US Autoloaders, Part 1. 37mm T16 through T54E1

[@jacobfarley2332]

Liking this video if for no other reason than "Armored Force is opposed to the elimination of the vehicle commander"

[@harveywallbanger3123]

I was once told (very seriously) by a Marine tank officer that "Russians have autoloaders because their tanks are designed for physically-stunted draftees with an expected combat lifespan of under a day. The autoloader is just one less thing they can f*** up in the meantime."

[@HanSolo__]

Oscillating turret is such a weird design... French Army: We need this in numbers - immediately!

[@mbr5742]

If not for the problems with NBC protection it would be a solid concept

[@MacChew008]

@@mbr5742 NBC, no issue, take out the crew, Oscillating Turret becomes an Enlarged RWS (Remote Weapon System).

[@MultiZirkon]

but, But, ...They are cute!

[@sealpiercing8476]

The French copy no one!

[@seanmac1793]

The french don't understand the word decent they produce things that are amaizing or terrible there is no in between

[@Ralph-yn3gr]

I am greatly annoyed by the refusal to adopt the 37mm auto-shotgun.

[@MandolinMagi]

Good news: The US also had 75mm canister, and if you really hate infantry, APERS rounds exist.

[@TheBuster0926]

@@MandolinMagi please elaborate an what an APERS round is for the people on the back.

[@Mishn0]

@@TheBuster0926 Anti-Personnel round M546. Payload is 8000 flechettes. Don't be in front of one.

[@TheBuster0926]

@@Mishn0 Thanks mate.

[@MrCantStopTheRobot]

@@Mishn0 I don't understand, is it bad to be in front of thousands of flechettes approaching you at supersonic speed?

[@marcusott5054]

Design eliminates TC: Hmmmm...?! Design eliminates Coax-MG: STOP right there!

[@bryanmanuelsalguero4729]

"37mm machine shutgun" 🔥

[@rebeccaschmitz1323]

That probably would have been fun

[@Bird_Dog00]

Why would a tank with such a gun even need a coaxial MG? :D

[@sir0herrbatka]

@@Bird_Dog00 Sometimes there is someone in front of your tank that you actually don't want to kill. Like your own infantry ;-)

[@Bird_Dog00]

@@sir0herrbatka Details ;)

[@josephsteven1600]

Missed opportunity

[@KiithnarasAshaa]

Heck yeah, props to the shout-out to the Des Moines. 8-inch autoloaders laugh at your puny tank munitions. ; )

[@davelewis3255]

I served on board the Newport News (Does Moines class) during her last Vietnam cruise in 72. I was an engine room guy - not a gunner - so I really can't say much about how the 8" guns worked. We were told that the ship carried 900 rounds of 8" ammunition and with 9 guns we could shoot the magazines dry in 10 minutes. Pretty impressive when the projectiles weighed about 250 pounds. I have a "trench art" ash tray that I made from the base of an 8" brass powder casing. The navy also used an automatic 3" 50 cal AA gun with rotary magazines in those days. I don't know if the design was derived from the army 75mm Sky sweeper design, but the loading systems look similar. I seem to recall that the 3" guns weren't very reliable and I'm glad that we never had to actually shoot at real fast moving targets. I might not be here today.

[@KiithnarasAshaa]

@@davelewis3255 Heck yeah. Thanks for your service all the same. The gun guys might get the notice, but engine guys keep the ship going.

[@Ralph-yn3gr]

@@davelewis3255 Thank you for your service (I'm sure you hear that all the time, but we really do mean it). That ashtray sounds really cool. If I recall correctly, the auto-3 inch predates skysweeper by a few years. I have no idea if the two are directly related or not. It was designed as an anti-kamikaze weapon and was adopted a few months after World War II ended. The most effective weapon against them were the 5 inch guns firing VT shells, but they were too big and heavy to replace existing weapons. The 40mm bofors was the next best thing, but its shells were too small for existing VT fuses, and actually hitting a kamikaze with enough force to blow it apart before it hit the ship was very difficult. So the Bureau of Ordinance just grabbed the smallest gun they had with a power rammer that could take a VT shell, in this case an outdated 3 inch gun, bolted on a weird, Rube Goldbergian clockwork autoloader to the top that just dropped shells into the existing loading tray, designed a twin mount that could replace the bofors quad mount, and called it a day. Probably explains why they were so unreliable. Apparently when they did work they were so effective that they made conventional air attack by propeller driven aircraft next to impossible, although they didn't work as well against jets and missiles.

