Dual-barreled tanks?

[Plong]

Yeah so there is a thing called dual-barreled tanks. They got 2 barrels. Man whata big punch that tank woulda pack. Anyway, I was wondering if having two turrets on a tank a smart idea, or foolhardy? I think it would be somehwat in between, as the extra firepower would be needed to take down enemy tanks fast and easy, however with autoloaders i think it has been solved. A dual-barreled tank with autoloaders, oh crap! The extra recoil and the width between the two barrels would make it kinda hard to aim and when fired, the recoil would probably take you off the target, but if you hit, then whatever... What is your point?

[Acrainia]

Weight and size mostly. It's a lot easier just to speed up the loading process.

[Blazedtown]

Possible, but not practical. Turrets tend to be cramped enough with one cannon. On the retarded idea scale, its slightly more sane than mechs, but not by much.

[Ifreann]

Yeah so there is a thing called dual-barreled tanks. They got 2 barrels.

Well duh.

[Senestrum]

A single large gun is in all cases preferable to two smaller ones.

[Plong]

Yeah so there is a thing called dual-barreled tanks. They got 2 barrels.

Well duh.

hahahahaha suoory couldnt help it.

[Arbites]

Possible, but not practical. Turrets tend to be cramped enough with one cannon. On the retarded idea scale, its slightly higher than mechs, but not by much.

Wait, does that make it more retarded or less? I'd say dual-barrels would be less stupid than a giant moving target.

[Plong]

Possible, but not practical. Turrets tend to be cramped enough with one cannon. On the retarded idea scale, its slightly higher than mechs, but not by much.

Wait, does that make it more retarded or less? I'd say dual-barrels would be less stupid than a giant moving target.

Yeah that'd make mroe sense. The Soviets experimented with these kinda tanks a while ago. It was called the T-100, but instead of 2 cannons mounted on one turret it had two seperate turrets with one gun each. The Germans tried this out as well, but the P1000 Ratte was never finished, luckily.

[Fartsniffage]

This would be more interesting if we had duel-barrelled tanks.

Can only be fired from 10 paces and require a second of good breeding.

[Indira]

Yeah so there is a thing called dual-barreled tanks. They got 2 barrels. Man whata big punch that tank woulda pack. Anyway, I was wondering if having two turrets on a tank a smart idea, or foolhardy? I think it would be somehwat in between, as the extra firepower would be needed to take down enemy tanks fast and easy, however with autoloaders i think it has been solved. A dual-barreled tank with autoloaders, oh crap! The extra recoil and the width between the two barrels would make it kinda hard to aim and when fired, the recoil would probably take you off the target, but if you hit, then whatever... What is your point?

Hard to see it working. I believe the American Grant tank got around the recoil problem by putting one one the body and a separate turret, but it was a pretty bad idea if I recall correctly

[Austphalia]

Durr, theres these things called dual-barreled tanks. They got two barrels.

LOL

[The Mizarian Empire]

Rather than insult the OP for his poor choice of wording (which seems to be sport for several people here) I'll quickly point out that attaching 2 main guns to a single tank turret would be entirely impractical. MAYBE in a couple dozen years when/if a way to stabilize such extreme levels of recoil more efficiently is discovered it would be feasible. As it stands now with today's technology you would essentially be bringing about Napoleonic warfare into tank warfare (Ala any hit would require massed volley firing).

[Brandenburgopolus]

Yeah so there is a thing called dual-barreled tanks. They got 2 barrels. Man whata big punch that tank woulda pack. Anyway, I was wondering if having two turrets on a tank a smart idea, or foolhardy? I think it would be somehwat in between, as the extra firepower would be needed to take down enemy tanks fast and easy, however with autoloaders i think it has been solved. A dual-barreled tank with autoloaders, oh crap! The extra recoil and the width between the two barrels would make it kinda hard to aim and when fired, the recoil would probably take you off the target, but if you hit, then whatever... What is your point?

2 turrets on a tank has been done before BUT it was mainly done as a stop gap measure.. Purest example of this was the American M3 Lee/Grant.. The m3 had a 37mm in a turret and a 75 mm short barrel in a side sponson turret.. The reason this was done was because american industry could not yet cast a turret to house a large gun like the 75...This was not an "ideal" solution and was not repeated on any other tank.. The russians also did the muti-turret gun on a 1930's era tank. It was NOT a success.. The tank in question was the T35

As for auto-loaders.. There are pros and quite a few cons to that idea.. I know the russians use autoloaders but i also know the USA does not.. I will sooner put my faith in a man or woman over a machine that .. when in the heat of battle will almost certainly fail when you have a target lined up.. per mr. murphy..


BTW.. the germans used double barrel FLAK guns in ww2.....not talking about the 20 mm variety either.. talking the 88mm and 128mm.. dont think any one has tried that on a tank though.. it would be impractical for one thing and logistically.. it would not work either.. no place to store enough ammo to be viable IMO

[New Korongo]

Why does one need an expensive, slow, heavy inaccurate double-barrel tank when they can have two cheaper, faster, lighter and accurate single-barrel tanks?

