A "howitzer" is capable of direct fire even though it is classified as artillery. Direct fire is discouraged due to the fact that you must see your enemy to use direct fire. Since you can see your enemy, the enemy can see you and therefore direct fire back. Self-propelled artillery has thinner armor than say a tank. Consequently, direct fire is unwise using a howitzer due to the lack of armor protection. Nothing says it can't direct fire. They can and do direct fire and it is becoming more and more common on the modern battlefield. In our hobby, that would mean it's a tank. It would be a tank with a low defense factor. They would be rated at like a 2/40 (2 hits takes it out of action with 40 paintballs in the magazine) or in some rare cases a 3/40. That would be why I would not build a SPG. For me, it's a simple matter of the low defense factor. The Paladin is simply an M109A6. So yes, it is an M109 that has been through multiple stages of upgrades over the years. The M109 had no name (like a Sherman or Bulldog, etc.) until it reached the A6 level of upgrades. The Army then gave it a name since that is the Army standard (as well as other services).
Derek T065 On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Sgt.A.Johnson < [email protected]> wrote: > > I've not heard of an M109. As90 is just the British self propelled > artillery I thought. Unless your all going on about something > completely different or its identical to an M109. seeming as it fires > a 155mm shell. Id count it as artillery and apparently the variant in > service isnt indirect and is used much like a standard howitzer. I'm > probably wrong though. According to this its artillery anyway: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AS-90 COPIED AND PASTED FROM > WIKIPEDIA: Four tenders were submitted, and AS90 was the only offer > that was not 'brochureware'. The MoD was also required to consider the > US "Paladin", an upgraded M109 howitzer. does this mean > its not an M109 > > On Jun 2, 2:57 pm, Frank Pittelli <[email protected]> wrote: > > Derek Engelhaupt wrote: > > > As far as I can see, an M109 would be considered a tank according to > the > > > rules. > > > > The M109 is definitely a "tank" under the rules. > > > > Frank P. > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group. To post a message, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
