AS-90 would be a 2/40 for it's rating since the armor is 17mm thick. All of the M109 variants A1-A6 have the same rating of 2/40 since the armor is 31.8mm thick and was not upgraded in any of the variants.
Derek T065 On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Sgt.A.Johnson < [email protected]> wrote: > > So as90=not m109. And both=useless > > On Jun 2, 5:38 pm, Derek Engelhaupt <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