[@Akm72]

@@davelewis3255 You might be interested in this brief clip of the 3in AA guns on HMS Tiger being test fired: kzbin.info/www/bejne/q5vShZJpjbqja68

[@CubeMasterTV]

Imagine being on the receiving end of a hidden t54e1 All of a sudden, 105mm rounds impact around you with less than 2 seconds between shots. Talk about suppressive fire

[@Bird_Dog00]

Now think about the fact that canister rounds aren't restricted to the 37mm calibre... 105mil canister with autoloader: "What zombie horde?"

[@ret7army]

@@Bird_Dog00 canister might have a problem with an auto loader, dunno. But the answer to that is "bee hive"

[@MrCantStopTheRobot]

They would report the T54E1 as "enemy tank platoon."

[@biasedsherman]

And now that thing has a 5 second reload in War Thunder

[@RebelTvShka]

@@biasedsherman is that with or without crew mastery?

[@Sim.Crawford]

Bloody hell, we are starting at the beginning! Nice.

[@ulrichkalber9039]

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep.

[@Sim.Crawford]

@@ulrichkalber9039 And you had already been an absolute spanner for over five billion years.

[@ulrichkalber9039]

@@Sim.Crawford i used genesis 1 as a symbol for "in the beginning"

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

@@ulrichkalber9039 You have it wrong. First, the earth cooled. Then the dinosaurs came, but they all got too big and fat so they all died and turned into oil. And then the Arabs came and they all bought Mercedes Benzes...

[@GymQuirk]

Not quite. The proper quotation is: "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."

[@guvyygvuhh298]

Still my favorite autoloder is the Otobreda 127/54 rapid fire naval gun. Because why not throw 5" shells every 1.5 seconds

[@tacomas9602]

Those are nice

[@johnknapp952]

Basically the same as the US Mk45 5" gun. I've seen that gun fire rapid fire and it is impressive.

[@guvyygvuhh298]

@@johnknapp952 yes but one is italian and has a funny name while the other is american

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

@Edgar Miller overkill doesn't exist

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

@@johnknapp952 the otobreda is faster at 32rpm vs the Mk45's 20rpm

[@Asestar]

Can't wait for the awesomeness to start!

[@evanceier8577]

I did not know that about the walker bulldog's development. An interesting bit of trivia about my favorite tank!

[@nicholaspratt8473]

What did you learn? I didn't hear the M41 mentioned :0 Nevermind, found it! Turns out I didn't know it either! Then missed it, the learned it, the forgot it! T37 Phase I (non-auto) mutated into the T/M41 :D

[@JWZ1001]

On the note of how the autoloader indexes the shells, thanks for the explanation. Been chucking that question at people after reading the T69 had indexed rounds to begin with. While mechanically probably completely different it functions conceptually the same way as the russian autoloaders, which isn't really a massive surprise, but it's still nice to know for certain.

[@jintsuubest9331]

Not really. Russian autoloader, at least most of the 125 spinny one, before the days electronic, use a seperated storage device and input panel to index projectile. The indexing is independent of the projectile length. Compare to length based system. Advantage being capable of upgrade and change projectile independently of the indexing system. Disadvantage being fail safe does not exist to prevent loading ap but index as atgm.

[@JWZ1001]

@@jintsuubest9331 doesn't change that it relies on a mechanical switch of some kind that's set during the loading process to determine the index, where the carousel/drum rotates until the correct index is read. Like I said, mechanically completely different, but quite similar in an abstraction(conceptually).

[@seanmalloy7249]

The description of the indexing system makes me wonder why it wasn't handled by a spring-loaded mechanism pushed forward by the shell, rather than having to be set manually. If the indexing mechanism slid back far enough to be out of the line for the detection circuit if there were no shell in the rack, that and automatic indexing would make reloading the cylinder a little bit faster.

