Comments on: Autoloading Leopard 1

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Fri, 22 Nov 2013 20:55:00 +0000

OTO, huh? That’s a name that often turns up in the context of modern naval weapons. Quick look at the Wiki says they’ve been making fully automatic dual-purpose naval pieces since the Sixties, so this would certainly seem up their alley.

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Fri, 22 Nov 2013 20:47:58 +0000

Actually the main point is deleting the loader station, which saves a lot of space and thus allows for that much smaller and lighter tank (or a bigger gun in a smaller tank, as the Soviet design philosophy went). Case in point, the Leclerc is pretty much the lightest “Western” MBT thanks to that.

On another note, the T-64 was the start of the “quality” line of the Soviet tanks meant for actual tank divisions, whereas the “quantity” branch to which the T-72 belongs formed the tank component of mechanised infantry divs. And you’ll have to excuse my scepticism about your claim a military as enormous as the Red Army would have had problems supplying trained loaders, given that AFAIK that’s the least technically challenging “menial labour” job in a tank and the leeeeeetle detail a fair few T-55s and T-62s were directly inherited by the Russian Federation…

By: Nitty

Nitty — Fri, 22 Nov 2013 18:06:08 +0000

Italy doesn’t need Another L7A1 Platform #69000 as its tier 10 medium. Leopard is the worst of those. That’s all I’m trying to say.

By: Amazingchickens

Amazingchickens — Fri, 22 Nov 2013 17:50:24 +0000

non-revolver auto loaders are useful, but generally only for rounds above 120mm in diameter where loading in a confined space starts to get difficult.
The reason the Russians used them was a combination of two things:
1. small tanks with small turrets and big guns (take the T62 4 RPM as an example).
2. lack of trained crews: T64s may have got decent crews back in the day, but T72s sure as hell didn’t.

In a tank as well loved by crews as the Leopard 1, a 105mm auto loader is kind of pointless

By: demonsmaycry

demonsmaycry — Fri, 22 Nov 2013 17:37:26 +0000

i am italian…and i hope they make this tank :D but i think is OP with an autoloader :P

By: Amazingchickens

Amazingchickens — Fri, 22 Nov 2013 17:30:48 +0000

you’ve been fed already, don’t be greedy.
get back to that place under the bridge where you belong.

By: martin4x4

martin4x4 — Fri, 22 Nov 2013 17:03:03 +0000

Yep, that would be extremely OP. You know why? Because it would give you the benefits of autoloader and benefits of regular loading system – capability do to immense burst damage when needed without vulnerability of loading system based tank when reloading. But there would be possibility to balance it if they modified it little bit more than what you offered, like 2 shells in that magazine instead of 4 or 6. Something in this manner will be in Japanese mid tier medium tanks IIRC so we will see how will it work (3 shots in drum but with regular drum loading time, so perhaps 12-16seconds reload time, depending on caliber of shells )

By: Nitty

Nitty — Fri, 22 Nov 2013 15:32:08 +0000

I’m glad Captain Autism wrote me a six page dissertation on the usefulness of a shitty medium tank, complete with internet roleplay laughing.

Italians should look elsewhere for mediums.

By: sp15

sp15 — Fri, 22 Nov 2013 15:16:36 +0000

from what ive heard OTO didnt start to work on the leo 1 until 1975, and that resulted in the lion a modefied leopard 1 for desert enviroments.

so id say this project is from the mid 70s

By: EkV

EkV — Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:56:12 +0000

Ok, but this thing is called “OTO-Centauro”: that “OTO” may refer to OTO Melara, an italian defense company that built (and still builds) weapons and gun systems (and even armored vehicles and tanks). This means that the drawing found by Yuri may be a project of an upgrade of the Leopard developed by that company prior to WG’s time limit.