Subdeacon Joe Posted March 11, 2024 Posted March 11, 2024 Someone is insecure. "Be careful, this thing will take your eye out! This is what happens when you place a 420 mm (16.5 inch) gun on a tank-sized chassis. It is the 2B1 "Oka", and unsurprisingly, it wasn't very successful. It could launch enormous nuclear projectiles dozens of kilometers away, transmitting brutal shock into its hull and suspension. Its running gear was reinforced to help alleviate these issues but it couldn't stop it entirely. While its gun was formidable, the 2B1 was simply a logistical nightmare. The 20 m barrel made transport difficult, its 420 mm ammunition was cumbersome and the rate of fire was slow. Missiles systems could do a similar job with a lot less hassle, so the vehicle was retired. Kinda bit of an embarrassment this one in comparison.... https://tankhistoria.com/cold-war/t-34-100/ "
Texas Lizard Posted March 11, 2024 Posted March 11, 2024 23 minutes ago, Cypress Sun said: Barrel envy. Mine is longer..... Texas Lizard
Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 Posted March 11, 2024 Posted March 11, 2024 Almost as long as an Iowa class 16”/50. Projectile is nowhere near as big. At 420 mm, the projectile was shorter than those of the American 8” howitzer. BTW, the link goes to tanks with 100 mm tubes.
Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 Posted March 11, 2024 Posted March 11, 2024 That barrel is too long for the vehicle to drive comfortably, even if there is a balanced travel position it would be long on both ends.
PowderRiverCowboy Posted March 11, 2024 Posted March 11, 2024 3 hours ago, Texas Lizard said: Mine is longer..... Texas Lizard LOL seems like all the little guys always cry "Compensation" and well it is small compared to:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.