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.
2 Likes
+1, imo it would be kinda cool if uk tree turned into the whole commonwealth super tech tree
1 Like
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.
2 Likes
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.
Here’s the GMG with the Vinghøg Vingmate FCS:
Spoiler
1 Like
Excellent identification and knowledge. Given how out of place the Pinzgauer itself is, combined with how difficult an AGL could be to use without a laser rangefinder while needing to be at a high enough BR that it’s not facing 1930s tanks, I’m going to leave the Pinzgauer out of the tree.
1 Like
A pair of interesting M113 modifications, courtesy of the 5/7 RAR
M113A1 (106mm RCL)
Armor, January-February 1997 Edition
This example appears to be of the same construction as the other vehicle in previous images, except this one has 61A on the side rather than 61C, so it’s possibly another vehicle from 5/7 RAR.
#anthonyalbanese #richardmarles #peterdutton #australianarmy… | Daniel Cotterill | 32 comments
M125A1 (Milan)
The M125A1 is the mortar variant of the M113A1, and so the Milan launcher was incorporated in a most interesting way, (unfortunately) replacing the 81mm mortar in the process. You can see however, that the Milan can be lowered into the hull by way of a hydraulic lift, which would be a really cool feature in-game.
Bonus image
M113A1 with M74C turret
Facebook
Not 100% sure if this is Australian, as I don’t remember if the U.S. ever used the M74C turret operationally.
Also, the Wargame: Red Dragon wiki claims that the Australians also mounted L6 Wombat RCLs on their Land Rovers, same as the British. I didn’t bother looking too much into this because it’s basically impossible to differentiate from the UK ones when it comes to an ID standpoint.
Rover Wombat | Wargame Wiki | Fandom
4 Likes
The Australian MK.3 Centurions where upgraded to MK.5/1 (armour added to glacis and a .50 cal coax added for ranging) prior to Vietnam.
You can see the addon plate here:
Spoiler
Here’s one in Vietnam, you can see the duel Coax MG of the MK5/1:
Spoiler
3 Likes
Great find, some fantastic images
2 Likes
Could be, but it is a pretty grainy image. Australia did use M113s with the M74C turret for a short time in Vietnam, but they were replaced by the T50 turret fairly quickly. The ARVN had M74C equipped vehicles too, could be one of theirs.
2 Likes
It seems plausible to be either vehicle then, we would need further imagery or information about the unit to know.
1 Like
Great find. I had heard of the MILAN one before and seen a photo or two, then forgot about it since it’s so hard to come by. Plus the Land Rovers I have in the tech tree seemed like they’d be more effective due to their speed and unique compared to other M113s in the game.
That said, I’d like to add these to the tree along with the LP1 casemate-style 2pdr, there being more than one of the 106mm RCL M113 is also encouraging. With any luck I’ll find the time to do it this weekend.
1 Like
And if you weren’t already aware, I also posted a new image for the MILAN-equipped Land Rover in your suggestion for it.
1 Like
I double checked the WOMBAT thing, and I’m pretty sure that was Wargame taking liberties again. I’m not even sure Australia had WOMBATs at all, we might only have had MOBAT which is heavier and so far I’ve found no reference of them being used on a vehicle. Doesn’t mean one won’t show up though.
1 Like
It’s in tune for them, as you may notice that they also gave the ANZAC faction the Tracked Rapier (albeit it is stated in the wiki that this is intended as a representation of the standalone ones).
1 Like
Didn’t they also give the ANZACs a Vickers Mk.11 in that game? Never even tested by us afaik, despite being designed for an Australian tender.
Yeah that too, not a clue why though, probably just needed some sort of assault gun that Australia couldn’t really offer.
1 Like
I’ve started integrating the M113s and LP1 carrier in to the suggestion (specs added for a couple so far). I hope you don’t mind I used the websites and images you provided links to.
And for my own personal reference for when I get to doing the tech tree images, I plan on putting the M113A1 106mm RCL at BR 7.3, I looked at the other tanks in game using the gun and quite frankly it’d be one of the best. Australian M113A1s had a more powerful 300hp engine, so the power to weight is actually going to be decent. The two closest were the T114 (BR 7.7) which has similar armour protection but less crew, while having a worse power to weight ratio it also has a very good reload speed. Then there was the SPz 12-3 LGS (BR 6.7) which has worse armour, worse mobility. The only thing going for it really is the 20mm but the M113A1 still has a fiddy cal, so I can see it being a higher BR than the SPz while, despite the better mobility and the slight increase in survivability vs the T114, the reload speed will not put it above or even equal with that.
I still need to double check the engine specs and what not of our M125A1s before making a call on the MILAN carrier. It could be similar to the Giraf at 8.3. Also depends on our model MILAN which I forget right now.
Edit: Looks like we had the MILAN 1.
Edit 2: The M113A1 106mm RCL, M125A1 MILAN and LP1 Carrier 2-pdr have now been added to the suggestion. I went with BR 8.3 for the M125A1, it has a worse missile than the two I-TOW equipped M113s but it also has a better engine, so…I guess it’s reasonably close enough to put it at the same BR in the suggestion.
1 Like
I’ve just put in my Honourable Mentions section to the op. I may add to it, but for now I’m happy with what I’ve got in there.
Just checked some of the sources you’ve linked and found some more Aussie vehicles, one named the ASLAV Armour-Dillo. Looks pretty interesting, perhaps similar performance to the Russian 2S23 Nona?
The mortar it used was the Royal Ordnance 120mm
4 Likes
I’ve discussed the 120mm mortar on the forums with others before and unfortunately it just doesn’t seem like we have any evidence of a round that could be useful in the game for it. Even the best 120mm mortar rounds in all of NATO today would barely pass as usable in the game.
