HistoryNet.com RSS
ArmchairGeneral.com RSS

HistoryNet.com Articles
America's Civil War
American History
Aviation History
Civil War Times
MHQ
Military History
Vietnam
Wild West
World War II

ACG Online
ACG Magazine
Stuff We Like
War College
History News
Tactics 101
Carlo D'Este
Books

ACG Gaming
Boardgames
PC Game Reviews

ACG Network
Contact Us
Our Newsletter
Meet Our Staff
Advertise With Us

Sites We Support
HistoryNet.com
StreamHistory.com
Once A Marine
The Art of Battle
Game Squad
Mil. History Podcast
Russian Army - WW2
Achtung Panzer!
Mil History Online

Go Back   Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History > Historical Events & Eras > World War II > Armor in World War II

Notices and Announcements

Armor in World War II Discuss all aspects & disciplines of World War II Armor here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 26 Jun 12, 15:26
dutched's Avatar
dutched dutched is offline
Lieutenant General
Pirate
ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Here there be tigers
Posts: 3,383
dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdbigdee View Post
The MG at the rear turret of some tanks(like the KV-1)was superfluous and was often not manned.
The fact that a weapon is not constantly manned does not make it superfluous, consider it sometimes can be faster to have to change stations than turning around the whole turret especially as it might have high gearing (=slow turning) even the Japanese medium tanks had extra mg stations as the person inside could turn around faster than the turret would turn around.

There was a need for the ability of an AFV to defend against infanty attacks. Just for arguement sake I highlight the cases of the StuG where on late vehicles a coax was added to the main armament and the Elefant rebuilt of the surviving examples to feature a bow mg. Later still the inclusion on the Panzerjaeger IV of one or two forward firing mg stations.
The latter is remarkable in the context of vehicles that would snipe at tanks
so in theory at least should operate further away from the infantry infested foremost front line.

Ed.
__________________
The repetition of affirmations leads to belief. Once that belief becomes a deep conviction, you better wake up and look at the facts.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03 Jul 12, 10:52
Michele's Avatar
Michele Michele is offline
General of the Forums
Italy
Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C Tournament 1 of the ACG 2017-2018 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Udine
Posts: 6,650
Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100]
Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
Thank you! However, these are both about the KV-1. I was wondering about the "some tanks" part, too.

Others have already pointed out, though, that sometimes one would spare the crewman but not do away with the station, because it might be manned at times - when needed - by a crewman whose main station was another one. This happened not only with tanks but also with armored cars and bombers.
On a similar note, some tanks had as part of their outfitting a SMG. especially at the beginning of the war. It's not as if any crewman normally served by keeping that in hand; but this doesn't mean that the gun wouldn't turn out to be handy at times.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 16 Jul 12, 21:57
mdbigdee's Avatar
mdbigdee mdbigdee is offline
Lance Corporal
United_States
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ludowici
Posts: 36
mdbigdee is on the path to success [1-99]
My source is The Armor at War Series"Stalin's Heavy Tanks 1941-1945 The KV and IS Heavy Tanks "page 26:A view of the rear of the turret of the KV-1 Model 1941.At the center is a DT 7.62 mm machine gun.The third crewman in the turret has the responsibily for operating this machine gun,intended to provide defense against enemy infantry.The layout was archaic,and due to crew shortages in 1942-1943 this position was often unmanned".Other tanks that had this machine gun position were the Japanese Type 95 HA-GO,the Type 89 and the type 97.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 16 Jul 12, 22:06
mdbigdee's Avatar
mdbigdee mdbigdee is offline
Lance Corporal
United_States
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ludowici
Posts: 36
mdbigdee is on the path to success [1-99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acheron View Post
Didn't the IS-2 feature such a MG? By that time the Red Army should have plenty of experience on the pros and cons of such a MG, no? Though admittably they didn't repeat it later on.
The IS-2 did have such a machine gun,however,the IS-3 did not.And of course no German,British or American tank in WW2 ever had one.Neither did the T-34.

