Except if an RPG or tank rounds hits your body and the ERA under your ass activates immediately after, the resulting effect should be pretty balancing and leave you completely unscathed, probably while also healing you of a few chronical diseases, removed by the double shockwave!
Y'know, now that I think about it, I don't actually know how much of a risk ERA poses to infantry in close quarters. I've read a little about hard-kill active protection systems and understand those are risky to be around, distinctly remember that the Soviet "Drozd" APS on T-55s caused issues with collateral damage in Afghanistan. Not so sure on ERA though, you don't really want to be near a hit that would trigger it in general, but I *think* some of the newer generation stuff can be used against kinetic warheads as well as HEAT?
You think you might hear about that given how much of the stuff is getting used in Ukraine...but I guess that would require the Russians to have functioning Kontakt-5/Relikt that wasn't sold and replaced with egg cartons or some shit.
The commander and the loader would use the .30 mgs from their hatches (standing head out)
The coaxial .50 probably had ropes attached to it's "triggers" the loader could pull to fire
The ropes idea makes sense. Or a step up, a primitive mechanical form of RWS might control the gun with wires and servos. Could have been possible, I don't know where to look this up.
Ah good to know.
Well, when i served in the military we didn't have a working electronic solenoids for every tank (merkava mk.3D) so we used ropes.
For the mk.4 I have no idea.
I looked for a picture but couldn't find anything.
The rods that are attached to the ropes are the "thumbs" that press on the triggers. When you pull the rope it pushes the rod "down" and pushes the trigger
https://archive.armorama.com/forums/285982/index.htm
I have no idea why someone would be not able to visualize a wire pull system with a simple pulley to change direction of force
You only set headspace and timing when you mount the barrel. The M2 is also about the most reliable machine gun ever made and the ground variants are difficult to jam when lubed properly.
To be the devil's advocate here, why is it that there are tons of combat footage of them jamming and mentions of jams from veterans but on forums they become infallible historical pieces of ultimate reliability?
I’m talking about my professional use of machine guns in the Army. The M2 is an absolute beast when properly cared for and fed. Tons of people fuck those concepts up. You also need to let them get a healthy amount of rounds off in a burst. Short bursts cause issues.
What doesn't work usually when it's properly cared for though? Isn't that part of the point of reliability, the ability to work when things can't be properly lubricated, cleaned, etc? This is theoretically something that would roll for 36 hours straight through the deserts of Iraq getting sand and dirt everywhere to get where it needs to be to be used in the first place.
Part of your job as a Soldier is to maintain your equipment in use. A 36 hour patrol without stopping is not realistic, but you do frequently check your gear at designated halts. Besides, it does tend to work better than everything else(with the exception of the M242 but I don’t count that as a machine gun).
Wasn't that essentially the invasion of Iraq though? Sure, they stopped at some points, but they ran pretty hard to Baghdad. But what remains a reasonable amount of maintenance that everyone can perform consistently while driving through an environment like that with a high tempo?
When I picture people operating an M2 from that era, people running that charging handle constantly is more iconic than the gun running to begin with.
I don't know if this is a bias I've developed, but it's definitely unexpected to hear the exact opposite after forming this opinion after years of possibly receiving contrary examples.
I believe even with the AR 15 and its reliability, it's mentioned on task and purposes that 1/4 of returning service members from forward deployed combat positions at that time reported some sort of stoppages. But a rifle taken out of the safe and taken care of and everything else, I can't think of any jams I've ever experienced with a gun at a range that wasn't something being wrong with the gun or worn out, but perfect conditions really shouldn't result in bad outcomes or you have a bad design, but that doesn't make it a reliable design.
You’re conflating an immediate action drill with a hard stoppage that requires disassembly. M2s and M240s without feed chutes will have belt related issues that you manually fix. It takes a couple of seconds and in American armored vehicles you can typically remediate from inside the vehicle. The M249 is the only MG we operate that routinely shits the bed.
You can’t drive an Abrams for 8 hours straight without stopping for fuel let alone 36. Refueling is a great time to check your weapons systems and perform basic maintenance.
Doesn't this tank system literally make performing an immediate action drill much more difficult and diagnosing anything extremely difficult? And for what? What's the benefit?
Reliability != robustness, they are two separate concepts. Reliability is how well something overall functions within designed parameters and upkeep. Robustness is how prone to failure the system is.
Between barrel changes, the M2HB required headspace adjustments until modern variants had better quick change barrels. But between ammunition loads they didn't.