[@tugfngjfuvj]

I don't know if we ever talked about it, but you once mentioned that sleeping on the roof of the ammo storage on the M1 was uncomfortable because of the crane hooks. As far as I can remember, you mentioned those were part of a canceled program to facilitate quick reloads on the field by changing out the ammo storage compartment. I didn't find anything about that on the web. Do you have any sources, project names, or other hints on hand to help me find out about that thing?

[@mkms685]

When I hear the Chieftain says "Greetings All", I know I'm in for another interesting tank topic.

[@MrCantStopTheRobot]

What a puzzle! The interaction between all the subsystems, emergent problems, and designs exotic to us. Have to work on a Sunday though, can't catch it all "live."

[@bernardfrederic6535]

I'm impressed over and over, by the ingenuity, of the pre-computer time. Today we pack tones of calculators and sensors in such systems and wonder, why they function so seldom and why the crew can't fix any problems.

[@MikeBison_]

Very excited to hear about the T57 and T58.

[@ekscalybur]

USMC = United Shoe Machinery Corporation This old Cav Scout has a new nickname for his jarhead younger brother. :P

[@genericpersonx333]

Me sure to remind him to dwell on the name when he is buffing his shoes for the umpteenth time!

[@jamullin97]

United Shoe Machinery Corporation Building still exists in Boston's financial district at 160 Federal Street! It's a registered landmark in the city and nationally

[@wesleyphillips7744]

The USMC factory complex still exists in Beverly MA and several of the buildings are still in use as part of the Cummings Center Office Park.

[@zbyszanna]

This topic interests me greatly.

[@darwinbarnes740]

Love learning about these obscure afv's and their systems.

[@lucisferre6361]

I missed this one getting uploaded as soon as it became available because I have been marathon watching The_Chieftain's videos all day. Excellent. Thanks much!

[@88porpoise]

I really love the efforts to solve issues mechanically when today they would be trivial with even the most simple computer. Mechanical systems are just so much more interesting and have this elegance and ingenuity that you can't see in modern devices (code generally being inaccessible and complete gobbledygook to most people).

[@That_Guy5575]

Not gonna lie, I got pretty giddy when you mentioned upcoming coverage of the T57 and T58 tanks!

[@njake19]

Some input from those who actually been on one I am curious about, is the opinions and experiences of being in those oscillating turrets after seeing the T69 at maximum elevation! I wonder how much that messed with the crew, especially on the move!

[@memonk11]

You’ll “put a Lincoln”? That’s good. Always room for Abe.

[@charleswade2514]

I visit Wright Patterson AF museum yearly. There’s a 75mm auto cannon in front of an A26 Invader ( I believe). Would this configuration been workable in a tank? I imagine several 75s impacting another tank would be a significant emotional event.

[@dilligafdude9434]

"37mm machine shotgun...the gunner would have really enjoyed himself." That made me crack up.

[@social3ngin33rin]

YAY FINALLY!!!!! :D I've been waiting for an autoloader vid regarding the oscillating turret designs!!! :D

[@PilotTed]

Man now I want to see the T22 with the auto loaded short 75mm gun in Warthunder lol, would be pretty damn good too.

[@ADRIAAN1007]

Will you be covering the HSTV-L autoloader I have heard its a "rotary breach type" but information is incredibly scarce there is one crudely drawn diagram from a top view and that's it.

[@jintsuubest9331]

He say this is a series...... He is gona tall about 60/70 stuff later. Hstv is late 70s.

[@ronaldthompson4989]

Warthunder has an xray view of the layout (and where to aim to break it) but how it operates is a bit of a mystery

[@hekko161]

New Chieftain video, this sunday couldn't be better.

[@jakobc.2558]

T22E1: 3 second reload. Holy Jebus, that is some firerate.

[@christofferwillenfort4035]

jup and sweden didit with a 155mm :) kzbin.info/www/bejne/h4HMqoV5pZl6gZY DAKA for everyone.

[@alanrogers7090]

In Salem, Massachusetts there is a museum ship, the USS Salem WWII cruiser. It has its triple eight-inch guns in turrets with autoloaders for each gun in each turret. To my understanding, it is the ONLY cruiser so equipped, as every other Navy ship has manually loaded and fired guns.