Last edited by mdbigdee; 16 Jul 12 at 22:58..
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 16 Jul 12, 22:32
mdbigdee's Avatar
mdbigdee mdbigdee is offline
Lance Corporal
United_States
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ludowici
Posts: 36
mdbigdee is on the path to success [1-99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutched View Post
The fact that a weapon is not constantly manned does not make it superfluous, consider it sometimes can be faster to have to change stations than turning around the whole turret especially as it might have high gearing (=slow turning) even the Japanese medium tanks had extra mg stations as the person inside could turn around faster than the turret would turn around.

There was a need for the ability of an AFV to defend against infanty attacks. Just for arguement sake I highlight the cases of the StuG where on late vehicles a coax was added to the main armament and the Elefant rebuilt of the surviving examples to feature a bow mg. Later still the inclusion on the Panzerjaeger IV of one or two forward firing mg stations.
The latter is remarkable in the context of vehicles that would snipe at tanks
so in theory at least should operate further away from the infantry infested foremost front line.

Ed.
So it is easier for the two crewmen in the turret(TC,who was also the gunner,the radioman,and who knows else...and the loader)to change positions during a battle rather than stay at their post and do their job?I'm talking about the KV-1 here,but it could also take into consideration the Japanese tanks.And since this MG was pointed at the tanks 6 o'clock position,the turret would have to be revolved anyway to engage infantry coming from any other position.And according to my previous-named source,this position had no vision slit/periscope/aiming device,so the best a gunner could do was"spray and pray".It was a completely superfluous position.

Last edited by mdbigdee; 16 Jul 12 at 23:36..
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 17 Jul 12, 11:22
Michele's Avatar
Michele Michele is offline
General of the Forums
Italy
Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C Tournament 1 of the ACG 2017-2018 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Udine
Posts: 6,650
Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100]
Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdbigdee View Post
So it is easier for the two crewmen in the turret(TC,who was also the gunner,the radioman,and who knows else...and the loader)to change positions during a battle rather than stay at their post and do their job?
The job of any tankers includes defending their tank from close infantyr assaults.
That said, I was under the impression that the KV-1 had 5 crewmen. Were three of them in the hull?

Quote:
I'm talking about the KV-1 here,but it could also take into consideration the Japanese tanks.And since this MG was pointed at the tanks 6 o'clock position,the turret would have to be revolved anyway to engage infantry coming from any other position.
Sure. Maybe the 6 o'clock direction was considered more vulnerable than the 3 and 9? It would seem to make sense.

Quote:
And according to my previous-named source,this position had no vision slit/periscope/aiming device,so the best a gunner could do was"spray and pray".It was a completely superfluous position.
Note that the early versions of the Tiger I came with 5 S-Minen, which also were non-aimed defense weapons intended to keep close assualts at bay.
They were not installed any more - once the Tigers came with the Nahverteidungswaffe, also an area weapon rather than an accurately aimed one.

It is obvious that eventually, a tank's defense against such assaults is in mutual support (other tanks, or friendly infantry, spraying its back), movement, and/or turning either the turret only or the whole vehicle to face the threat (turning the whole vehicle counts as movement, as far as an approaching infantyrman is concerned when he gets close to those tracks, so it's doubly effective).
But tanks could be ambushed while unsupported, or could have been immobilized by prior problems (hits, mines, terrain, mechanical breakdowns), and turning the turret took time. So an interim keep-away weapon wasn't a bad idea.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 17 Jul 12, 16:07
mdbigdee's Avatar
mdbigdee mdbigdee is offline
Lance Corporal
United_States
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ludowici
Posts: 36
mdbigdee is on the path to success [1-99]
As I stated in my previous post,the KV-1 was supposed to have three crew in the turret...the tank commander/gunner,the loader who also fired the co-ax machine gun,and a third crewman whose job was to fire the rear machine gun.However due to a shortage of crew in 1942-43 this third crewman was often eliminated.Source:Armor at War Series Stalin's Heavy Tanks 1941-1945 The KV-1 and IS-2 Heavy Tanks.Now with the third crewman gone you have only two in the turret.The Germans certainly thought that the rearward-firing machine gun was superfluous.A German intelligence report from 1943 says this:The tank's(KV-1)turret configuration was very poorly conceived,with the commander having to double up in his tasks while the third turret crewman did nothing but fire the useless rear machine gun.And if a rearward-firing machine gun was a good idea,why wasn't it installed in the T-34 or post-World War Two Soviet Tanks?And if you need a "keep-away"weapon you take out your submachine gun.

