SK-105 probs

[Siddhi]

O/T and quite irrelevant for the game but anyway: Have you ever taken place on the gunner's seat of an early 'K', Siddhi? O/T and quite irrelevant for the game but anyway: Have you ever taken place on the gunner's seat of an early 'K', Siddhi? (You'd have to be quite short + slim to fit in ;-))

actually i did - first time when i was 14 , it was small then too! i remember getting a site in my kiddneys... but i think most tanks tend to be a little cramped, especially "light" ones. und bei dir?

I can confirm that - M60 crews usually stopped making the common jokes about their "smaller brothers" as the Kuerassier was called on the radio AFTER maneuvers. This, however, requires well-trained crews, and it takes a long time to get that good.

agree - a major i worked with recently and former K commander said the main problem was the amount of dust kicked up by the backblast if you did not watch your vegetation setting - if it was a dry field under your muzzle then a couple of rapid-fire round and no wind would make a better smoke screen then anything man-made, both bad and good.

Shan said:
A stabilizer on a Kuerassier? Sure? AFAIK even the A2 upgrade (which, btw, was introduced only as part of the infamous Mech-Paket only from 1998 onwards, definitely not 1993) never included a stabilizer (which stabilizes the gun along 2 axis on the move... only to avoid misunderstandings), only a fire control computer and true night fighting capability (TI) were fitted. A stabilizer would not be of much use anyway if you're defending.

stand corrected on the "mech paket".
The A2 has the french-made CH6/6 stabilsation system, there was another one beforehand which designation i don't know.

i would say a stabilizer is vital for rapid-fire, also in defense, otherwise the recoil takes too long to absorb via the autmotive components alone.

Shan said:
One of the main weaknesses of the 'K', however, was its hydraulic turret transmission which sometimes worked, sometimes caught fire, and very often didn't work, and that one was not changed. Another weakness - the hydraulic steering system - also quite unreliable due to high pressures - it's not fun to fin out you cannot steer any more when you're driving at full speed...

true - now how did you know that! - supposedly all of it however has been changed latest with A2 model.

Shan said:IMHO the passive system was completely useless - dirvers could see more on their image intensifier night sight than commanders and would often spot the "enemies" that the commander could hear, but not see... and as soon as you'd turn on the IR searchlight , everyone with an IR sight or better would know where you are.

in early K the drivers, gunner and commander all have the same passive sites - with all the known limitations. the range i gave was NOT for night fighting. also the searchlight is mainly used as a designation tool, it was "flashed" by a desingated spotter at the main enemy elements. the passive sites is sufficent for close-in night fighting (<600m), and unlike TI ,is not "whited out" by flares.

Shan said:So - overall, if I'd play a cold war scenario on the defending side, I'd still prefer Kuerassier over the M-60, since it has greater RoF and mobility - but it has to be said that this is a poor man's weapon, often called a movable A/T gun with a splinter jacket...

ok - who are you -i'm calling h�tteldorf- meldung!!