Very cool photos. Shame these things wouldn’t have a purpose in the game with their limited elevation.
Does the last one (3rd Cavalry Regiment) rotate with the cupola? Does the cupola rotate? Doesn’t look like it would elevate at all?
Just a little update as well, I have added a new vehicle to the tech tree at the sparse rank 5. A Hawkei equipped with an automatic grenade launcher. I only realized recently these grenade launchers have a round that can pen 51mm, and I started pondering all the gameplay possibilities and decided it would actually be pretty damn fun. I wanted to make it a Bushmaster PMV, but I couldn’t find any photos of one equipped as such in Australian service, even though it’s the same weapon station they use.
And I’ve continued working on the post below, getting close to adding those vehicle specs etc. Once done, I can link it in the OP.
Australian Universal Carrier with 2-pdr field modification from North Africa (1942) https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/s/mOkk0QZKHk
Contrary to the official modification we already have in the tree, this one is mounted casemate-style in place of the Bren gun.
The M430A1 actually penetrates 76mm of armor. Standard M430 penetrates 51mm. I’ve been preaching the good word of AGL capability for a while now so it’s great to see someone else dipping their toes in.
For sure. 76mm of pen makes 40mm AGLs better than the Rh202’s DM63 at point blank range against flat plate. The poor velocity will greatly reduce the situations it could be used in but it should still be perfectly viable in any CQC run-and-gun situation. There’s also a proximity grenade available called M684 for that bit of extra utility though I don’t know how effective they’d be against aircraft with such a low velocity.
Also, fun fact, the AH-1G used to use the M430A1 with 76mm of penetration but Gaijin nerfed it to the weaker M430.
That is an LP1 carrier. Mounting a small anti tank gun like the 2 pounder on a little carrier chassis was a very, very popular idea, I can think of at least four different attempts for Australia alone so there could easily be more, and then the UK and Canada for sure had their own designs, I not be at all would surprised if there many more from different corners of the globe.
I was already envisioning the ability to try and lob grenades from behind cover, or potentially hitting vehicles just behind a hill from long range because of the trajectory. I had done a little testing with the squadron BMP’s grenades as you can select them with the weapon selector now, and even with the laser rangefinder they required some small amount of skill to hit a moving target. But they are also a lower muzzle velocity.
Yes, lots. The LP1 is riveted, LP2/2A welded. LP1 glacis plate meets the front plate higher up to clear the steering levers, LP2 doesn’t need this as it has a steering wheel. LP1 doesn’t have the ram air scoop the LP2 has. LP1 sprocket carrier is solid, LP2’s is ventilated and from memory has a lower tooth count. They are different in some way in detail, design, or construction, in almost every particular.
Slightly harder with that one as it has been heavily modified, and yes the 2 pounder is just the top part on the Mk III (?) carriage. The left side of the carrier has been shifted outwards to make room and then more plate, hopefully armour plate, has been used to build up the sides and elsewhere to protect the crew.
So it’s an LP1? Are those rivets I see on the low glacis?
Also, with the recent 40mm grenades revelation I was slow on the ball with, do we want a Kiwi Pinzgauer? It looks goofy as anything, but I guess it would still work. Not sure if the BR should change though, 7.7-8.0 still probably.
It’s an LP1, it is riveted, the top of the glacis plate ends right below the driver’s view port, the lighting here makes it difficult but it is just above the shadow of the circle of the driver’s gun sight, there’s nothing else around at the time that looks like that.
When it comes to soft-skin vehicles with pintle mounted AGLs, the balance VS “immersion” metric gets thrown all out of whack. The AGL on the Hawkei has access to thermals, a stabilizer, and an LRF. The Hawkei itself is also STANAG 4569 whereas the Pinzgauer is just… not. The AGL on the Pinzgauer is also, again, just a on a pintle mount. No stabilization. No thermals. No LRF. Putting something like that at 7.7+ wouldn’t be too great of an idea since reactive mobility and stabilizers become normal from there onward.
Sure, it’d still be just as effective when used as arcing fire from a covered position but being vulnerable to even rifle caliber bullets from any distance and any angle is never good. Run and gunning would be harder too due to the lack of stabilizer, which would be very important for a weapon of such low velocity.
I always put such vehicles in the 6~ area in my custom trees but this is largely due to my personal complete disregard for “immersion” so I’m aware that this isn’t going to be a popular option. At the 6~ area they’d still retain their massive weaknesses but go against more vehicles with poor reactive mobility, allowing them to close the gap necessary for them to be capable of engaging in the first place. They could also serve as a natural predator for another vehicle class that’s be the source of controversy; SPHs.
All of this is to say that, even though I’d fully support their addition, soft-skin vehicles with pintle AGLs could probably cause more issues than they’re worth and should probably be relegated to the event/premium role at best until we can get a more solid view on how AGL-armed vehicles in general would perform in-game.
Doesn’t the grenade launcher itself have a built in laser rangefinder on its sight? Or does that get removed when mounted on a vehicle? But yeah, all the other factors make it a little silly. No armour. No stabilizer isn’t as bad, just means a lower BR. And it looks very silly. In short, it’s not a vehicle designed for combat with other vehicles, but the AGL could allow it to do so in the game.
You may be thinking of the Mk47, which does have its own LRF, however, the AGL mounted on the Pinzgauer is a Mk19, which, by itself, is completely manual. It requires additional attachments to laser rangefind. The AN/PEQ-2A is one such attachment. The photo you showed seem to feature an additional sight, which could house an LRF but I’m not sure as I cannot identify it. It’s also just completely in the hands of Gaijin and their idea of balance if these optional attachments are to be modeled in the first place.
Edit: Looking closer, the AGL mounted on the Pinzgauer appears to actually be a H&K GMG. Like the Mk19, the GMG doesn’t have its own LRF and utilizes attachments to supply it with one. The most notable of the GMG’s attachments is the Vinghøg Vingmate Fire Control System, which is very easily identified. Unfortunately, it is not present in your picture and is up to Gaijin’s discretion whether or not its added.