Last edited by mdbigdee; 17 Jul 12 at 16:31..
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 18 Jul 12, 04:14
Michele's Avatar
Michele Michele is offline
General of the Forums
Italy
Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C Tournament 1 of the ACG 2017-2018 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Udine
Posts: 6,650
Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100]
Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdbigdee View Post
As I stated in my previous post,the KV-1 was supposed to have three crew in the turret...the tank commander/gunner,the loader who also fired the co-ax machine gun,and a third crewman whose job was to fire the rear machine gun.However due to a shortage of crew in 1942-43 this third crewman was often eliminated.Source:Armor at War Series Stalin's Heavy Tanks 1941-1945 The KV-1 and IS-2 Heavy Tanks.Now with the third crewman gone you have only two in the turret.The Germans certainly thought that the rearward-firing machine gun was superfluous.A German intelligence report from 1943 says this:The tank's(KV-1)turret configuration was very poorly conceived,with the commander having to double up in his tasks while the third turret crewman did nothing but fire the useless rear machine gun.
That the task arrangement was poorly conceived doesn't necessarily make the defensive armament superfluous.

Quote:
And if a rearward-firing machine gun was a good idea,why wasn't it installed in the T-34 or post-World War Two Soviet Tanks?And if you need a "keep-away"weapon you take out your submachine gun.
The disadvantage of the tank's SMG is the same as the disadvantage of the pintle-mounted MG many post-war Soviet tanks had, and that could be quickly used 360: the crewman using it has to expose part of his body. The rear-facing MG had other disadvantages, but not this one.
It made sense to have a heavy pintle-mounted MG, say on Shermans and later on T-62s, because their main function was as AA defense; only secondarily they served against personnel targets in the vicinity of the tank. But the crewman could be hit by the latter, which is a disadvantage in comparison with the possibility of engaging these from inside the tank.

The fact that the Germans went for the Tiger I's S-minen and the Nahverteidigungswaffe means that they prized this advantage; both these close-defense systems don't require the tank crew to expose themselves to small-arms fire at point-blank range. Which makes sense: the close-assaulting PBI might very well only be armed with Molotov cocktails or hand grenades, i.e. weapons that have a low chance of affecting the tank's armor; but they're close and they have small arms, and killing or wounding the crewman would be a real possibility for them.

Note that the Hetzer also featured a top-mounted MG that would be fired from inside, and aimed by looking through a periscope. Low accuracy but high protection for the firing crewman.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 19 Jul 12, 14:37
mdbigdee's Avatar
mdbigdee mdbigdee is offline
Lance Corporal
United_States
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ludowici
Posts: 36
mdbigdee is on the path to success [1-99]
Tank mg's

