Christian Ankerstjerne wrote:The three-man turret allowed for each crewmember to concentrate on one task (loading, aiming/fireing and commanding, respectively).
Christian Ankerstjerne wrote:This would both produce a higher rate of fire, as well as a better gun crew (as each person would only have to learn one thing, which he could then concentrate on).
Christian Ankerstjerne wrote:if the fireing time and aiming time is brought down considerably, then yes.
Mark V wrote:Guys,
Just an hyphotetical scenario:
In 1940 T-34 is designed with larger 3-man turret with commanders cupola.
The increased weight of turret necessitate *** the thickest armour of turret and hull to be decreased to 40mm to maintain the same combat weight and mobility...
Better or worse than the actual model ??
*** not actually - but here the weight limit is strict
Panzermeyer wrote:The problem of the French armour war far less the 1-man turret than the communication issues, the lack of coordination with the artillery/aviation/infantry and the fact that some crews had known their tank for only one week before beeing engaged.
Some idea can be found from a book at my childrens bookshelf: "Rakenteiden Salaisuudet" ( original name: "Incredible Cross-sections") by Stephen BiestyWitch-King of Angmar wrote: T-34s 2-men turret was a big disadvantage - not only there were 2 of them, but the turret itself was so cramped I wonder how could two large Russians fit in, winter clothing notwithstanding
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Shareaholic [Bot]