GerryCMBB Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Hello: 1. Coming from ASL so know them as bow-mounted, coaxial, and anti-aircraft MGs. Wondering are there more proper military terms? 2. Neat experience yesterday going through Raff Campaign. I could only see 2 MGs on a Sherman. Then I zoomed in, and they were firing the coaxial MG. Just seems to stick out a little from the turret. Cool beans. 3. Is the firing of the anti-aircraft and coaxial one mutually exclusive. Thanks, Gerry 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Depends on the AA mount. Some Shermans mount the AAMG behind the commander so it is impractical for use in the ground role. Others place it so it is accessible to the vehicle commander, so Coax and AAMGs can be fired simultaneously. On a Sherman the AAMG is always a .50 cal HMG The Sherman also has a bow machine gun mounted through the glacis plate of the vehicle (in the bow, hence bow machine gun) which is operated by the radio operator alongside the driver. As such, as long as the target is in the front arc, this can fire too. The Coax and the bow MG are both .30cal 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 1. Bow Co-ax and AA are the correct terms. 2. Although there are 2 to 3 MG's on a WW2 tank the bow gun will generally be just a simple ball mount but the Co-ax is usually linked to the gunner sighting system and has a longer range and higher firepower. 3. As stated many AA MG's cannot really be used to attack ground targets and in some cases leave the firer very exposed if they do so. Not 100% sure but it does seem the AAMG on some German tanks is usually dismounted, (carried inside the tank?) as it is rare to see a picture with an MG on the cupola but most "technical" drawings show an MG. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 On some models of Shermans the AAMG is mounted facing forward but to the left of the commander. It can be fired by the loader when he isn't busy loading. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Not a bad site this one, shows lots of closes ups of the hatches and MG mounts etc http://www.strijdbewijs.nl/tanks/sherman/eng.htm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Shermans with the split commander's hatch had a rotating ring that the hatch was built into and that held the MG mount, so the MG could be rotated to any position. Later, when they went to a one piece commander's cupola, the MG was mounded on a fixed pedestal on the turret top. Sometimes there was a pedestal aft, sometimes two including one forward of the commanders hatch. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Maybe we should think too about whether it was a good idea to fire the AAMG. Even the one in front of the commanders hatch requires a fair bit of your bod outside the tank, akin to sticking your head over the top of a wall really, which is a good way to get it shot off. You are also 3 metres in the air so a fairly obvious target and an easy way to suppress/KO the tank. To use an ASL term, definitely "Hazardous Movement" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 From wargames, people frequently have the impression that several MGs on the same tank double or triple its firepower. This isn't really the case. Mostly they just deal with different covered arcs. By far the most effective MG on any tank is the coaxial. It has turret tracking with a dedicated high power optic and excellent stabilization. This makes it a far more accurate weapon than any of the other MG mount types. Anything the coaxial can hose down it going to be showered with bullets and it won't matter a darn whether another MG is firing at the same area too, or not. The only real exception to this is 50 cal flexibles against modestly tough cover, where the rifle-caliber 30s might not penetrate. But 50 cal penetration of cover does come at a pretty steep price - very limited ammo. The rounds are much heavier, and loaded in an external box that was not exactly easy to reload in action. The internally supplied coaxial had 15 to 20 times the ammo load. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GerryCMBB Posted June 4, 2011 Author Share Posted June 4, 2011 One other question. In of the the tutorial missions, I noticed Shermans firing on the move - it was the mission with the dummy German tanks. They did it multiple times. Is this the normal behavior? Thanks, Gerry 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 On a Sherman the AAMG is always a .50 cal HMG IN CMBN yeah. But on occasion Shermans were sporting a pintle mounted .30 cal instead of the .50. Only this week a photograph of one got posted in a thread here. And lets not forget those weird hull mounted fixed .30 in early US tanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 The Sherman also has a bow machine gun mounted through the glacis plate of the vehicle (in the bow, hence bow machine gun) which is operated by the radio operator alongside the driver. As such, as long as the target is in the front arc, this can fire too. As long as the tank is not hull down or otherwise has an obstruction to the front high enough to block LOS/LOF. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 2. Although there are 2 to 3 MG's on a WW2 tank the bow gun will generally be just a simple ball mount but the Co-ax is usually linked to the gunner sighting system and has a longer range and higher firepower. Agree on all points except the last. The coax is more accurate due to the sighting system and may well have a longer range due to being mounted higher on the tank, but as both guns were Browning .30 cal, would have had the same ROF, used the same ammunition, etc. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RookieCAF Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 And in most cases, the Bow Mounted MG was more or less just a bullet hose. No real sighting system other than the Mk1 Eyeball thru the vision slit or periscope. IIRC 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Yes, I see the coax doing a lot of whacking in CMN, even in the lowly M8 recon car. Handy it was and is, the coax. And our friend the Maus even had a 75mm gun for a coax, taking a good thing to the supremely over the top extreme. Maybe our uberpanzer buddies can get to play with one in some later module. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 German bow machineguns have sight systems, directly in-line with the barrel. (I'm unsure of their magnification, if any.) US bow machineguns had no sights. The bow machine gunner used the periscope to track the tracers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Agree on all points except the last. The coax is more accurate due to the sighting system and may well have a longer range due to being mounted higher on the tank, but as both guns were Browning .30 cal, would have had the same ROF, used the same ammunition, etc. Sure on US tanks but I am talking in the generic here, in general the Co-Ax has better ammo feed, sights and all that sort of thing, in some cases the co-ax is a heavier MG as well, like the BESA on British tanks 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Where British Tanks mounted a BESA, I think that the bow mount was also a BESA. Considering that it's a different calibre to all other British small arms, having two different .30cal-ish link ammunitions in one tank would be somewhat confusing. Even WW2 British tank design wasn't that disjointed. Except when they also had a Bren on a pintel mount. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wokelly Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Interesting video on the BESA machinegun in British tanks here at the Churchill Restoration Project website: http://www.churchilltank.com/Churchill_Tank/THE_BESA_MACHINE_GUN_film_and_picures_of_Besa_firing.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Maybe we should think too about whether it was a good idea to fire the AAMG. Even the one in front of the commanders hatch requires a fair bit of your bod outside the tank, akin to sticking your head over the top of a wall really, which is a good way to get it shot off. You are also 3 metres in the air so a fairly obvious target and an easy way to suppress/KO the tank. To use an ASL term, definitely "Hazardous Movement" I had a recent encounter where the TC after receiving a glancing hit from an AT gun immediately grabbed the .50 and started scanning for targets. The next round killed him. Would've been better off dropping down into the turret. For those who care, this was a friend of "George the tanker". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 I suspect that may have happened to more than one tanker in real life. You severely reduce your situational awareness when you drop into that turret and that .50 may seem as big as a cannon, particularly if you are not too battle-wise yet. It might just be tempting to stay out there and try to take the SOB on yourself. I'm personally glad that the game randomizes such behavior to some extent because it makes the pixeltruppen all that much more unpredictable and human-like. After all, humans do stupid things aplenty too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Cool video, I was surprised to see that the BESA was actually mounted and sighted independently from the main gun. flamingknives: Yes you are right, in most cases I have found they were the same all around, the A9 however did have a 303 lewis and a 7.92 BESA, ironically the BESA being mounted in the hull but with the better sights etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Cool video, I was surprised to see that the BESA was actually mounted and sighted independently from the main gun. Pretty sure that is the hull-mounted MG. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RookieCAF Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Interesting Video on the BESA. The British Supply system must have been bizzare. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Interesting Video on the BESA. The British Supply system must have been bizzare. It had to be to keep up with their tanks. Some odd critters there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Pretty sure that is the hull-mounted MG. Yeh , could be. I have been looking at pictures though and didn't think I could see the sight hole in bow gun mount. 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.