If the rearward firing machine gun filled a niche,why weren't they installed on other Soviet armored vehicles like the SU-85,the SU-100 and the ISU-152?Both the SU-85 and the SU-100 were turretless tank destroyers with no machine guns,and the ISU-152 was a heavy assault gun and tank destroyer with a 12.7mm AA machine gun and a coax machine gun.It seems to me that a armored vehicle that had no turret might benefit from such a rear-firing machine gun,but the Soviets chose not to install one.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 20 Jul 12, 20:18
dutched's Avatar
dutched dutched is offline
Lieutenant General
Pirate
ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Here there be tigers
Posts: 3,383
dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdbigdee View Post
So it is easier for the two crewmen in the turret(TC,who was also the gunner,the radioman,and who knows else...and the loader)to change positions during a battle rather than stay at their post and do their job?I'm talking about the KV-1 here,but it could also take into consideration the Japanese tanks.And since this MG was pointed at the tanks 6 o'clock position,the turret would have to be revolved anyway to engage infantry coming from any other position.And according to my previous-named source,this position had no vision slit/periscope/aiming device,so the best a gunner could do was"spray and pray".It was a completely superfluous position.
Really?
It might have been deemed very useful.
As for your statement that no German tanks had this feature I would refer to the rearward facing MP ports on the PzKfw III and IV and the MP port on the early and mid production Tiger I Ausf. E.
In mainy cases the coax MG in the tank turret of various tanks had/has in many cases a large dead zone.
So to address these shortcomings against a close up infantry attack from rear and side quartres ............. as highlighted in my previous posts.
I wonder what direction you had in mind with this remark: "rather than stay at their post and do their job"? What if someone is trying to set your tank on fire in a close quarter infantry atack. You just get on with your job? What job would that be? What ever job you are thinking of better get the priorities right, as a tank crew member one would probably hate having to rely on those that show little or no initiative in emergencies.
As for the future deletion of "pistol" ports in WW II tanks. look at the following developement of a short throw mortar mounted in the turret ceiling. There were two major reasons for deleting "pistol" ports:
a/ Pistol ports will weaken the integrity of the armoured surface as do the extra escape hatches.
b/ Providing pistol ports from a production point of view will increase turn around time and so cost. When casting turrets there is a slight advantage
as one could provide for the opening to be included in the cast which opening has to be machined out on a welded construction.
But I start to drift.

Ed
__________________
The repetition of affirmations leads to belief. Once that belief becomes a deep conviction, you better wake up and look at the facts.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

  #41  
Old 21 Jul 12, 08:57
mdbigdee's Avatar
mdbigdee mdbigdee is offline
Lance Corporal
United_States
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ludowici
Posts: 36
mdbigdee is on the path to success [1-99]
Which is what I stated in my previous post.If you need a "keep-away "weapon you take out the SMG and fire through the pistol port.And I have read accounts where even a 3 man crew in a turret where overwhelmed in battle because too many events were happening at the same time and they could not cope.The fact remains that neither the T-34,the BT series of Soviet tanks,nor the T-60 had a rear-firing machine gun.And if you try to cover all the blind spots that a tank has with MGs,then you have a turret bristling with MGs and a crew who can't effectively do anything.

Last edited by mdbigdee; 21 Jul 12 at 09:51..
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 21 Jul 12, 14:06
dutched's Avatar
dutched dutched is offline
Lieutenant General
Pirate
ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Here there be tigers
Posts: 3,383
dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200] dutched is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdbigdee View Post
Which is what I stated in my previous post.If you need a "keep-away "weapon you take out the SMG and fire through the pistol port.And I have read accounts where even a 3 man crew in a turret where overwhelmed in battle because too many events were happening at the same time and they could not cope.The fact remains that neither the T-34,the BT series of Soviet tanks,nor the T-60 had a rear-firing machine gun.And if you try to cover all the blind spots that a tank has with MGs,then you have a turret bristling with MGs and a crew who can't effectively do anything.
Horses for courses of coursus. Some tanks had an inherenly smaller dead zone (blind spots) like the vehicles you bring to the foreground. Why adorn the vehicle with unnecessary extras. As for the crew being overwhelmed by events outside the vehicle, well those things do happen. Cannot cater for all eventualities. Anyway some of the poblems were addressed with the introduction of the short throw mortars in the turret tops.
Too many can be just as bad as too few. In the end it's about finding the balance. Like with everthing else in design many a case of trial and error.
Right first time, every time is a good mantra, but then reality strikes.