[@tomhalla426]

There was also the DesMoines of the same class.

[@steved5495]

It had two sister ships, Des Moines and Newport News. Can you imagine that as a firing line in shore bombardment? 270 8" shells every minute! They could also fire 24 5" guns combined at around 15 rounds per minute.

[@derekp2674]

Really interesting, thanks Nicholas.

[@CAPNMAC82]

The Mk 37 dual 3"/50 mounts were a marvel of their day. Right around the time Army was sorting out the 90mm Skysweeper, USN needed a 3" shell to support VX fuses versus expected banzai Kamikaze raids in 1946. So, not only dual rotary magazines behind each breach, but a vertical pre-load spindle per each as well (which had additional duty for spinning up ordinary time fused rounds. I've been trying to find out if the De Moines ships retained the separate loading powder case to return them to the handling decks beneath the barbettes.

[@ScottKenny1978]

On the 8" guns? No, those were single piece ammo.

[@CAPNMAC82]

@@ScottKenny1978 Nope. Mk 16 used separate loading, if in brass casings, each handled on their own flats below the turret. They did not meet until rammed home.. Fixed loading was examined for the Mk 71, but the semi-fixed (round stacked on a loaded case in the magazine) was found to be more reliable.

[@ScottKenny1978]

@@CAPNMAC82 that doesn't agree with anything I have read, or the video clip that Chieftain posted.

[@CAPNMAC82]

@@ScottKenny1978 Well, it's what we were taught at Surface Warfare School in 1985. And from knowing crew from Des Moines.

[@STEPHENDANERD]

This seems like a perfect co-topic with Ian from forgotten weapons, since it is basically trying to make a cannon function more like a gun, even the T54E1 functions a lot like a ... boberg? I think it was, with the bullets/shells being pulled backwards and then back in to the chamber.

[@ScottKenny1978]

Yes, Boberg is the right name.

[@jameslewis2635]

And there I thought that the main reason that US tankers didn't like auto-loaders is that they didn't want to let go of their trained monkey who did all the physical and unpleasant grunt work that no-one else wanted to deal with.

[@UkrainianPaulie]

You'll see more autoloaders because that 90 lbs female loader will not be able to load 120MM rounds. But the politicians are always right.

[@salidin6737]

@@UkrainianPaulie sweet Jesus. You are aware woman have been serving successfully in a large number of armies around the world for decades. In my time in the Canadian Forces they proved themselves more than capable of performing in combat but I am sure somehow decades (although that can be correctly pointed to as millennia)of success is somehow non existent because you are triggered that women are being giving equal rights.

[@alltat]

@@UkrainianPaulie She'd be assigned to another role within the vehicle. Women serving in the army isn't a new thing. It seems to always be men who aren't in the military themselves who are upset about all this. If you want that 120mm round to be loaded quickly then go join up and do it yourself.

[@travisjohnson6703]

@@UkrainianPaulie Literally took a handful of minutes for the misogyny to kick in. Keep it in your pants bro.

[@jimdavis1576]

@@UkrainianPaulie they are angry because you are right.

[@billwilson-es5yn]

The M4 tankers also complained about the 75 mm shells coming apart when being handled inside the fighting compartment. The crew kept extra water handy to wet down the spilled propellant ASAP.

[@pinkyandbrain123]

“We are coming close to half an hour.” Laughs in Drachinifel

[@prussianhill]

Drach's patreon subscribers do not pay the man nearly enough money.

[@jeffcaird6801]

Fascinating. Looking forward to when you get to modern designs! Interestingly the US Army could be in a position to adopt a new autoloading tank, in the event BAE’s son-of-M8 Design wins the MPF competition. Which frankly, who knows as the Armor community will likely prefer the GDLS design for its similarity to Abrams. But if M8 Mk2 wins an auto loader will enter the fleet just after the only one in service exits ...

[@gabrielpalileo3294]

If the army accepts the M8, they'll essentially be putting a 25 year old design into service. Though, it does the job perfectly fine.

[@ScottKenny1978]

The M8 should have been in service 25 years ago and we wouldn't be having this discussion at all. The only thing wrong with it was the collapse of the Soviet Union.

