Jump to content

M247 Sergeant York (SPAA)


Thiky
 Share

You want M247 in the game?  

268 members have voted

  1. 1. You want M247 in the game?

    • Yes
      254
    • No
      14


Hi members!

 

I saw the "Super Coelian" idea and born an idea to me to USA tech tree. This would be the M247 Sergeant York with a stronger, close case (M48) and longer, stronger 40mm barrel than the M42 Duster. The weapon system would be a little bit more accurate maybe, because the radar assist.

 

The category should be between the German Coelian and the Russian ZSU-57-2: Highest level with BR 7-7,7

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M247_Sergeant_York

http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=644

 

M247-sergeant-york-tn1.jpg

 

20110911044559.jpg

 

cochran_m247_29.jpg

 

 

 

 

Specification:
M247 Sergeant York
 
Weight:  54.4 ton
Length: 7.67 m (gun forward)
              6.42 m (hull only)
Width:  3.63 mm
Height:  3.42 mm
 
Crew:  3 man
 
Motor:  Continental AVDS-1790-2D diesel
            750hp (559kW)
Suspensiont:  torsion bar
Maximum speed:  48km/h (30mph)
Operational range:  500km (310mi)
 
Main armament:  2 × Bofors 40 mm L/70
                            580 rounds
Elevation:  -5° to +85°
Traverse:  360°
Rate of fire:  600 rpm
Maximum firing range:  12.5 km
 
I hope this is a good idea and you like and support!
I wait the remarks and ideas!
 
Regards,
Thiky
Edited by Thiky

SAUBER_KH7 (Posted )

Your topic is Approved.
  • Upvote 23
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Open for Discussion. :salute:

 

The L70 40mms would be a nice upgrade from the M42. :good:

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the "Super Coelian" idea and born an idea to me to USA tech tree. 

Well If the Super Coelian is added I would also like to see this :P Would be a nice counter to them both.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2705_243764064_Tank%20M-48%20Paton_DIVAD

 

Maneuverability:
Gradient: 60%
Side slope: 30%
Vertical step: 0.9 m
Trench: 2.6 m
Fording: 1.2 m
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many were made?

50

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good enough. I support it.

:salute:

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno if it should or not be in-game.... but I love the name, because it's named after a World War I veteran... Sgt. Alvin York

 

It could be accepted. Planes, 1960's, Tanks, 1970's. 

 

18. How far are you planning to do the tech trees? So far, we have seen aircraft and vehicles from the 1950s and 1960s, so would it be likely to see aircraft like the Lightning and Vulcan as well? Or are you planning in going "backwards" in time?

 

Anton: "Generally, the answer is quite simple, although it can be a lengthy one. War Thunder is a very realistic game regarding physics and damage modelling, and we want to keep it that way. For aircraft, that means we are limited to vehicles not equipped with good enough Air-to-Air missiles, as that would change the gameplay completely - or rather, it would remove any gameplay altogether. You just lock on the target, release the missile, and that basically is the whole combat. There is no classic dogfighting with modern combat jets, as the individual pilot's skill is much less important here, compared to the WWII and Korean War eras. Early jets will thus most likely remain the end of the tech tree there, as later ones all come with Air-to-Air missiles.


For tanks the combat situation changed as well, but much later. Even vehicles from the 1970ies were not equipped with potent missiles that could be used without actually seeing or manually guiding for the enemy. So, with tanks, we'll probably go up to the 1970ies, while with aircraft we'll stop in the 1960ies - when missiles took over combat. And this decision is purely a gameplay one, as combat with missiles in a Realistic game is, well, boring."

 

 

So, I would have to say yes :3

 

 

 

But, I must hasten to add:

 

I think that the T249 needs to come after Duster, and that the M163 VADS needs to come before the M247. 

 

 

I also think that there were some towed applications (100+mm, iirc) that would be nice to combat bomber spam, although, in the kinds of battles we have now, we do not have to target large heavy-bombers at 30,000 feet.

