British AFV armament peculiarity.

[montieth]

I've noticed that a number of British tanks and AFVs have the Bren as a Coaxial Machine gun. This is, to the best of my knowledge grossly incorrect. There were Bren LMGs onboard the AFVs but as a secondary AA and Ground weapon. The Lakeman mounts were discarded in the ETO as the Luftwaffe was more or less absent but they were usually still retained. I've seen photos of british tanks with the Bren set up on the roof as a useful close in weapon for dealing with Jerry's trying to get close. It was NOT a coaxial weapon however. The magazine prevents it use as such.

Basic weapon fits should be:
Humber Mk I, II and IIIs,
7.92mm Besa, 15mm Besa

The MK III Humber should have a 4 man crew as well.
Driver, Gunner, Commander, Radio Operator. It has a larger turret which was roomy enough for the MKIV humber to have the same turret and the larger US 37mm installed which necessitated the removal of the 4th man.

Vickers Mk VIb
.303 Vickers, .50 Vickers

Vickers Mk VIc
.7.92mm besa, 15mm Besa.

Also, the 15mm BESA in the various vehicles has an HE round listed. This is also, to my knowledge, incorrect. It's my understanding that the 15mm besa was adopted as an Anti AFV weapon and had a steel core AP round. At worst, it would have a ball round where the Steel AP was not available.

Could someone send me a current British OOB file? I moded mine in a fit of annoyance. I'll go back through and see what jumps out at me.

Something else.
Should hand-grenades and the like be added as vehicle weapons? Most british afvs had a bin for these to keep them handy. 3 would be a proper incremental number.
See http://www.mindspring.com/~rmgill/br...Cstow3-5.o.htm for an example.

[Imp]

It should still be there just swap it with your current one using manage OOB sets in utilities. Copy your modded one to the custom file first if you have not done so.

[montieth]

A more specific example 298, MkIVb is listed as having x2 #152 .303 Bren CMGs.

It should have #117 0.5 Vickers TMG
And
#137 Vickers T/CMG

The 15mm BESA should probably have similar if not better penetration as the .55 boyes.
From Tony William's site.

METRIC DESIGNATION 15 x 104/101
RIM DIAMETER - 24.9 mm
NATIONALITY - CZ / UK
PROJECTILE (type/weight) - AP / 75 (grams?)
VELOCITY - 880 (m/s)
NAME / WEAPONS - WW2 ZB vz/60, BESA afv

[DRG]

Originally Posted by montieth

I've noticed that a number of British tanks and AFVs have the Bren as a Coaxial Machine gun. This is, to the best of my knowledge grossly incorrect.

"A number of tanks" you say...... anyone reading that would assume that to be quite a few when in fact it's only THREE vehicles represented by 4 units. HARDLY " A number of units" except that it's a very low number of units and, in fact represents only 0.0058% of the units in that OOB

Then you go on to tell us that

Basic weapon fits should be:
Humber Mk I, II and IIIs,
7.92mm Besa, 15mm Besa

Which is EXACTLY what those units are armed with in the game. One would assume from the text of your post that we somehow stuck Brens in there when that isn't the case so WHY write this ???

I've made a note to look into the use of the Bren CMG on the Mk VIb and the two Marmon-Herringtons as well as the use of the Besa instead of the vickers on the MkIvc.

Now stop exagerating and get a grip on that "a fit of annoyance" If you're going to tell me what wrong you should at least know the basic details of the game that there are stock OOB's aways in the game in the "Default OOBs" folder

Don

[DRG]

http://www.geocities.com/marmonherrington/armdcar.html

The Mark II was a four wheel drive front engined vehicle. It served with both the UDF and British forces. It was initially delivered to UDF armoured car companies in November 1940 while the first units in the Middle East received them in March 1941. A total of 887 Mark II were built. Deliveries ended in May 1941. Armament was initially that of the Mark I. However, the turret and armament were subsequently changed for those serving in the Middle East to a flat faced turret mounting a .55 cal. Boys ATR and a Bren LMG. There were pintle mountings on the front roof for an additional Bren LMG and a pintle mounting for a Vickers MMG at the rear of the turret. However, it appears that the second Bren LMG was rarely carried.

