Chrisswim Stuff.

[chrisswim]

These served as my M-8 A1. Using Sheridan hull with the Strykers’ MGS gun system. Used to have a dozen or so. Just put one together so now have three.

[redleg]

Nice work on your Bradleys and variants Chris!

[Harlan]

Very nice what-if!

[chrisswim]

Thank you gentlemen. I appreciate your kind words.

We will need to have a number of combat scenarios utilizing the M-8A1, Bradley MGS, and the Booker.

[chrisswim]

Namer with turret upgrade.

[chrisswim]

Worked on these barriers/walls, painted ‘concrete’, then washed.
I am thinking putting sand and some grass on the base. I did add a wider base of thin plastic.

[redleg]

Nice work chris!

[chrisswim]

Thank you, Mr. Mike. Appreciate it. Are you back in the US? Is you heart, mind and soul still in France?

[panzergator]

Chris,

I like the look of your MGS/Sheridan, but... I have difficulty with its practicality. The magazine has limited capacity, reloading appears to be difficult, and likely, without significant modification, the hull would not stand up to the 105mm cannon functioning. Balance may have proved another issue during cross-country maneuvering.

I'm looking for something to do with my MGS turrets. Perhaps Bradley hull...

[chrisswim]

Ohhh Jim, I agree with you totally!!
Just a look. The MGS on Bradly hull, I have done only 4 of the MGS on M2A2 hull and 4 on M2A3 hull.

You saw the taller barrier walls, well I added grass. I added more grass than I initially planned. I may still add beach sand or some rubble.

[panzergator]

Re M2/105... Modify for a semiautomatic loader wherein human loader puts round on a tray which shoves it in the breech. Same transport requirement as a tank. Maybe if we can't build M1s fast enough and just need SUMTHIN'. Same thing with M10 Booker. Someone let the Infantry design a tank. It's what you get when you move the Armor School to Ft. Whatever-They're-Calling-It-Now.

But what is the utility of the M2/105. Too much for bunker-busting, too little for tank work now. We have other things that do those jobs.

[chrisswim]

Jim, a 105 not viable vs top line MBTs? Certainly older tanks should be still on the menu.
Wonder about T-80 series, 105 capable? T-90 is supposed to be better, but those turrets pop off.
Is the 105 able to penetrate.with AP round? T-14 has APS to defend itself. It’s armor is at a STAG level that a 30mm nay or may not penetrate. Chinese armor, similar, T-80 or T-90?
The armor of recent Leopard 2 A6 or A7 and newer, LeClerc, Challenger, Ariete, and other contemporary tanks would be significantly more difficult to make-a-kill. So the 105 would be obsolete in these cases, correct?
Are my conclusions wrong or inaccurate? Any of my comments or assessments off? Please let me know.

[panzergator]

There is a reason the M1, Leo, Challenger, and LeClerc carry 120mm guns. If the 105 were still reliably effective, they would still carry 105mm. I have absolutely no idea why the guy selected 105mm for the M10, except that he's an Infantry officer. Moving Armor down to the Benning School for Boys... that's what we get. We're lucky it wasn't a "machinegun tank" with machine guns in sponsons. Or an 8-wheeled something or other with a malfunctioning autoloader. Just half-a$$ing these things.

[chrisswim]

PG, you have me laughing at a ‘m.g. tank’ …, I guess I should not, as we have the Booker vs. M60 variant of some type. Put an M1 Abrams or M1A1 turret on M60 hull. Jordan did this as I recall. I used to have 40 or so. But had to RE-convert back to Abrams.

The Olympic, want to put on a wash and highlights.



Taco Bell, it 2am … “dong”.



Go get some MD 20/20….

[chrisswim]

Russian Airborne, modern.
ASU-85



BMD APC and SO-120


BMD-1 73mm and w/ AT-3