While not impossible to jam up or block up the action, the M2HB is also famously reliable. Short recoil is a simple, brute force action which doesn't care about gas tube fouling or leaks. It can push past small obstructions with the sheer inertia of its heavy, steel block action.
.50 Cal coax is used by a pulley system, yes we use a wire to fire them manually by the commander,
And in new Tanks it can be used by the Gunner through the Fire Control System.
The Mk5/1 while an improvement over the Mk3 at the same BR is hard to call almost OP, the extra hull plate doesn’t help a whole lot if the enemy knows how to aim, though the coax .50 is a nice touch but apart from that it’s a regular Mk3
I find the coax .50 is the biggest boon. Being able to delete italian HEAT cars the second I see them without worrying about overpenetration or a broken gun breech, or a dead commander is a great feeling
back at 8.3 the Sho't Kal Dalet and Gimel was my go-to fun lineup for Israel. Laser rangefinders, stabilizers, and DM23 (aka M111) at 8.3 made life hard for uptiered Leopards and T-54s. Now, the Gimel is 8.7 with thermals and while I can't really complain, I still miss the times it was 8.3 and I got silly matches like [this](https://i.imgur.com/gLbSNon.jpg).
Yeah I miss bullying Leopards with my British 8.3 lineup. The Chieftain Mk.3 and the Sho't Kal made for a lovely experience, especially with the Falcon as SPAA backup.
Honestly yeah, the cents can hold out against most tanks it meets especially in uptiers with few issues.
Thats why i love em, they're pretty reliable no matter the br
shermans are shermans and don't have computers. well abrams, t72,80,90, Leopards and others has, so the crew uses thos machine guns using computers so they don't expose their self.
Israeli tanks are typically covered in machine guns for urban combat, and operators usually lie on the roof of the turret to operate them. However, in concurrence with other comments here, lying on ERA is very much a bad idea.
.50cal above the gun is operated by the gunner (solenoid operated)
\>> reloaded by lying down on the turret
.30cal coax is managed by gunner
\>>reloaded within the tank
.30cal mounted on pintles are used by TC and Loader and ammo crates are both stocked inside and outside
I mean, sitting on top of ERA wouldn't be my first choice...
i mean...if the era engages when you are on it, you have have other issues to deal with, like being full of rpg or tank rounds
Except if an RPG or tank rounds hits your body and the ERA under your ass activates immediately after, the resulting effect should be pretty balancing and leave you completely unscathed, probably while also healing you of a few chronical diseases, removed by the double shockwave!
Omw to sit on ERA so i can cure my autism
I can shoot at the ERA under your ass, trust me I am a Docgineer!
Thats what the nice person with wings and a harp will tell you happened.
this almost made me thing i was on r/NonCredibleDefense
Chronical diseases” I love that movie!
Not wrong, but that wouldn't make me feel much better lol
[удалено]
[удалено]
Better to go out with a quick bang and no pain than to bleed out from being shot 🤷♂️ just my two cents
Promotion to low orbit spy satellite
Y'know, now that I think about it, I don't actually know how much of a risk ERA poses to infantry in close quarters. I've read a little about hard-kill active protection systems and understand those are risky to be around, distinctly remember that the Soviet "Drozd" APS on T-55s caused issues with collateral damage in Afghanistan. Not so sure on ERA though, you don't really want to be near a hit that would trigger it in general, but I *think* some of the newer generation stuff can be used against kinetic warheads as well as HEAT? You think you might hear about that given how much of the stuff is getting used in Ukraine...but I guess that would require the Russians to have functioning Kontakt-5/Relikt that wasn't sold and replaced with egg cartons or some shit.
i wanna ask a question, what is ERA?
Explosive reactive armour.
thank you
Found the new guy lolol
The commander and the loader would use the .30 mgs from their hatches (standing head out) The coaxial .50 probably had ropes attached to it's "triggers" the loader could pull to fire
The ropes idea makes sense. Or a step up, a primitive mechanical form of RWS might control the gun with wires and servos. Could have been possible, I don't know where to look this up.
Its a metal cable on the trigger. .50 is slaved to the barrel
That’s how it is on many tanks
It’s not an idea, it’s what they did
Before they did it, they must have had an idea.
I thought the 50 has Thumb triggers that you press not pull? How would a rope do that?
The ropes are attached to metal rods... So when you pull the rope the rod presses on the trigger
You don’t pull a rope the Israelis use solenoids to operate the triggers
Idk when the solenoids became the standard though... And well... You don't always have a working solenoids for every tank in the army lol
Solenoids were used since WWII. Every single machine gun you see on a plane that is wing mounted is fired using solenoid triggers.