Ed.
__________________
The repetition of affirmations leads to belief. Once that belief becomes a deep conviction, you better wake up and look at the facts.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 21 Jul 12, 16:09
T. A. Gardner's Avatar
T. A. Gardner T. A. Gardner is online now
General of the Forums
United_States
ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Tournament 1 and preceding Mini-Polls Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: T. A. Gardner
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 34,952
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
They are very valuable if not installed as just a 'bullet hose.' That is, if the person operating the machinegun actually has good sights and such these weapons are critical to the vehicle.

The Germans provided their hull machineguns with a telescopic sight and rig to help stabilize the gun for the operator. Such a weapon could easily equal a ground mounted medium machinegun (the one on the tripod) in use.

The coaxial allows the gunner to engage soft targets without using the main gun. This wastes less ammunition on targets not requiring high explosive or armor piercing rounds.

The US .50 on the turret for AA defense found a more frequent use as a reconnissance by fire weapon. It was frequently used to spray buildings, church steeples, and other suspect locations for enemy that might be hiding there. It was also frequently dismounted and used on a ground mount for defense of the tank when in an encampment.

Some US tank crews also managed to swap out their .30 coaxial for the .50 machinegun to give them a bit more firepower under armor.

The German AA machinegun when mounted used either the coaxial or hull mounted machinegun on a mount provided with the vehicle. That is why you don't see it mounted very often, it requires modifying things. If the vehicle were to go into action with the machinegun mounted for AA defense it leaves the vehicle without one machinegun under armor.

Even vehicles that don't permanenty mount a machinegun often are provided one. US tank destroyers had a .50 AA machinegun even though they lack a coaxial and hull mounted one.
German assault guns generally lack a permanently mounted machinegun until late in the war. They still have one in the vehicle for crew use and defensive purposes.

The rear mounted (usually on the turret) machinegun was found of little value. It normally isn't manned by a crew member so its field of fire is often unobserved. It takes up space in the turret for little return. That is why it is seldom seen and generally dropped on vehicles where it appears on early models.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 23 Jul 12, 06:47
broderickwells's Avatar
broderickwells broderickwells is offline
General of the Forums
France
ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon Best Pin-Up Of World War II Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign 
Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Auckland
Posts: 10,624
broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+] broderickwells has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdbigdee View Post
Which is what I stated in my previous post.If you need a "keep-away "weapon you take out the SMG and fire through the pistol port.And I have read accounts where even a 3 man crew in a turret where overwhelmed in battle because too many events were happening at the same time and they could not cope.The fact remains that neither the T-34,the BT series of Soviet tanks,nor the T-60 had a rear-firing machine gun.And if you try to cover all the blind spots that a tank has with MGs,then you have a turret bristling with MGs and a crew who can't effectively do anything.
The BT-7 obr. 1937 had a rear-firing turret mg, as did the T-26 of the same year. Early versions of the T-34 also mounted one but it was eliminated to make manufacture easier. A pistol port was retained. As for the T-60 and T-70, being as they were two-man tanks, it would be kind of redundant to put an extra mg in the rear of the turret.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 23 Jul 12, 14:32
mdbigdee's Avatar
mdbigdee mdbigdee is offline
Lance Corporal
United_States
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ludowici
Posts: 36
mdbigdee is on the path to success [1-99]
The Japanese Type 95 HA-GO light tank was comparable to the Soviet BT-2.The HA-GO had a crew of three,driver,hull machinegunner and the tank commander. The TC was charged with observation,rotating the turret,loading aiming and firing the main 37mm gun,giving commands AND firing the rear 7.7mm MG,which was stationed at the 5 o'clock position.As far as Soviet tanks like the KV-1 and IS-2,they usually carried some PBI on them to protect them,which is why they had hand-holds welded to the turret and rear deck.They also operated in juncture with other tanks,which could"scratch their back"with MG fire if a swarm of tank hunters tried to destroy it.If the tank was disabled in enemy territory alone the crew would abandon the tank and try to make it on foot to friendly lines.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Please bookmark this thread if you enjoyed it!


Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 21:47.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.