It's a good story but...

[duff]

Hi Guys. I read a story from the Korean war in which Chinese and US tanks were too close to each other to use their gun-sights. This lead to an American gunner bore-sighting his gun while all the other crews of all the other tanks were unable to shoot because the enemy were too close to aim at.

Can anyone confirm the story or confirm it is implausible?

I found it at:
http://www.cstthegate.com/davetrott/...tal-paralysis/

[Double_Deuce]

Its possible, but I doubt that it really happened. Its not something you are going to do if tanks are moving around especially in wooded terrain. Then you have, based on his verbiage, him making it sound like the gunner is doing the loading and firing. To my knowledge, all US tanks used in Korea had 5 man crews, including loaders and with the exception of the M46 and M26 you are pretty well squeezed in and not going to be moving around much at least not from position to position. Of course, when real bullets are involved you do what you have too, but my guess is he either made it up for book sales or heard the story from someone else who heard it through the grapevine and so on.

[Cross]

Originally Posted by duff

Can anyone confirm the story or confirm it is implausible?

I have no idea about this particular story, but I have read several accounts of German panzers using bore sighting. I got the impression that it was common practice when sights were damaged in the midst of an engagement.


Cross

[mkr8683]

It sounds to me like there's a misunderstanding of what it means to have a weapon boresighted. It's simply placing a laser-emitting device that looks like a cartridge into the chamber, aiming the weapon at a target, and adjusting the sights to wherever the laser is showing.

I don't understand how anything can be too close to shoot. In my infantry days, we were taught, when using iron sights, to 'fill up the peep sight with meat' and pull the trigger. I was also a gunner on a M2A3 during my Bradley misadventures at Fort Hood and briefly in Baghdad. I still can't fathom a target being too close for the sights.. maybe they couldn't traverse? Maybe the Red tanks were on higher or lower terrain?

[Double_Deuce]

Originally Posted by mkr8683

It sounds to me like there's a misunderstanding of what it means to have a weapon boresighted. It's simply placing a laser-emitting device that looks like a cartridge into the chamber, aiming the weapon at a target, and adjusting the sights to wherever the laser is showing.

I can see where the term is being used in this instance due to in the old days, even as late as the early 80's you boresighted with 2 pieces of thread tapes to the muzzle of the gun, looked through the tube with binos, having the gunner manually lay the "cross" on the boresight panel while he also adjusted his sights to the same aiming point. Use a similar method without the thread to mark hull down positions to make sure the driver pulled up far enough so the gun cleared the berm.

Doing a Google search the only times this story comes up for me is when its been posted by this guy, almost exclusively in psychology themed forums, nothing on any military forums/sites.

Military types like to brag to other branches about what people in their branch accomplished back in the day and in all my years I never heard this one come up. Not saying it didn't happen/ just that I don't find the story all that credible.

[Cross]

I found one of anecdotes I've read:


The second shot from the enemy's giant cannon raced past a few meters above the roof of the
tank destroyer, but the third was on target. Bix noticed that the recoil guard of his own cannon
rose backward and felt the blow of the impacting shell. The fearful crash of the impact left him
deaf. Thus he did not hear the gunner report that he could no longer see, as the optics port had
been shattered.

Bix tried to open the cannon's breech in order to peer down the barrel and aim in that way. But
he found that the recoil guard was up at the edge of the turret on the inner armor. Now he knew
that the gun mantlet had been sprung from its trunnions and that the end was near for them.

Panzer Aces, Franz Kurowski, 1992, J.J.Fedorowicz Publishing



Cross

[Cross]

Here's an interesting article from the Fort Bliss Monitor. But this is not aiming.


A Paladin crew normally takes firing instructions from its fire direction officer, who has received firing coordinates from forward observers on the battlefield, but with direct fire the crew chief opens the breech of the cannon and looks down the barrel to make visual contact with the target before giving the order to fire.

The result is a nearly instantaneous verification of the artillery round’s hit, and another sight adjustment for the aiming of the next round.

Paladin crews are trained to use direct fire as a defensive tactic when enemy targets have advanced too close for the howitzer’s traditional, indirect firing.


Source:

http://fbmonitor.com/2011/11/30/pala...t-direct-fire/


Cross