Guest Guest Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dixon_el Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 The comparison would be firecracker vs. half a block of C4. Nothing replaces pure destructive power when it comes to reducing fortified strong points. The Sheridan would compare very poorly. The 152mm was abandoned because its lack of accuracy made it an ineffective anti-armor weapon. (Think infantry tank) The missles are several generations removed from eachother in range, killing power, accuracy and control. The comparison would be similar to comparing the M1SEP to an M48A5 and would be patiently unfair. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 The 152mm on the Sheridan was rather like when the Brits put a Cromwell 75mm gun on the Staghound 4x4 in WWII (Staghound III in CMAK). In both cases the gun's recoil tended to knock the sights out of allignment, unscrew the bolts holding the turret together, kick up so much dust that the target was obscured. A better comparison would actually be with the ubquitous Mecar and Cockrill (and Engesa) 90mm low pressure guns! Both fit similar-size vehicles. Modern 90mm guns fire APFSDS darts, usually weighing just 1 or 2 pounds but with decent velocity,and accuracy, and maybe matching(?) 25mm high velocity armor piercing rounds in penetration. I had been lobbying for inclusion of the little French AML-90 AC in the game but the chance that there are any examples in Syria still running are about zero. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.