Prev: Re: [OT] Re: Co-Axial MG? Next: Re: [FT] Weapons Cost for firing every other turn

Re: [FT] Weapons Cost for firing every other turn

From: Chip Dunning <chip.dunning@f...>
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 00:49:47 -0400
Subject: Re: [FT] Weapons Cost for firing every other turn

Yes, historically multiple gun turrets enabled the firing vessel to 
bracket their target to ensure a greater chance to score a single hit. 
Maybe a multi-gun turret could move the hit numbers down by one. Thus if

  you have 2 Class-2 batts in a turret you could fire them as a single 
Class-2 with a 1 shift positive result.

The reason I used the COAX design was it was coupling the same gunner 
with two very different weapons. As an example a turret could contain a 
Class-3 and a Class-1 Beam weapon. The reason I limited it to the same 
arc was to account for the fact that the beam weapon is more than likely

not really coaxially mounted, but in fact each weapon can only target 
within the same arc at the same time.


John Atkinson wrote:
> On 5/18/05, <> wrote:
>>As far as I'm aware the coax MG on a MBT is never used to engage
different targets than the main gun, at the same time at the main gun? I
thought they were pretty damn fixed with respect to eachother, which is
what _co-ax_ial implies?
> Coaxial MG on an MBT is not used to engage different targets, but
> rather different kinds of targets.  You are correct on your
> understanding of the word coaxial.
> Since it is the same gunner operating both those weapons, it would be
> tricky to engage two different targets even if they could move freely
> and seperately from each other.
>>As for the guns on modern surface combattants, I'm fully lost what you
are suggesting here. The vast majority of modern surface combattants
have one gun per turret, and those that have more than one gun per
turret fire at the same bearing and elevation - hence at the same
target? (*)
> Historical cruisers and capital ships would have multiple guns in one
> turret, but would (AFAIK) engage one target at a time.
> Generally, even if you did have the capability to engage multiple
> targets it wouldn't be wise to spread your firepower around like that,
> hoping for a lucky hit.  Much better doctrine to concentrate fire and
> have better assurance of smashing your primary target quickly.  If you
> want to swat bunches of escorts, that's what the batteries of
> secondary 5" quick-firers are intended for.
> John

Prev: Re: [OT] Re: Co-Axial MG? Next: Re: [FT] Weapons Cost for firing every other turn