Jump to content


Photo

Commander & Loader Machineguns Original M1 Tanks


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 17thfabn

17thfabn

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 163 posts

Posted 18 January 2020 - 2208 PM

On the original US M1 Tanks did the commander and loader have to expose themselves to use their machine guns? Or was there some way they could fire from cover?


  • 0

#2 DogDodger

DogDodger

    Cornre durg dealing ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,586 posts

Posted 18 January 2020 - 2230 PM

TC could fire from under armor; loader could not.


  • 0

#3 17thfabn

17thfabn

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 163 posts

Posted 24 January 2020 - 1226 PM

Does any one have videos or pictures of how the fired the M2 .50 cal from under cover on the early M1?  Was it similar to how the MG34 on the Hetzer worked.


  • 0

#4 DogDodger

DogDodger

    Cornre durg dealing ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,586 posts

Posted 24 January 2020 - 1608 PM

One of the actual tankers can please correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it, the commander's weapon station used two separate controls for traverse and elevation; traverse could be electric and elevation was manual. A sighting periscope could be found to the right of the MG. The elevation handwheel was to the left of the forward periscope, and the powered traverse handle was in front of the TC's turret control handle.
 
The elevation handle:
GK4xNIs.jpg
 
The powered traverse handle is to the front of the turret control handle:
ZFqMVFo.jpg

The sighting periscope can be seen to the MG's right:
xISWTBn.jpg

Edit: Speaking of Manic, skip to 7:40 because apparently timestamps don't work.


Edited by DogDodger, 24 January 2020 - 1614 PM.

  • 0

#5 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Staff
  • PipPip
  • 11,181 posts

Posted 24 January 2020 - 1611 PM

Manic posted on a recent Forgotten Weapons video, that when the solenoid broke on his 0.50, he reached up through the open hatch and depressed the paddle to fire.


  • 0

#6 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,159 posts

Posted 24 January 2020 - 1704 PM

On the original M1s there was no electrical trigger for the M2.  There was an elevation knob, similar to the one depicted in DogDodger's picture, except instead of having an electrical trigger and electrical wires, there was a cable attached to the top of the knob.  The cable was thus attached to a lever which would depress the butterfly trigger of the M2.  The M1IP and M1A1 introduced the electrical trigger in Dog's picture which activated a solenoid which depressed the butterfly trigger on the M2.  To traverse the weapon station there were indeed to methods, electrically and manually.  The manual traverse was rather interesting, if not crude.  Instead of a crank, as on the M60s, the TC would spin a slip ring.  You can see the ring in Dodger's first picture, it's behind the elevation crank.  This ring was geared into the traversing gearbox.  It wasn't a 1:1 gear ratio, it was more like 3:1 or 5:1, and took a lot of spinning to get the CWS to move more than a few degrees.  However, if you wanted accurate fire manual traverse was the way to go.  At least for me, I found the the electrical traverse far too sensitive for fine adjustments.  Personally, if they'd ask me to design CWS controls, I would have grafted my old M60 cupola controls into the M1s CWS. 


Edited by DKTanker, 24 January 2020 - 1705 PM.

  • 0

#7 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,159 posts

Posted 24 January 2020 - 1706 PM

Manic posted on a recent Forgotten Weapons video, that when the solenoid broke on his 0.50, he reached up through the open hatch and depressed the paddle to fire.

It was a POS system cobbled together by 12 year olds.


  • 0

#8 17thfabn

17thfabn

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 163 posts

Posted 25 January 2020 - 2033 PM

Thanks guys.

 

DogDodger, watching one of Chiefton's videos was what got me thinking about this topic. He off handed a remark about firing the M2 .50 cal from under cover. I knew the .50 cal in the cupola on the M60 could be fired from under cover . I didn't know that the M1 before CROWS could be fired from under armor.

 

 

Is the reason the loaders M240 didn't have the capability was space limitations?


Edited by 17thfabn, 25 January 2020 - 2034 PM.

  • 0

#9 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,159 posts

Posted 26 January 2020 - 0019 AM

Is the reason the loaders M240 didn't have the capability was space limitations?

It was never deemed necessary.  It's a nice to have weapon, not a necessary weapon.


  • 0

#10 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,467 posts

Posted 08 February 2020 - 1440 PM

A question on this photo from Hunicutt book - this looks like Chrysler ХМ1 validation phase prototype, JE0001 ?

9c6a9719d47e4ee1af34af54e9b7ca8d-full.jp

 Not XM1 FSED.


Edited by Harkonnen, 08 February 2020 - 1440 PM.

  • 0

#11 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,467 posts

Posted 08 February 2020 - 1504 PM

Are there any details on the  Chrysler ХМ1 validation phase prototype  comander weapons station?

It looks like it has separate sight for mashine gun in front of the commander hatch?

 

1c196ecaadf18802d0066d5ef63ea6f2-full.jp


  • 0