[@richardmiranda640]

Thanks for your efforts, sir.

[@terranceroff8113]

and then there's the new 50mm autoloader/autocannon currently field testing from Bushmaster.. seen a few vids.. looks like a pretty awesome system!

[@ScottKenny1978]

It's a Bushmaster 3. The 50mm supershot is the same size as the 35mm NATO rounds.

[@VulcanDriver1]

I love the Skysweeper gun. Got the Renwal kit.

[@raybrindos4514]

Ft. Lewis museum has one of them. I remember building the kit when I was a young man.

[@davelewis3255]

The old Renewal kits were about the first popular bigger scale (maybe 1/32) armor kits. I believe they had an M41 Bulldog, 8" SP howitzer, Ontos, Sky sweeper AA gun, and the ever popular Atomic Cannon. The Atomic Cannon was on the pricey side so that was reserved for a Christmas or birthday gift. 60+ years later I don't remember any of the Renewal kits as being particularly accurate or well detailed, but if you wanted big iron that was about all you could find.

[@richardearl3815]

Don't forget we brit's had a Autoloader for the 57mm 6ld the Royal Navy used it on MTB's and the RAF used it in the Mosquitos.

[@christofferwillenfort4035]

and sweden had the T 18B-2 with a en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bofors_57_mm_m/45_aircraft_gun, you hve both the Stuka, the P-39 with 37mm guns and the huricane with 40mm guns. (of the top of my head.)

[@jamesocker5235]

Excellent history thank you

[@systemshocker7634]

Thank you sir! Excellent #tank engineering information.

[@derekmcmanus8615]

Interesting and informative as always! 👍

[@MililaniJag]

How about the 37mm M4 autocannon used in the P-39 fighter? Cheers!!

[@majorsam83]

If you look on Wikipedia - it was also designated as “T9” - I agree - I wonder if this weapon was considered at the time?

[@spitezor]

Hey Chieftain, Love your content as always! Thanks so much for this and linking the autoloader video which I missed earlier. If you're looking for topics... I was listening to Dan Carlin's Supernova in the East podcast, about the Pacific War. It REALLY stirred up my interest in that theater and I find myself immensely curious about the role/effectiveness of the tanks deployed there (disproportionately light tanks), and how late in the war light US/Commonwealth armor remained effective.

[@thralldumehammer]

Excellent!

[@LIETUVIS10STUDIO1]

Yes, Nick, we did notice the re-dubs

[@aldenconsolver3428]

Always a pleasure to listen to your explanations. It is way to common on the internet to hear simplistic explanations of machinery development (tank a's gun is 4% bigger than tank b's therefore tank a is 4% better). The actual concerns of a real good development branch are way far more complex than numbers. Not only how often does it break but how easy is it to fix? Can the crew do anything to keep it running? What about the day that a new shell is longer than the original? What if you're going full speed cross country with the entire soviet army chasing you - are the mounting bolts just going to pop off? Leaving the crew to fight T55's with MaDeuce? Speaking of spare parts - are they all labeled clearly enough that maintenance can fix the thing in black out conditions? And a thousand other things that don't win battles but do win wars.....In a battle give me a tiger - in a war give me a Sherman.

[@ernestcline2868]

Either I'm blind or Part 2 has yet to be uploaded.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

It has yet to be even scripted. Long story

[@ernestcline2868]

@@TheChieftainsHatch No problems, I thought it was probably the latter, but hoped it was the former since I subscribed after you posted Part 1, so I might have missed it. I can wait until you can bring more of the Book of Armaments down from Mount Cheyenne.

[@whiskeytangosierra6]

Kudos for not bursting out laughing at several points in the presentation. I sure did.

[@FullSemiAuto357]

I found it interesting and informative.

[@tacomas9602]

Nick, the T29 and T30 T34 tanks are obviously here in the states, in fairly good shape. Do you know if those machines are actually able shoot still, or did they weld the guns?

[@LUCNUKEM]

If they're in civilian hands the breech has a hole torch cut into it, or the owner met the requirements for the ownership of a destructive device & has it registered with the ATF.

[@Mathosalpha]

If I'm correct, all the t29s and t34s are at fort Benning, one of the two t30s is in Detroit outside of TACOM, and the other is at Benning.

