  • Member since:
    12-15-2013
Its all french... (or is it greek?...) to me:teethhappy:

Daigensui #3 Posted Feb 10 2015 - 19:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 32016 battles
  • 29,987
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012
AMX Leclerc doesn't have a drum, so not sure what you're blabbering about.

Treacherous_Neighbour #4 Posted Feb 10 2015 - 19:17

    Captain

  • Players
  • 27454 battles
  • 1,277
  • Member since:
    01-04-2013
T72b and t90 do not need loaders

Silvers_ #5 Posted Feb 10 2015 - 19:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 50601 battles
  • 5,537
  • [REL-A] REL-A
  • Member since:
    06-12-2012

Type 90 and Type 10 (Japan)- Uses a "conveyer belt "autoloader"

Type 99 (China)- Has a 22 round "carousel"

T-64 (Russia) - Has a 28 round "carousel"

T90 - Has 22 rounds in it's "carousel"



Blackhorse_Six_ #6 Posted Feb 10 2015 - 21:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 53815 battles
  • 10,030
  • [HHT] HHT
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

View PostDaigensui, on Feb 10 2015 - 13:09, said:

not sure what you're blabbering about.

 

Come on Dia, even an insensitive lout like me usually knows to be a little more diplomatic with the first post ...

 

The main advantage of any large-bore autoloader is that it functions predictably while on the move, whereas a low-experience human loader will spend precious time chasing the breech of a stabilized gun. As you can plainly see in the early oscillators, those autoloaders are contained entirely within the turret and so do not suffer that disadvantage. Soviet carosel-style autoloaders are contained entirely within the hull, directly under the gun breech and their centers coincide with the pivot-center of the turret. The disadvantage of this type of autoloader has long been that the gun must return to a loading angle after firing to facilitate loading, as the loading machinery is not flexible. Oscillating turrets eliminate this problem, but tend to be the size of a barn to by which to enclose the autoloader machinery.

 

The Soviet T-62, while not autoloaded, did require a loading & ejection angle after firing to facilitate human loading due to the cramped space of the turret and the required manipulation of the 115mm rounds. However, the sights of the T-62 were slaved to the gun, so whenever the gun went into the loading angle, the sights came-off the target when the gun was elevated, forcing the TC and gunner to re-acquire the target, which if moving/motion, could be extremely disorienting. If this version of the T-62 were ever to appear in WOT, I highly doubt that this important performance characteristic would be represented.



The_Chieftain #7 Posted Feb 10 2015 - 22:11

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 14382 battles
  • 9,929
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011
The majority of modern tanks being designed today incorporate the use of an autoloader to save space. Today's autoloaders are a lot faster and more reliable than they used to be. Many of the human-loaded tanks (eg Leo 2, Challenger 2) do revert to a loading position just like their autoloader counterpart, for the same reason: To make it easier for the loader to find the breech. There is no loss in engagement time as, as Blackhorse correctly points out, these days the guns are slaved to the sights, not the other way around.

Blackhorse_Six_ #8 Posted Feb 10 2015 - 22:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 53815 battles
  • 10,030
  • [HHT] HHT
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

View PostThe_Chieftain said:

The majority of modern tanks being designed today incorporate the use of an autoloader to save space.

 

Saving Space = Reducing overall vehicle height & target presentation while eliminating a mouth to feed, clothe, house, equip, care for and pay ...

 

Oh yeah, and to cram all that saved-space with extra crap :teethhappy:



Shinma_ #9 Posted Feb 10 2015 - 23:52

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 16614 battles
  • 352
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

View PostBlackhorse_Six, on Feb 10 2015 - 16:29, said:

 

Saving Space = Reducing overall vehicle height & target presentation while eliminating a mouth to feed, clothe, house, equip, care for and pay ...

 

Oh yeah, and to cram all that saved-space with extra crap :teethhappy:

 

And dumping the maintenance workload on 3 people instead of 4 while increasing complexity and failure points.  

Blackhorse_Six_ #10 Posted Feb 11 2015 - 00:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 53815 battles
  • 10,030
  • [HHT] HHT
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

View PostShinma_, on Feb 10 2015 - 17:52, said:

And dumping the maintenance workload on 3 people instead of 4 while increasing complexity and failure points.  

 

(+2)

The_Chieftain #11 Posted Feb 11 2015 - 00:52

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 14382 battles
  • 9,929
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View PostShinma_, on Feb 10 2015 - 22:52, said:

 

And dumping the maintenance workload on 3 people instead of 4 while increasing complexity and failure points.  

 

Not really.

 

As I recall, the French actually do have more crewmen in a tank company than you would think, because the extra personnel who help out with maintenance and security are transported in a PC. You don't make the same manpower savings, but you do get the tactical savings and without risking so many men in one tank. As for complexity and failure points, I think that's a little overstated. Given just how complex today's tanks are, another moving part isn't really going to be noticed if it's passed the tests.



Daigensui #12 Posted Feb 11 2015 - 01:45

    Major

  • Players
  • 32016 battles
  • 29,987
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012
The only issue ROKA noticed with installing autoloaders was..... in battlefield conditions you have only three people instead of four to load the ammo into the tank. Aside from that, there were no particular problems.

Lert #13 Posted Feb 11 2015 - 02:11

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 44742 battles
  • 25,715
  • Member since:
    09-02-2010

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Feb 10 2015 - 21:11, said:

Many of the human-loaded tanks (eg Leo 2, Challenger 2) do revert to a loading position just like their autoloader counterpart, for the same reason: To make it easier for the loader to find the breech.

 

So that's why the Leo2 looks up after firing each shot....

 



Dominatus #14 Posted Feb 11 2015 - 02:19

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,790
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010
You can see it in the Chally 2 promo video as well. Even older tanks are supposed to do that, but manually. Now tank designers have decided not to trust the crews to do it themselves.

EmberTheDragoness #15 Posted Feb 11 2015 - 18:06

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 6617 battles
  • 589
  • Member since:
    09-11-2011
Oh. Nevermind I see my confusion. I think. The Leklerk can rapidly fire 18 shells before needing to be reloaded from the hull right?

Dominatus #16 Posted Feb 11 2015 - 18:14

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,790
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010
Depends on what you mean by "rapid". All tanks need to reload their bustle racks from the hull (or try loading from the hull directly) once its empty.

Blackhorse_Six_ #17 Posted Feb 11 2015 - 18:22

    Major

  • Players
  • 53815 battles
  • 10,030
  • [HHT] HHT
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

View PostDominatus, on Feb 11 2015 - 12:14, said:

Depends on what you mean by "rapid". All tanks need to reload their bustle racks from the hull (or try loading from the hull directly) once its empty.

 

Assuming the bustle ammo rack is empty, most TCs would transfer their hull stowage to the Ready Rack.

 

You don't want to be caught dead loading out of the saddle racks, or you will be.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users