--- On Sat, 9/10/11, Onno Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: > Brandon replied to me: > > I picked the 105mm howitzer because it was close to > the 100mm gun the > > BMP-3 uses in bore. It's also good for firing at > dug-in infantry. > > I wondered if 1,100 lbs. won't make your design > 'gun-heavy', > more a tank with troops than an APC with guns.
That's the whole problem with the IFV concept. The BMP and Bradley are really over-sized light tanks carrying an understrength rifle squad. > > > And how much good were flamethrowers, > historically? Note > > > that they > > > are just about gone from AFVs. Squeamishmess or > the > > > realization > > > that their role can be filled by other systems? > > > > The Marines made a fair amount of use of them in the > Pacific, both > > man-carried and installed in M-3 light tanks and M-3 > medium tanks. IIRC they were > > quite useful against Japanese in bunkers and tunnels > who refused to > > surrender. > > Historically. What if they had had plans for a > RPG-7-clone? When the AK-clone was offered, there was also an RPG-7-clone. However, as the bazooka was just ready to enter production, the US decided to with it's own design over the Atlantean one. I'm not sure if the British would have abandoned the PIAT or not, though. > > > No anti-armor shells? > > > > No. Japanese tank armor was very weak and could be > dealt with by the 20mm > > cannon. > > The Atlanteans didn't convince the humans that targets > would > get tougher, all around, with an AH arms race? Japan, much like Italy, really doesn't have the industrial base for mass producing heavy tanks. They'd have to cut back production of aircraft or warships to do so and I don't think the Japanese mindset would let them to that. OTOH, as Germany defeated Russia in 1941, there is little need for the Tiger or Panther tanks. Brandon _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