Edited by BlitzkriegWulf
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Done historically, the radar and fire control system should not make this more accurate. While the manuals may hype up how great this system was supposed to be, there's a reason it wasn't accepted for service. It couldn't track targets quickly enough. It was complex and unreliable. And most notoriously, the tracking system once locked onto a bathroom fan thinking it was an aircraft target.

 

It was in development long-term, up until 1985, when the project was finally put out of its misery. Air defense units continued to rely on the M-163 Vulcan until the Bradley-based Linebacker system came about, which didn't last long itself.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could be accepted. Planes, 1960's, Tanks, 1970's. 

 

18. How far are you planning to do the tech trees? So far, we have seen aircraft and vehicles from the 1950s and 1960s, so would it be likely to see aircraft like the Lightning and Vulcan as well? Or are you planning in going "backwards" in time?

 

Anton: "Generally, the answer is quite simple, although it can be a lengthy one. War Thunder is a very realistic game regarding physics and damage modelling, and we want to keep it that way. For aircraft, that means we are limited to vehicles not equipped with good enough Air-to-Air missiles, as that would change the gameplay completely - or rather, it would remove any gameplay altogether. You just lock on the target, release the missile, and that basically is the whole combat. There is no classic dogfighting with modern combat jets, as the individual pilot's skill is much less important here, compared to the WWII and Korean War eras. Early jets will thus most likely remain the end of the tech tree there, as later ones all come with Air-to-Air missiles.


For tanks the combat situation changed as well, but much later. Even vehicles from the 1970ies were not equipped with potent missiles that could be used without actually seeing or manually guiding for the enemy. So, with tanks, we'll probably go up to the 1970ies, while with aircraft we'll stop in the 1960ies - when missiles took over combat. And this decision is purely a gameplay one, as combat with missiles in a Realistic game is, well, boring."

 

So, I would have to say yes :3

 

But, I must hasten to add:

 

I think that the T249 needs to come after Duster, and that the M163 VADS needs to come before the M247. 

 

I also think that there were some towed applications (100+mm, iirc) that would be nice to combat bomber spam, although, in the kinds of battles we have now, we do not have to target large heavy-bombers at 30,000 feet.

I know an anti-aircraft system from cold war, what hasn't AA missiles yet and I thought show to you like idea. That's all. This would be too young to its enemies maybe.

 

The T249 is a good idea too, but its built number 6 (would be good to premium) and the M163 are the our days vehicles yet.

 

 

Done historically, the radar and fire control system should not make this more accurate. While the manuals may hype up how great this system was supposed to be, there's a reason it wasn't accepted for service. It couldn't track targets quickly enough. It was complex and unreliable. And most notoriously, the tracking system once locked onto a bathroom fan thinking it was an aircraft target.

 

It was in development long-term, up until 1985, when the project was finally put out of its misery. Air defense units continued to rely on the M-163 Vulcan until the Bradley-based Linebacker system came about, which didn't last long itself.

That's right, but I don't saw support jets in the ground battles yet.

Edited by Thiky
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the T249 needs to come after Duster, and that the M163 VADS needs to come before the M247. 

An other project with a M48 case and a 30mm GAU-8 (from A-10) Gatling gun.

 

SaXtEiA.jpg

 

d5b8a2354e6778650afee51cd1051f0d.jpg

  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know an anti-aircraft system from cold war, what hasn't AA missiles yet and I thought show to you like idea. That's all. This would be too young to its enemies maybe.

 

The T249 is a good idea too, but its built number 6 (would be good to premium) and the M163 are the our days vehicles yet.

 

 

That's right, but I don't saw support jets in the ground battles yet.

 

 

Well..... Seemed that (After looking into it...?) That the M247 was a pretty epic fail. Basically using poorly-stored M48 hulls, with the same turret drives on an AA platform that were used on the M48, with old 40mm bofors barrels, with a bad feed system, and with a FCS that was on the F-16.... and designed for only air use.