[Volnotova]

Yeah so there is a thing called dual-barreled tanks. They got 2 barrels. Man whata big punch that tank woulda pack. Anyway, I was wondering if having two turrets on a tank a smart idea, or foolhardy? I think it would be somehwat in between, as the extra firepower would be needed to take down enemy tanks fast and easy, however with autoloaders i think it has been solved. A dual-barreled tank with autoloaders, oh crap! The extra recoil and the width between the two barrels would make it kinda hard to aim and when fired, the recoil would probably take you off the target, but if you hit, then whatever... What is your point?

There are recoil issues(that can add up to the point were they can have a devastating impact on the chassis and the turret), weight issues, size issues(you would need separate reloading mechanisms which might not fit in the turret).

I can see the advantage in being able to fire two successive shots in a short time span though, but currently that doesn't weigh up to the side effects.

It is generally more preferable to arm a tank with missile launchers and heavy machine guns instead.

[Greater Evil Imperial Japanese Dystopia]

Why does one need an expensive, slow, heavy inaccurate double-barrel tank when they can have two cheaper, faster, lighter and accurate single-barrel tanks?

Nuclear powered tanks for the z?

That compensates the lack of slow speed, then all you have to do is..

[humourous]install rocket propulsion.[/end of humour]

[Vorond]

Just for clarification: you actually mean two guns in one turret? Tanks with more than one main gun are quite common actually, but two guns that have the exact same arc of fire...yep, retarded.


US Grant tank - one fixed hardpoint, one in the turret.


Vickers AE-1 Independent. peopalby the multiturret-tank. Basis for soviet development, though only one "real" cannon.


Soviet T28 medium. Built in quite large numbers, but useless.


Soviet T35 heavy. One short-barreled big caliber artillery in the main turret, two diagonally placed smaller ones. klick here for detailed sketch Propably to crack bunkers with the main gun that acts as a sort of artillery while the two smaller ones take care of armoured enemies. Suffice to say it was no good.


Soviet concept SMK, obviously related to the T35 (and the T28)


Soviet concept T100 - related to the others. "only" two turrets, though both with heavier armament


French Char FCM-21 prototype - apparently they quickly discovered the idea was bullshit, and started building more conventional tanks. Seems to be the only thing that actually had two guns in one turret.

Not I don't know about the grant, but the soviet ones quickly proved to be utter crap in 1941: a lot of them simply broke down, their armor was weak, their main guns rather useless against sturdy german panzers. They dissapeared, one way or another, until more modern concepts came along. The idea of having two medium-caliber guns instead of one big one was apparently discarded simply because the two smaller guns were more expensive to produce, a phenomenon the germans encountered much later in the FLAK-business. Although I have to admit: two high speed medium caliber guns with a good penetration firing alternatively sounds quite fearsome.

here is info on french, here on german and here on soviet development.

[Yes Im Biop]

EH... ... OK Let me think


Double barrels aren't used because as you said. Massive recoil.

Now. The Guns on tanks are good enough. And One gun is cramped as hell already., Add another one and you mess up everything up from the center of gravity to the targeting computers.

[Imota]

As tvtropes would say, Awesome, But Impractical.

[Fartsniffage]

Why does one need an expensive, slow, heavy inaccurate double-barrel tank when they can have two cheaper, faster, lighter and accurate single-barrel tanks?

Because C&C. That's why.

[Vorond]

Why does one need an expensive, slow, heavy inaccurate double-barrel tank when they can have two cheaper, faster, lighter and accurate single-barrel tanks?

Because C&C. That's why.

How about a rhino rush to prove the point?

[OMGeverynameistaken]

A single large gun is in all cases preferable to two smaller ones.

Depends on the role you're talking about.

If it's less a tank and more of an IFV/support vehicle, several autocannons might be preferable to a single large gun. See the Tunguska.

[Northwest Slobovia]

There are recoil issues(that can add up to the point were they can have a devastating impact on the chassis and the turret),

Oh, Ghod, yes! The off-center recoil does awful things to the turret ring and the traversing machinery.

[Greater Evil Imperial Japanese Dystopia]

Wait, does that make it more retarded or less? I'd say dual-barrels would be less stupid than a giant moving target.

Yeah that'd make mroe sense. The Soviets experimented with these kinda tanks a while ago. It was called the T-100, but instead of 2 cannons mounted on one turret it had two seperate turrets with one gun each. The Germans tried this out as well, but the P1000 Ratte was never finished, luckily.

Yes, however you need two different separated chassis turrets for it to work, as well as a huge tank size. Yes, the P.1000 was fortunately never in service... although I wished to see the even bigger Schwerer Gustav & P.1500 Monster vehicles with 80-cm barrelled cannons.

Or what our own country in real life during the Second World War tried to build (Japan), which is the O-I 130-tonne super heavy tank. Imagine if all the aforementioned modules were nuclear powered.

[Northwest Slobovia]

Imagine if all the aforementioned modules were nuclear powered.

It makes a bigger mess when it gets blown up.