[@quentintin1]

if the guns are still in the army hands, they were probably left as is, if the ownership was transferred to civilians, there's a high chance they were neuteured

[@ncktbs]

have you seen the films the army air corps did in the 40's to train air crew on the p-39 37mm m4 cannon

[@Hybris51129]

It seems that in the end that the main issue with any auto loading system is the sheer mass of everything being thrown around. It makes me wonder how a very much upscaled AR system would behave if one were to try and chuck 155mm rounds out of it.

[@SergeantSarge]

Can’t imagine very well - directing gas back towards the crew compartment, plus ejecting case still under some residual pressure that’s low enough to function and not harm the crew - plus how do you reliably change ammunition types at will?

[@ScottKenny1978]

Poorly, since 155mm is separate shells and powder.

[@cheesenoodles8316]

Wither the autoloader was an instant classic for me. As is this video...

[@diebabrika8904]

Dear Mr. Chieftain, would it be possible that you take a look into the SdkFz 222/221? I am certain that you know this vehicle, but there isnt any good material about the inside and technical specifics!

[@ThroneOfBhaal]

That 76mm revolving AA gun on the Des Moines is an absolute unit. Clearly they were very proud of the technological terror they'd created. :D

[@ericbouchard7547]

@The Chieftain, would there have been any practical application for the T16 as either a towed weapon, or mounted in a non-tank as a fire support weapon (such as the 37mm-armed M2 halftracks fielded by 2d Armored)?

[@cirian75]

Nice vid matey, hope you get the almond fingers

[@kippamip]

I hope you manage to find some footage of these things cycling, that would be great.

[@fredorman2429]

After seeing the large and complex monstrosities, not to mention the need to arbitrarily select between three types of ammo, the trained human loader - two arms and legs, opposable thumbs and common sense - looks like the most reliable option, especially since the tank has several spares that can be inserted as needed.

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

most of these include the ammunition storage. while i agree on reliability [otherwise they would have been used like the french ones] on these versions of autolaoders, the size is still less than a human loader.

[@ScottKenny1978]

I question your claim that a loader has common sense.

[@minuteman4199]

@@matthiuskoenig3378 Autoloaders can't fuel the vehicle, load and unload ammo into the vehicle, clean the main gun and machine gun, dig slit trenches, stand sentry duty, do radio watch, do listening posts, do patrols, change tracks, erect camouflage nets, read a map, look for targets, make coffee, etc etc etc. The loader does a lot more than shove rounds into the beach. When I was learning how to be a tank platoon leader our instructors sat in the loaders hatch. Since they were only there to instruct and test us, they didn't do any of the work normally associated with that position. It was absolutely exhausting trying to run a troop, and a company with 25 percent fewer people.

[@glenschumannGlensWorkshop]

Thanks.

[@Damien_N]

Silly question - what’s the major distinction between an autocannon and an autoloading tank gun? Is it just a case of calibre, wherein autocannon are of lower calibre? Or does the positioning of the magazine/carousel system in relation to the gun/breech come into this definition?

[@mrb692]

In my mind the distinction is the use of linked ammunition versus individual rounds, but I’m sure someone can come up with counter examples

[@hitchy98]

I think autocannons function more like a machinegun but in a cannon calibre while autoloaders mechanically load a larger shell like a human operator would

[@looinrims]

Uh an auto cannon fired constantly (automatically) and within a second or two, auto loading tank cannons take plenty of seconds to load, and don’t shoot automatically

[@jintsuubest9331]

Autoloading tank gun is almost always autoloading cannon. Autoloading cannon is only sometimes autoloading tank gun.

[@quentintin1]

an autocanon is basically a very large calibre machine gun (usually 20mm and up), the loading mechanism is part of the weapon and thus can't function without it an autoloading gun means that it is a gun with an autoloader attached to it, usually via the mounting system for the cannon, remove the autoloader and the gun will still work as normal

[@isuzu6851]

if a unbalanced revolving magazine was a issue on T69, how did that go for the 120mm AMX 50?

[@zachfakename6675]

"If you are in the British Army and in the area, I hope you brought Almond Fingers." I sense an implied task.

