Imagine the effort it must've taken to load that thing…

Dora.

BTW the actual gun and ammunition behind the A-10s cannon is used in various light armored vehicles. A ground vehicle doesn't need to deliver that kind of lead on target. It's like Beowulf versus a 50 caliber machine gun.

The Ma Deuce is my second favorite BFG.

Nothing says luvin' like a scoped compound crossbow. Thwip!

bravo1102
BTW the actual gun and ammunition behind the A-10s cannon is used in various light armored vehicle

Yeah, a big 30mm Bushmaster might use it, or any number of 30mm autocannons really, but of course 30mm is small biccies in terms of mounted single barrel guns. They all have their own unique applications though. :)
—————–

This is someone's own personal Gatling gun…



What they had before revolvers. Very heavy, clumsy and all barrels are single shot.

Then there's the famous 20mm Finnish Lahti



Used against light armour by the Finns in WW2. There are quite a few makes of 20mm rifles around today, but the big old Lahti still stands out. The man in the pic looks a little like he might be compensating for something…

Then there's the so-called “Nock” gun.



Featured in the “Sharp” series. This heavy multi-barrelled gun shot all barrels simultaneously, to give someone a HELL of a whack, or more likely- to smash into a crowd or through wooden walls… It was used as an anti boarding weapon on ships and known for breaking shoulders.

And finally, the Atomic canon.



Not the most powerful piece of artillery ever made, but definitely the most powerful ammunition.

Oh man, I LOOOVE pepperbox guns. I don't know why, I just think they're stylish in a steampunk way.

And the atomic cannon makes me think of my favorite novel, The Year of the Angry Rabbit. They used atomic mortars with easy-to-clean-up mini-nukes.

The 280mm atomic cannon was obsolete about the same time it was fielded when every 8 inch (203mm) atomic artillery rounds were made and every artillery piece with an 8 inch barrel was that powerful including the old M115 8 inch howitzer. Except the effective range of the gun wasn't outside the effect of the nuclear ammunition. But Dora is still far bigger.

A 30mm or 35mm Bushmaster on a Light Armored vehicle is capable of killing anything on the battlefield except a Main battle tank. But it doesn't destroy real estate as well without a large caliber cannon. Hence the Stryker AGS



Third favorite BFG.

I have a personal connection to the AGS knowing the guys who wrote its manual. If I hadn't been invalided out the army ten years ago I probably would have been one of them. :(

Gotta love anti-tank rifles like that Finnish weapon. The Ma Deuce was developed originally as an automatic anti-tank rifle. Russians used their anti-tank rifles in WWII to destroy German tank optics, blinding the crew; or destroying the pins that held the track together even though the rifle could not penetrate the armor of the tank.

Aside from the AA-12 Shotgun, my second-favorite BFG would be the Paladin M109A6. And I'm not calling it a tank, because technically, it's long-range artillery.



Delivering 155mm kisses from up to 30km away!

why even mount the thing on a turrant if it's going to be locked in place?

Orin J Master
why even mount the thing on a turrant if it's going to be locked in place?

That's only until it comes to a stop and does this:

Orin J Master
why even mount the thing on a turrant if it's going to be locked in place?

For shifting of fire to make a wonderful grid square of death the turret traverse is adjusted from side to side. Red Legs (artillery men from the red stripes they used to wear on their pants once upon a time) and tankers are cousins and I had training to drive an M109 and we learned how they shift fire for when we had to Call for fire from our Arty.

I believe there's a swedish “tank” that doesn't have a turret…. the whole thing has to be turned to aim and for vertical adjustments they actually have to pull on their tracks… or something…

Lonnehart
I believe there's a swedish “tank” that doesn't have a turret…. the whole thing has to be turned to aim and for vertical adjustments they actually have to pull on their tracks… or something…

Stridvagn 103 tank. They did away with the turret to install an auto loader. It is similar in concept to the tank destroyer of WWII like the Sturmgeschutz III



and the SU-85


mmm why are all the best images of tanks on the internet of 1/35th scale model kits?

And a really big part of that design reasoning was to lower the profile- so it could hide from other tanks and whatever other ground based weapons behind minor rises in the landscape.
Great for avoiding line of sight weaponry on the same level. :)

Makes a smaller target too. And no bother with all that extra weight and infra structure that goes into having a turret.

But with helicopters, anti-tank planes and especially unmanned drones…
Well, it's still a good plan against troops, tanks and other ground based weapons.


This prototype Super heavy U.S. T-28 tank is a monster in a similar style…



The back makes it look like a sports car:



Very, very, very slow with MASSIVE frontal armour.



-Some tend to think that having a turret defines a tank. But that's not so. I believe that it's purpose that defines the beast. Tanks, whether with turret or without, are meant to be able stand front line combat and survive heavy fire, unlike self propelled guns, tank killers, APCs and the rest.

But Bravo can say Yay or Nay to that. :)