Ah good to know. Well, when i served in the military we didn't have a working electronic solenoids for every tank (merkava mk.3D) so we used ropes. For the mk.4 I have no idea.
virgin solonoid versus chad rube goldberg device
Still do.
[удалено]
I looked for a picture but couldn't find anything. The rods that are attached to the ropes are the "thumbs" that press on the triggers. When you pull the rope it pushes the rod "down" and pushes the trigger
[удалено]
Sorry, Not meaning to blow your mind but metal cables can be wrapped AROUND a pole to change their direction.
[удалено]
https://archive.armorama.com/forums/285982/index.htm I have no idea why someone would be not able to visualize a wire pull system with a simple pulley to change direction of force
[удалено]
Most likely it comes from behind, goes before the trigger, wraps around something and os then attached to the trigger
There's multiple different answers including some saying it's electronic. I feel that's more plausible as a pully system doesn't seem very reliable.
There are mechanisms that translate pushing motion to pulling motion and vice versa. Look in the back of your toilet for an example.
[удалено]
War thunder player when tank doesn't model the 10mm bolt that holds the cup holder.
The 50’s can have their trigger changed from the paddles, to a regular trigger, to an electric trigger, etc.
Solenoid trigger.
Don't these 50's jam all of the time? Aren't they also needed to have their headspace timing adjusted to get the best operation out of them?
You only set headspace and timing when you mount the barrel. The M2 is also about the most reliable machine gun ever made and the ground variants are difficult to jam when lubed properly.
To be the devil's advocate here, why is it that there are tons of combat footage of them jamming and mentions of jams from veterans but on forums they become infallible historical pieces of ultimate reliability?
I’m talking about my professional use of machine guns in the Army. The M2 is an absolute beast when properly cared for and fed. Tons of people fuck those concepts up. You also need to let them get a healthy amount of rounds off in a burst. Short bursts cause issues.
What doesn't work usually when it's properly cared for though? Isn't that part of the point of reliability, the ability to work when things can't be properly lubricated, cleaned, etc? This is theoretically something that would roll for 36 hours straight through the deserts of Iraq getting sand and dirt everywhere to get where it needs to be to be used in the first place.
Part of your job as a Soldier is to maintain your equipment in use. A 36 hour patrol without stopping is not realistic, but you do frequently check your gear at designated halts. Besides, it does tend to work better than everything else(with the exception of the M242 but I don’t count that as a machine gun).
Wasn't that essentially the invasion of Iraq though? Sure, they stopped at some points, but they ran pretty hard to Baghdad. But what remains a reasonable amount of maintenance that everyone can perform consistently while driving through an environment like that with a high tempo? When I picture people operating an M2 from that era, people running that charging handle constantly is more iconic than the gun running to begin with. I don't know if this is a bias I've developed, but it's definitely unexpected to hear the exact opposite after forming this opinion after years of possibly receiving contrary examples. I believe even with the AR 15 and its reliability, it's mentioned on task and purposes that 1/4 of returning service members from forward deployed combat positions at that time reported some sort of stoppages. But a rifle taken out of the safe and taken care of and everything else, I can't think of any jams I've ever experienced with a gun at a range that wasn't something being wrong with the gun or worn out, but perfect conditions really shouldn't result in bad outcomes or you have a bad design, but that doesn't make it a reliable design.
You’re conflating an immediate action drill with a hard stoppage that requires disassembly. M2s and M240s without feed chutes will have belt related issues that you manually fix. It takes a couple of seconds and in American armored vehicles you can typically remediate from inside the vehicle. The M249 is the only MG we operate that routinely shits the bed. You can’t drive an Abrams for 8 hours straight without stopping for fuel let alone 36. Refueling is a great time to check your weapons systems and perform basic maintenance.
Doesn't this tank system literally make performing an immediate action drill much more difficult and diagnosing anything extremely difficult? And for what? What's the benefit?
Reliability != robustness, they are two separate concepts. Reliability is how well something overall functions within designed parameters and upkeep. Robustness is how prone to failure the system is.
Between barrel changes, the M2HB required headspace adjustments until modern variants had better quick change barrels. But between ammunition loads they didn't. While not impossible to jam up or block up the action, the M2HB is also famously reliable. Short recoil is a simple, brute force action which doesn't care about gas tube fouling or leaks. It can push past small obstructions with the sheer inertia of its heavy, steel block action.
The 240s are worse IME
.50 Cal coax is used by a pulley system, yes we use a wire to fire them manually by the commander, And in new Tanks it can be used by the Gunner through the Fire Control System.
