Absolutely yes, +1 i don’t know why vehicles like this aren’t in the game yet.
Maybe? It was still a steel mockup, I can’t find any confirmation that the turret actually turned. The first actual turrets weren’t produced until sometime around May of the next year.
They definitely liked them.
Don’t have the entire document on hand, but the British wanted to fit all their tanks with it. However, it just never materialized.
1 Like
Evidently that wasn’t their same opinion with the Grant, due to how far factory installation of the gyrostabilizers lagged behind the Lees and how the retrofits weren’t ordered as standard. Sherman Minutia quotes “AFV Technical Report No. 11,” circa December 1942, for the British dissatisfaction of the gyrostabilizer in North Africa, though I can’t find the actual report itself.
HE Mk.II has a mv of 2700 ft/s according to FM 23-80 for the 37 mm M5.
Note that M51 and M63 have different velocities listed than in-game. This is because M74 and M51 were initially charged to achieve 2600 ft/s from the 37 mm M3/M6 (2550 ft/s from the M5). The propellent load was eventually increased. The earliest evidence I’ve found thus far is from late 1941, but it seems the lower charge rounds stayed in circulation for quite awhile since they even had to account for both charges in the tank gun sights. There’s also a steel case with 2800 ft/s mv.
M63 is the opposite for some reason. Early batches had a higher charge. Could’ve been reduced so it could be lobbed, maybe it was just for economics (same reason the M74 shot exists). Idk.
The change in propellants could be an good way to differentiate US low rank tanks with the 37 mm, and help bring them more in line with other reserve guns. M2 Med and M2A4 would be solid picks to receive this change, which could make the M2A1 Med better by proxy despite using a slightly shorter gun.
Updated with the velocities. The base-fuzed armor penetration is done through the Calculator with a 0.7x multiplier applied to the result.
I imagine it was more due to initial distrust and lack of familiarization with the system. As well as cost and time, this was during “cash and carry” rather than lend-lease. So the British could have seen this as an unnecessary expense and a delay in production during a period they desperately needed tanks.
Here the recommendation is to install them immediately. Which implies it was quite effective when installed in Centaur.
The issues they had with it is that it didn’t provide enough benefit for the space it took up and the maintenance it required. This was a specific complaint about the gyros in the Grants and Lees. I don’t see what bearing the Centaur report has when discussing specifically the possibility of the Grant turret steel mockup having had a stabilizer or not. Which, I’m confident to say now it absolutely did not; combined with both the lack of a counterweight and with the lack of either the two or three-screw “bumps” that was indicative of a gyrostabilizer being mounted in place.
Edit: The loader’s periscope was also supposed to be where the gyrostabilizer would normally be mounted.
I was never talking about the mock-up, purely chiming in on the British gyro perspective.
I would recommend to start at 1.7 BR due to the armor and mobility upgrades. If they seem to be too small to improve it, then it can drop to 1.3 with the current M2 tank, but it would be a nice addition to the US tech tree nevertheless.
4 Likes
nah keep it low. armor means nothing at that br anyways
I think it highly depends on the armor profile because some tanks, just by having 5-10 mm more armor, they become much more survivable overall. Especially on sloped armor. And the M2A1 should also have a mobility improvement as well. It’s real drawback, if not addressed, would be the poor turret traverse kept from the M2.
The M2A1 would get a fair degree of protection from lower end 37 mm guns, 20 autocannons, and HMGs when angled, which is really all you can ask for at this BR range. It’s just harder to justify making it 1.7 when there are basically already 1.7~2.0 tanks larping as reserve tanks that are outright better than the M2 medium.
Since Gajin just pulled the manual turret traverse rate out their backside for the M2, they could just as easily increase it (within reason for manual traverse) to make the M2 and M2A1 more viable at their respective BRs.
bt tanks dont gaf lol