[@nicholaspratt8473]

Oh my God I had no idea what you were talkin about, then he said it :0

[@1278-mtm]

What happened to part 2? I was hoping to hear about the M8 AGS.

[@comradealexie]

Any chance you could make a video about the T95 and all of its iterations?

[@nicholaspratt8473]

Doom Turtle or the medium tank with silicon hardened armor?

[@comradealexie]

@@nicholaspratt8473 The medium tank, from the armor, to the suspension, to the variety of guns and turrets they put on the thing it sounds like an interesting story.

[@BigDaddy-fx4nx]

I live right near Ft. Hood in Copperas Cove.

[@CMDRFandragon]

Is that tank between the Abrams and Bradley a Japanese Type 90 with a mine roller? And if the US had the automatic loading position for thier main gun on the T30, why didnt they keep the system on later tanks?

[@ronaldthompson4989]

Leopard 2

[@CMDRFandragon]

@@ronaldthompson4989 Its definitely not a Leo 2. For starters, the gunner sight is on the wrong side of the turret, also, if it was a 2A4, which yes, the Type 90 looks like, the gun sight would be imbedded in the right side of the turret, instead of sitting up on top of the turret like that tank there. Additionally, the engine grates on the Leo 2 are circular instead of one solid square piece.

[@ronaldthompson4989]

@@CMDRFandragon apologies, my phone does not show that level of detail. I was judging by hull and turret outlines, which to me seem too bulky for a 90 but about right for a Leo, particularly aome of the export variants

[@tacticalmanatee]

is Part 2 on hold/in progress, or is it cancelled for whatever reason?

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Haven't had time to get around to it. But it's on 'the list', all right

[@user-oo8xp2rf1k]

Not strictly on topic. Looking at the models on his desk. What do you think Panzer 4 long barrel vs Bradley armoured fighting vehicle?

[@jintsuubest9331]

Doesn't matter long or short as the ap from both of the gun will likely shoot throught and destroy bradley regardless. But a bradley will spot, ranged, engaged, see smoke and fire pooping out of a panzer 4 long before the panzer 4 crew notice a thing. Maybe they saw a tow going their way, but it is too little too late at that point.

[@ryanaegis3544]

@@jintsuubest9331 Unless, you know, there's a hill, or rock, or three blocking line of sight until they are closer together.

[@armandorodrigues144]

so that makes it 2 different times the US Army armed the Pershing with a 76mm gun, first the 3 inch T98 and now the 76mm T94

[@Rubberduckzillas]

Any primary sources on the T54E1 like a manual?

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

I have some test reports, but not a manual.

[@Rubberduckzillas]

@@TheChieftainsHatch Ty for the response - any chance for a link to take a look? Or is it as anal as it is here in the UK trying to get documents from MOD?

[@michaelmorrismorris6113]

I heard that some Russian auto loader tank guns tried to load pieces of the gunner into it instead of shells.

[@hanhphuc166]

The BMP-1's "Finger Destroyer"?

[@kiltmanm60]

DEATH BEFORE DISMOUNT...er AUTO LOADER!!! lol Good breakdown Chief. I will spare you the laundry list of reasons NOT to use an auto loader. The MGS auto loader is a complete train wreck however, I heard a rumor that the M8 AGS Airborne Tank had a good one. Please add it to your research if and when you can. I think our Army may have missed out not getting that light tank. Please tell me what you thank. Apache Green 4 Out KSSSSH!

[@loneghostone6883]

Hi Chieftain, your models have me itching to get a set of tank models for the modern MBTs. Are there good models out there that will look nice without being painted?

[@maconmcclellan9709]

Hello Chieftan, I’m asking this one purely out of curiosity as I live very close to Camp Shelby near Hattiesburg Mississippi, and I’m aware that the army has a big tank firing range there, have you ever been to it?

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Nope. I have not

[@steinerding3978]

Any autoloader mechnics video?

[@FangAzi]

What were the differences between the T20 hull and the T22 one where the ramjet autoloaders were installed? What about the differences between that T22 hull and the T25 hull?

[@Novous]

Fun fact: All German tanks in ww2 had autoloaders. ... well, they called him Otto, but the effect was the same. ... I'm sorry.

