|
|
От
|
Alex Medvedev
|
|
|
К
|
All
|
|
|
Дата
|
28.03.2003 20:47:52
|
|
|
Рубрики
|
Танки;
|
|
Кто бы грамотно перевел американского танкиста?
My speciality was gunner, actually - I got "promoted" to commander and even run a platoon for a while (3 tanks) but shooting was my forte.
At about 15-20 miles an hour I would hit a target withing 30 degree arc at 1200 meters within 5-7 seconds and then put another two rounds as fast as the mechanism reloaded - all within 1 feet raduis around the point of aim - with HE rounds we practiced with, not sub-caliber penetrators that treavel twice as fast and are easier to aim - not being as critical to range estimation due to much flatter trajectory. Those penetrators were rarely used for practice - and never at garrisone ragnes, due to flying way further throughg the target and probably crap inside them - depleted uranium maybe, I have no way to know.
With those penetrators in real combat I'd probably shave off 5 or so seconds of making a laser distance measurement by setting teh sight to 800 meters and compensating by eye via shifting teh point of aim.
The power of such a round shot from 125 mm smooth bore cannon (with additional powder charge compared to the HE one) is enormous, but exact penetration in particular kind of armor - who knows...
Of course I ws the only one in the regiment capable of such feat - having few friends (I was the only one college-kid) there and many enemies, so little to do but practive while others slacked off. Plus I've alsways loved mechanical stuff, especially those that go "boom" - my Ukrainian home-made guns, bazookas and rocket launchers were quite impressisve.
Also, I made sure that my tank's stabiliser was not drifting, the cannon properly balanced, the circle of a laser rangefinder in the sight was close to the aiming carret to avoid extra adjustment, the night sight not burned out and the loading/ejection mechanism was working properly - all that having nothing better to do and needing a reason to get out of barracks where I had ongoing "vendettas" with azerbaijan, usbek and western-ukrainian "mafias" going all at once.
So on any shoots with top brass present I was shooting non-stop while making impression that the crew changed all the time - we all dressed same and 90% of our training and shooting was at night.
The T-72 and it's derivatives (80,90) was lighter tank than western ones - mostly by being 2 feet smaller and presenting much less of a target. The cannod does not depress nearly as low - which makes it harder to shoot down from the pop-up position behind the ridge. But those tanks were not desined with stationary defence in mind but for overrunning Europe and shooting on the go, up at the defenders, not down at the attackers.
Basically, the technology was as close to the ideal, that within the affective range of a cannon it was up to the quality of the crew - mostly detecting the target and making the first shot a fraction of a second earlier.
Also, on real life tank maneuvres - and combat not involving tanks - there is usually so much crap and dust in the air that two-mile engagement ranges narrow down to "what the heck is that!? Stop, stop! - Blamm!".
In reality the quality of serf-drafted, not selected in any way according to technical-savyness soviet crews were atrocious.
If faced with western tanks in anything near matching numbers, I would have jumped out of a tank (remenbering to ignite the ammo load as an excuse) and switched to infantry... Especially if such battle happened during the day, since, I am practically colorblind in the green-gray spectrum which is not a good survival trait for a gunner in real combat, success in practice nonwithstanding.
I can only guess about the quality and motivation of the Iraqi crews and the extent of their training. If you have a guy with a
miko