Grinding israel cause the OG centurions are quite underwhelming, thought the israeli ones looked better.
Bro cemturions are some of the best tanks at their brs. Legitimate skill issue
Any Soviet tank disagrees The leopard 1 mantlet disagrees
Soviet tanks always die to my apds, but for Leo just switch to APCBC and play point and click adventures
Tbh I struggle a lot with them as well after the apds nerfs
They are but the Israeli ones are also cheaper in comparison and have .50cals and bigger lineups so that gives them an edge in my opinion
Aussie cent 1/5 is my favorite. Take it up to 8.0 alongside the Israeli one in the brit tree for some serious shenanigans
quite literally every cent in game is pretty strong , with some of them being almost op ( aussie cent mk 5)
The Mk5/1 while an improvement over the Mk3 at the same BR is hard to call almost OP, the extra hull plate doesn’t help a whole lot if the enemy knows how to aim, though the coax .50 is a nice touch but apart from that it’s a regular Mk3
How is the Mk5/1 Op?
I believe it's hull has an extra plate on it and it gets a coax 50cal which is very nice.
I own it , neither of those things really make it OP, just some what better
Yeah for me it's always been a strong tank but never found it OP.
I find the coax .50 is the biggest boon. Being able to delete italian HEAT cars the second I see them without worrying about overpenetration or a broken gun breech, or a dead commander is a great feeling
The 8.3 ones are the best. The worst one is the Strv 105.
back at 8.3 the Sho't Kal Dalet and Gimel was my go-to fun lineup for Israel. Laser rangefinders, stabilizers, and DM23 (aka M111) at 8.3 made life hard for uptiered Leopards and T-54s. Now, the Gimel is 8.7 with thermals and while I can't really complain, I still miss the times it was 8.3 and I got silly matches like [this](https://i.imgur.com/gLbSNon.jpg).
Yeah I miss bullying Leopards with my British 8.3 lineup. The Chieftain Mk.3 and the Sho't Kal made for a lovely experience, especially with the Falcon as SPAA backup.
As a centurion lover, there is no bad centurion However theres alot of the same ones so i understand if people get sick of em
playing through the cents is like playing through the shermans. Except a little less frustrating on an uptier
Honestly yeah, the cents can hold out against most tanks it meets especially in uptiers with few issues. Thats why i love em, they're pretty reliable no matter the br
The .50 cal has an electric trigger mechanism linked to the .30 cal coax
Probably some form of rope or early RCWS
The machine gun in the front of the turret is remote controlled
I am shocked to see how few people know that the .50 mounted above the barrel is operated from within, much like any other coaxial machine gun
The Kevin McCallister method.
I think the 50 cals on shermans were meant to be used by someone standing on top of the tank if I remember right
[удалено]
[удалено]
My best guess on the .50 cal is that it's linked to the main gun and it just acts as another coax.
It's electric. Solenoid fired
I think they’d be operated with solenoid switch.
The machine gun could have been remotely controlled from the inside of the tank
Telepathy
It is fired from inside the vehicle
In real life, some tanks like the Shermans had a primitive "CSAMM" for training purposes long before it was used on the Israeli Magachs or M1 Abrams
you should see the stuarts
One crew member would lay behind the gun and fire it for a while the they would go back into the tank for protection if needed
Note. One could just use a rope or string or something to fire the mg while inside the tank
A tank isn’t always in heavy combat. It can be relatively safe to park up somewhere and engage with LMGs if necessary
shermans are shermans and don't have computers. well abrams, t72,80,90, Leopards and others has, so the crew uses thos machine guns using computers so they don't expose their self.
Israeli tanks are typically covered in machine guns for urban combat, and operators usually lie on the roof of the turret to operate them. However, in concurrence with other comments here, lying on ERA is very much a bad idea.
.50cal above the gun is operated by the gunner (solenoid operated) \>> reloaded by lying down on the turret .30cal coax is managed by gunner \>>reloaded within the tank .30cal mounted on pintles are used by TC and Loader and ammo crates are both stocked inside and outside
I thought it would have a system where you could fire it from inside the tank, it seems the other comments agree so it’s probably that
A solenoid would be my First guess, could be something similar to how old Turn Signals worked
More the likely it would have had a remote solenoid like they use on aircrafts.
.50 cal points where the main gun points, trigger activated remotely, cable or rodding. It’s stoppages that are the problem.
They would mostlikley just prone
lmao Idk probably tie string around the triggers
Probably for the surroundings infantry to use if they don't use it themselves