rexford Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 The following tidbits suggest that smoke was not available for the Sherman 75mm gun during the African campaign, and coaxial machine guns were used to an unknown degree for range estimation: Sherman Field Manual FM 17-12 indicates for "SMOKE SHELL" that "Smoke shell for tank guns is under development. The smoke shell now issued for the 81-mm mortar is very effective for screening. (See FM 17-27.)" The date of the FM 17-12 is April 22, 1943. The gun sight for Sherman 75mm in FM 17-12 includes range markings for SHELL SMOKE (WP) MK II, with a maximum range of 2200 yards. FM 17-12 has a section on "DETERMINATION OF RANGE, a. Estimation by Eye" which suggests use of the coaxial machine gun for range estimation by Shermans. "By firing a coaxial machine gun - Fire the machine gun with an estimated range and roll the strike into the target. The point on the reticle at which the strike appears is the range setting for the machine gun. Refer to the sight diagram and determine the corresponding range setting for the tank gun." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Is it true that the bow MG on the Sherman had no usable gunsights at all, and had to be aimed solely by tracers viewed through the periscope, or by sticking the gunner's head out the hatch? Did German AFVs have sights on their bow MGs? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Is it true that the bow MG on the Sherman had no usable gunsights at all, and had to be aimed solely by tracers viewed through the periscope, or by sticking the gunner's head out the hatch? Don't know about the Sherman, but it's certainly true for the firing ports on the M2 Bradley. Come to think of it, I don't recall seeing any port for sights on the Shermans at Bovington. Did German AFVs have sights on their bow MGs?The PzIIIN at Bovington has two linked holes through the hull MG mount. As the MG will only require 1, I presume the other (above and to the left) is for the sights. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexford Posted October 9, 2003 Author Share Posted October 9, 2003 The sight diagram for M3 75mm gun with telescopes M32, M38 or M55 has this relationship between CAL .30 AP MG bullets and SHOT A.P. M61 for the same elevation angle: M61 APCBC 600 yards, coax MG 700 yards M61 APCBC 1000 yards, coax MG 1000 yards M61 APCBC 1500 yards, coax MG 1200 yards M61 APCBC 2000 yards, coax MG 1400 yards M61 APCBC 2500 yards, coax MG 1600 yards M61 APCBC 3000 yards, coax MG 1800 yards Gun elevation angle increases as one heads down the sight. Setting the 75mm gun for an M61 APCBC shot to 2000 yards uses the same elevation angle as the coax MG firing at a 1400 yard target. With coax MG range estimation, roll the MG bullets until they fall onto the target and note the range on the MG sight markings. Say it is 1200 yards. Since one estimates the target range to be 1200 yards based on the coax MG, a shot with M61 APCBC would then use an elevation for that ammo which results in a 1200 yard shot. And the 75mm M61 APCBC shot against a target range of 1200 yards would result in a gun elevation angle less than the coax MG at the same range. [ October 08, 2003, 08:22 PM: Message edited by: rexford ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 9, 2003 Share Posted October 9, 2003 Thanks flamingknives, that's a start. Rexford is apparently limited in his reading ability, since I have no idea why he just did that data dump - not even remotely connected to my question. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted October 9, 2003 Share Posted October 9, 2003 He appears to have dropped into both threads (on CMBB and CMBO forums) but it's only really relevant on the CMBB one. D'OH! Second port on hull mount on PzIIIN is above and to the RIGHT. I've been scooting through web-based images of the Sherman, and can't find anything that would be MG sights for the hull gun. Interesting... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 9, 2003 Share Posted October 9, 2003 This was an issue in GI: Anvil of Victory. All the US players got mad that BMGs were downrated to 2 instead of 4 despite being the same gun as the infantry MMG counter (rated a 4). They said that a hull MG had cleaner ammo, a gunner under armour, and etc. - advantages the crunchie didn't have, so why the rating? An article from the design team in the General mentioned that the BMG on the Sherman had no gunsights, hence the downrating of the firepower. German AFVs did have BMGs rated 4 IIRC. D'ya think that will be reflected in CMAK? It always seemed that tank MGs were undermodelled in CMBO and I haven't used armour enough in CMBB to be able to tell if there is a difference. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted October 9, 2003 Share Posted October 9, 2003 They said that a hull MG had cleaner ammo, a gunner under armour, and etc. - advantages the crunchie didn't have, so why the rating? OTOH, the Crunchy gets an assistant gunner and the ability to change barrels, plus a T&E mechanism. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexford Posted October 10, 2003 Author Share Posted October 10, 2003 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Thanks flamingknives, that's a start. Rexford is apparently limited in his reading ability, since I have no idea why he just did that data dump - not even remotely connected to my question. Had nothing to do with your post, I just thought it was interesting. 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.