The Mark III was very similar to the Mark II in appearance. However, it had a shorter wheel base (117 inches instead of 134 inches). Armament was the same as the Mark II on Middle East service. A total of 2,630 were produced with deliveries from May 1941 through August 1942.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marmon-...n_Armoured_Car

Marmon-Herrington Mk II. It and the Mk III were extensively used during the North African Campaign, mostly for reconnaissance being the only armoured car available in sufficient numbers, and had a reputation as a reliable, but underarmoured vehicle. Their normal armament, consisting of a 0.55 inch Boys anti-tank rifle in a turret, a coaxial Bren machine gun and one or two additional machine guns for anti-aircraft defence


http://www.wargaming.net/tanks/s_afr...herrington.htm

also shows a Bren

as does

http://www.wwiivehicles.com/southafr...herrington.asp

which shows a Bren in the Mk II and a Vickers in the Mk III

Don

[montieth]

I'm sorry you took offense at my post Don. I was merely pointing out an error of fact.

Insofar as the Bren Being Coaxially mounted on the Marmon Herrington Mk 1 and Mk II cars, that Boyes and Bren are likely NOT mounted on the same mount. Certainly they are facing out of the same face of the turret, but I strongly suspect, given how the RAC and it's various contributors never mounted brens on 'fixed mounts' ala a BESA or AFV version of the vickers. Looking closely, you'll see that the MH MKI and MK II cars were fitted with a Ball mount for a vickers and a fixture to take a Boyes on the MKIIs. The Vickers MMG ball fixture was removed and replaced with a point for a bren, presumably to use the Vickers in the Flexible role.

You'll note that this photo, shows the BOYES at elevation and the Bren at a straight depression. This is a preceise example of a mount that is NOT coaxial. Co-Axial - Same Axis. On AFVs with a coaxial mount where the weapons are controlled by the gunner, they both move, that is to say, elevate (and maybe train) with each other on the same fixed mounting. Though, admittedly warwheels uses the same term incorrectly.



Suffice to say, I'm strongly inclined to understand that the MH Mk I and MK II cars had a pad for the base of the receiver of the Boyes and Bren (in the case of the MK II) to sit upon, similar to that which my Dingo has or which my various friends Bren Carriers have.

My point still stands, in the close confines of MOST afvs which have a roof over the turret, a Bren would be awfully difficult to service and operate. The barrel handle necessitates far more of the weapon inside the turret and the magazine changes are exceptionally awkward. The Bren also lacks a mounting for which to fix it to in an AFV. One COULD use the mounts which are used on the tripod, but that would mean a VERY long and very obtrusive mount from forward of the barrel handle and just under the buttstock. I've handled a Bren in an AFV, a fixed mount would take a great deal of room. That's why the British just put them on pads on the front of the AFV or entirely outside the vehicle as on a PLM mount (Humber SC).

Compare the MH or Humber/Morris LRCs to the Vickers and the gun mounts on the vickers are clearly a an elevation only mount with the .50 and .303 vickers guns elevated on the same fixture with the same outer mantlet protecting the guns. They do not elevate separately and they are co-axial. Suffice to say, with those large water cooling jackets, it's quite clear that those are NOT Bren LMGs but Vickers MMGs fitted. One a .303 the other a .50 (note the larger cone on the .50).



Insofar as the Humber AC's go, I could not recall if they were incorrect or not. I did note that the MK III had the wrong crew count. I was articulating the weapon fit for completeness.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by montieth

I'm sorry you took offense at my post Don. I was merely pointing out an error of fact.

And your reply conveniently skirts the issue of exaggeration

Originally Posted by montieth

I've noticed that a number of British tanks and AFVs have the Bren as a Coaxial Machine gun

The NUMBER was 3 which caused you to mod your OOB's in a childish "a fit of annoyance". Not really very impressive behaviour was it ?

If you can provide information on errors then that's fine, we appreciate it and it makes the game better but in the future do try to do so WITHOUT the ridiculous exaggerations.

As for the Marmon Herrington's, there were armed in a wide variety of ways including captured weaponry. What I was pointing out with my examples is someone else has provided info that Brens had been pressed into service as "CMG's" on that vehicle and that's how that unit ended up with that armament in the game. As for the MkIV b's, I have NO idea who set them up with twin brens but I can say they have been like that in the Brit OOB for years.


A "CMG" and a "TMG" gun in the game have the exact same use and effects and was set up that way years ago simply as a naming convention to specify their main use and to differentiate them from the BMG's and infantry MG's so IF a Bren was stuck through a hole in the front of a turret as a secondary weapon that makes it a CMG in game terms so it's not used by OOB designers as a LMG infantry weapon.

Don

[montieth]

Originally Posted by DRG

And your reply conveniently skirts the issue of exaggeration

No, I'm just stepping around the issue because I don't think much will be served by arguing over the semantics of "a number" as being "a lot" or "a great many" or "tons".