 

 

So basically the trees showed up as aircraft/interferance, and when the barrels were elevated past a certain point, the exhaust from the propellant made the FCS go haywire. Also, the FCS apparently made lots and lots of heat, meaning that if we ever get into FLIR cameras... it's going to have a really nasty signature from quite a distance.

 

An other project with a M48 case and a 30mm GAU-8 (from A-10) Gatling gun.

 

mmmmh...... hopefully that takes more after the VADS. Seems a lot of people have needed their A-10 fix and that might help soothe them to be able to blow people away with a GAU-8.

 

Could be a good top tier.... what do they call it?

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're near (1.59 Rumors) to have a Modified M61-A-1 "Vulcan" 20mm Guns for SPAA, so why do you want a new twice Bofors SPAA?

 

Mmh..... But the difference is (supposedly....) that this SPAA has a FCS. 

 

So it should be effective against some things, hopefully.... but yeah, the slow rate of fire doesn't help it any.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmh..... But the difference is (supposedly....) that this SPAA has a FCS. 

 

So it should be effective against some things, hopefully.... but yeah, the slow rate of fire doesn't help it any.

Also the fact that they're L/70 instead of L/60 might have something to do with it.

 

                  Fire Rate /min              Muzzle Velocity  m/s            Traverse Rate   deg/s         

L/60               120                                   881                                     50             

L/70               330                                   1021                                   92

 

It's only a bofors firing nearly three times as much shells at a higher velocity.  But yeah, who needs Bofors eh?

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmh..... But the difference is (supposedly....) that this SPAA has a FCS. 

 

So it should be effective against some things, hopefully.... but yeah, the slow rate of fire doesn't help it any.

 

Which means FCS? men,put us the global meanning.

Edited by Cpt_Bel_V
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An other project with a M48 case and a 30mm GAU-8 (from A-10) Gatling gun.

 

SaXtEiA.jpg

 

d5b8a2354e6778650afee51cd1051f0d.jpg

Can someone make a suggestion for this? I would totally support that.


Which means FCS? men,put us the global meanning.

I'm pretty sure FCS means Fire Control System

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mmmmh...... hopefully that takes more after the VADS. Seems a lot of people have needed their A-10 fix and that might help soothe them to be able to blow people away with a GAU-8.

 

Could be a good top tier.... what do they call it?

I found only one place, where wrote name to it.

/"Avenger" - DIVAD (Divisior Air Defence) system vehicle prototype propose by General Electric Company. This vehicle was armed in 30 mm GAU-8 seven barrel cannon and had effective kill range of 4000 meters. Developed in 1977./

The name got after the gun name according to me.

 

Also the fact that they're L/70 instead of L/60 might have something to do with it.

 

                  Fire Rate /min              Muzzle Velocity  m/s            Traverse Rate   deg/s         

L/60               120                                   881                                     50             

L/70               330                                   1021                                   92

 

It's only a bofors firing nearly three times as much shells at a higher velocity.  But yeah, who needs Bofors eh?

"...and longer, stronger 40mm barrel than the M42 Duster"

Edited by Thiky
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also the fact that they're L/70 instead of L/60 might have something to do with it.

 

                  Fire Rate /min              Muzzle Velocity  m/s            Traverse Rate   deg/s         

L/60               120                                   881                                     50             

L/70               330                                   1021                                   92

 

It's only a bofors firing nearly three times as much shells at a higher velocity.  But yeah, who needs Bofors eh?

 

 

Well.... While I wasn't aware of the barrel length difference or the fire rate difference, I somehow doubt that the turret traverse on the M247 is 92 degrees per second... I thought I read somewhere that the turret traverse modules were the same as the M48's. 

 

And, while the fire rate of (combined) 660 is far superior to the 240 of the SPAA we currently have, it's a far cry short of the T249, M163 VADS, or the M48 with a Gau-8 turret. 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which means FCS? men,put us the global meanning.

 

"FCS" is "Fire Control System". 

 

Typically what these systems do is they scan for a target using radar, calculate lead and drop, and pre-aim the weapons system for you. The result is usually very accurate shot placement. 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...