Why no passenger capacity for CW MMG carrier?

[Kingfish]

I'm trying to understand the reasoning for not allowing the MMG carrier to carry passengers, when it would appear at first glance (to me at least) it could carry a team in much the same manner as it's ATR cousin.

I base my opinion on the fact that the Universal Carrier , which is esentially the same vehicle, can carry the 3" mortar section.

So why is the MMG exempt when all other variants have the capability? A CM bug, established battlefield doctrine, or did the Vickers ammo really take up that much room in the back?

[Bigduke6]

[cranky]

I think this falls into the same category, that explains why a MG42 unit can sit on a panzer, but a Maxim unit cannot sit on a T-34.

[/cranky]

[The_Enigma]

I was reading some article the other day which stated that the MG battalions had carriers assigned to them, to move there vickers around.

I guess you could assume that the MMG carriers are therefore just the dedicated MG units transport, hence just the vickers onboard.

Well just a guess

(like the ATR ones, from what ive read it seems reasonable to assume you would see a dude in the back firing his Bren from the thing at the same time as the guys in front firing off the Boys)

Bigduke, thats easy to explain .... the tankers find it funny to watch those guys drag them through the mud!

Appears to be a Vickers and a Bren gun on this one

Boys and a Bren on this one One to many guns!

I think the carriers are pretty cool for the photos you see with the ammount of crap the crew or section have put on them!

[stoat]

I believe the MMG carriers have a crew of three while the ATR carrier only has a crew of two. Perhaps that would go some way into cutting down on passenger room?

[SgtMuhammed]

If it has wheels or tracks a bunch of Joes or Tommies will figure out how to hitch a ride. I think it has more to do with the abstract unit sizes than it does with any actual value passenger capacity.

[The_Enigma]

Come to think of it, ive only ever seen photos of them with like 3-4 guys in them.

Although am sure like you said, i can just picture a hell load of them piling in if they need to go somewhere in a hurry.

Edit, after saying that i found this

The entire section piled in on this one

Caption states: "Katie" of the Hastings & Prince Edward Regiment ('Hasty Pees') somewhere in Italy. Note the entire section of infantry which has hitched a ride! This is indicative of the abuse carriers received throughout the war.

lol hasty pee

Edit again: Seems later in the war carrier drivers and erm crew? got a helmet which was a version of the para helmet instead of wearing the regular bowl style one.

[Kingfish]

Originally posted by stoat:

I believe the MMG carriers have a crew of three while the ATR carrier only has a crew of two. Perhaps that would go some way into cutting down on passenger room?

Perhaps, but consider again the UC w/ 3" mortar team. That's 4 men (3 man team + 1 driver) and 60+ rounds of ammo.

[Guest Mike]

Layout of a MMG carrier from the Vickers Machinegun site

Crew is 4 - driver and 3 gunners

A non-standard layout:

the ATR "carrier" is different in that it's crew is only the driver and gunner, with the ATR "replacing" the bren in front and thus not taking up any extra space in a normal vehicle.

[Kingfish]

OK, so it would appear that the traditional layout of the Vickers MMG carrier is one that has the weapon mounted on a pedestal in the center of the passenger compartment, much like the Jeep MG.

Is this correct?

[McIvan]

I'm not at all sure there is a traditional layout, but if there is one then that's it. But the MMG could also be found installed into the front left pod....or on top of that pod as per the picture in SO's post.

[BeauCoupDinkyDau]

One way or the other, this is all moot. There will be no more patches to any of the CMx1 games.

BFC has proven this. Once the next game comes out, the previous one goes as dead and limp as a duck in a hunting dog's mouth. We all continue to play it, but BFC completely ignores it.