I figure getting into a flame war here is counter productive so I'm just more or less going to skirt around it.

If you REALLY want to argue about it, come over to Tank-Net.org and we'll yell at each other on the Free Fire Zone. Then we can go over to the Historical AFV section and discuss peciliarites of No32 telescopes and the provisions for 100 round drum stowage on some British AFVs and 30 round magazine stowage on other AFVs.

The NUMBER was 3 which caused you to mod your OOB's in a childish "a fit of annoyance". Not really very impressive behaviour was it ?

I also fixed the bits that had Coaxial Armament other than BESAs and I've worked up a bunch of OOB's reflecting the complete oranization of the Recce Regiments under the '43+ template. Was that childish too?

I made the changes late one night. Then Got to thinking that maybe I should report them. I admitted that I had a non-standard OOB file and that I'd go back through and proof what I know. I apologized above. What more do you want? I can give you a ride in the Humber at FIG or at Reading if you like after it makes it's debut. Would that help?

A "CMG" and a "TMG" gun in the game have the exact same use and effects and was set up that way years ago simply as a naming convention to specify their main use and to differentiate them from the BMG's and infantry MG's so IF a Bren was stuck through a hole in the front of a turret as a secondary weapon that makes it a CMG in game terms so it's not used by OOB designers as a LMG infantry weapon.
Don

Presumably there are technical differnces between a Bren used from the front hull of a carrier and it's stability and accuracy and range as compared to an MG of just about any sort firmly clamped in a fixture with a telescope with ranging scales marked on the side?

When we were running around in the field with the Bren Carriers, running a bren from the front was a challenge. You had to hang on for dear life as you went over bumps AND keep from loosing the weapon out the front or damaging it. How they ran them on the move I don't know. It's a little easier on the Dingo since they don't pitch nearly as much as a carrier does going over rolling ground.

If there's any close combat advantage given to AFVs, you should possibly give one to the Dingos. We thoroughly scotched some german infantry at a couple of WWII events (FIG mostly) with 2-3 dingos at a time. Even accounting for safety, we were able to move around so fast they had a hard time getting potato mashers into the vehicles. Needless to say, if we were tossing Mills bombs at them they'd have been even more unhappy. We even counter popped a German ambush team and before they knew it we'd worked around behind them and were shooting up their backsides. Being able to reverse quickly and accurately is VERY handy for the driver. You can't do that nearly as quickly in a Bren Carrier which is not much larger.

I'm still not sure of the weapon mounting provions on the Marmon Herringtons, but I can ask a few folks that may have data. Want me to send an e-mail off to David Fletcher? I'm sure he could probably look at the stowage diagrams and send me a copy of them.

However, overall, I noted that there are differences between Hull Besas and Coax Besas in the range. I'll defer to your knowledge of how things were established and generally are and only positively point out things that I firmly know to be correct or not where it concerns AFV's that I'm familiar with (Either beecause I own one, I have stacks of manuals, or because I've crawled over one owned by a friend or acquiantance or belonging to a museum ).

BTW, is there a number of shots facility in the MG functions? Because compared to a Bren (unless it's in the AA role with the Drum magazines) a Vickers and BESA have a LOT more shots on tap than they normally do. 225 rounds per belt and 250 rounds per belt respectively vs 30. Its my understanding that the german MG34s had 75 round belts.

[montieth]

Ok, I didn't realize that the default OOB files were stored in a separate area as well. That's a good thing.

Ok. I'm also seeing BESAs missing where they're listed as other ~30 cal MGs.

MKVIc
15mm Besa
Vickers T/CMG - Should be a 7.92mm Besa.

Humber MK IV
37mm Gun (M5)
30 Cal CMG - should be a 7.92mm BESA

AEC Mk III
75mm Gun
30 Cal CMG - should be a 7.92mm BESA

Guy MK I
Vickers T/CMG - should be a .50 Vickers. (Same setup as the Vickers MKVIb)
Vickers T/CMG


Something that could go either way is the oddity that is the Humber Scout Car. I've seen in historic photos, Vickers K Guns singly and dual on the PLM mount and sometimes One or Two Bren guns with the 100 round drums. I'm not sure what is or is not really standard.

[Imp]

I think you might be missing the point in some ways, have not looked but consider the scale of the game how much diffrence is there between the MGs its not possible to model every varient where do you stop. If in game terms the diffrence is marginal its not really worthwhile.
Also I am guessing coaxial MG in the game tells it its not a bow MG whether it is mounted that way or not is irrelivant as all weapons that can fire do so at the same target anyway.