[@LittleJohnAB1]

Is that a Tamiya Type 90 with the mine rollers, in the centre on your desk?

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

It is

[@UkrainianPaulie]

Well done thanks.

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

I can see the point of the 37mm auto but not of the larger systems. Wouldn't a system to fire 30+ per minute of 75mm-105mm be more appropriate for the artillery branch? And I STILL don't understand why no one managed to get something like a Bofors 40mm into a turret. Now THAT would have been useful.

[@pdallen8355]

The Hungarians used a turreted tank destroyer in WW2 with a 40mm Bofors, called the Nimrod. It was useless against mid to late war tanks and so was pressed into service as a mobile flak gun.

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

@@pdallen8355 I tried to look this weapon up without success. I think it was similar to the British 2 pounder anti-tank gun, not an auto cannon. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

@@pdallen8355 Now that's what I'm talking about. 1943 was too late for it to be an AT asset, but it would be a great cavalry vehicle against infantry and aircraft targets. Not sure I understand why it required 2 gunners.

[@walt4032]

I wonder when part 2 is coming.

[@danielm7794]

It would've been pretty nice if they redsigned the 37mm T16 to be belt fed.

[@Classic_Frog]

So the system would recognize the shells by their length and spin until the correct one was in the position. But what if there was no correct one available, like, all the shells of the said type were already expended? Would the magazine keep spinning indefinitely, or was it "smart" enough to know the shell is not there?

[@jintsuubest9331]

Of course engineer figure out that one already, just the matter of how. I had an easy solution. There exist another counter. Counter count from 0 to drum capacity - 1. Assuming binary counter system, there would be 3 switch. The counter will be set to 0 in an event of hit. The counter will cut off the power and shut down the system if it count pass capacity - 1, and counter will be set to 0.

[@mbr5742]

We get the "Red Storm Rising" Effect. Where in one scene of the book the "R2D2" of a US carrier has two equally dangerous targets and can not decide going into a "loop" and not shooting at either. The carrier did not like it...

[@jintsuubest9331]

One question. Did any of those autoloader tank has the requirement of increase armor for the same profile or maintaining armor for a smaller profile?

[@ArtemSolovey92]

Hi!Have photo inside t54e1?

[@soviet_union1936]

Could you see if you can do the char d2 heavy tank

[@marksalvio5644]

Hi Chief, do you know about this game in development called "Gunner, Heat, PC"? Or GHPC in short. It's a pretty cool tank game in development, and I just watched their recent stream, a lot of their gunnery tutorials reflect the stuff you taught back in your M1A1/2 Switchology. I hope you can check them out and give a much needed boost or review to this promising game.

[@larskjar]

I just got a thought, why was 37 mm so common a round size? I is an odd number in mm, not any clean number in inches either? I would have thought a 35 or 40 mm would be a more likely size.

[@classifiedad1]

I believe it had to do with the St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868 and the Hague Convention of 1899, as it prohibited the use of exploding bullets in war, and banned such projectiles which weigh under 400 grams. Under these rules, 37mm was about as small as you could make it. While this rule is no longer followed, and hasn't been followed for a long time, the principles of those rules is still in force; explosive small-arms ammunition as used by military forces is virtually nil. The idea is that the only legitimate objective of war is to weaken enemy military forces, and that the use of highly destructive weapons can bring a swift conclusion, where the use of less deadly explosive ammunition may simply cause prolonged suffering. This same principle was applied to a variety of other weapons, including poison gas and expanding bullets in 1907.

[@danielaramburo7648]

Why not make an enlarged semi automatic belt feed 75mm gun?

[@TheNecromancer6666]

I am sure the the 203/55 from the Des Moines would have made a great Tank gun....

[@PilotTed]

They Chief, I assume you already know about the Marines getting rid of their Abrams, what is your opinion on that?

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Covered it in a q and a a few months ago. Maybe 15? Have a gander back

[@PilotTed]

@@TheChieftainsHatch oh thanks didn't know

[@PilotTed]

@@TheChieftainsHatch Looked through your streams, found it on #10, man that was a while ago, and I thought it was recent news lol.

[@Maple_Cadian]

Could The Chieftan collab with Spookston on the HSTVL