Autoloaders vs Human Loaders

[ShadowTrooper001]

Here is just a discussion on your opinions on what is better, and why.

[Vriz]

What's good about autoloaders? Tank could be made smaller with only 3 crews. What's bad about autoloaders? Once component is damaged, unreliability becomes an issue. What's good about human loaders? They can load faster, even when the tank is damaged. What's bad about human loaders? They need medkits and food and porn magazine in order to function properly.

[Leinad]

I think this thread can be closed now, everything has been said.

[ShadowTrooper001]

Pretty much... that was easy

[Belisarius]

Autoloaders are wonderful in their own right, however, have a serious drawback; save for a few modern designs, an autoloader's ammunition is stored in a massive ring... RIGHT underneath the turret, mirroring the turret ring. If one round is struck and explodes, there is absolutely no chance the vehicle will survive. The turret will fly off and the crew will be soup.

[Vriz]

Originally posted by The letter H in comic sans™:

Autoloaders are wonderful in their own right, however, have a serious drawback; save for a few modern designs, an autoloader's ammunition is stored in a massive ring... RIGHT underneath the turret, mirroring the turret ring. If one round is struck and explodes, there is absolutely no chance the vehicle will survive. The turret will fly off and the crew will be soup.

Some have that as a design choice, others don't like the MBT-70s, Object 906 and Object 120.

If you think about it, it's marginally better to have ammo farther back (like below the turret ring which is usually center of the tank) than to have ammo racks right next to the driver after all like tuhe M60s, Leopards and T-54s :P

Of course, the best defense is to NOT be shot at in the first place.

[Katokevin]

It's a split between what you have and need. If you have less men to man tanks or need to save a bit more on space, an autoloader can be the better choice. You can go down to a 3 man crew, place a lot of the ammo in a spot the autoloader can do all the work, and if maintained, can go on longer in combat over a human loader (autoloaders don't get tired per say). The Japanese have even gotten an autoloader (Type 10 with a 120mm) down to about 2 seconds.

Drawbacks? It's a machine. They have to be well maintained to ensure it works in combat and does not stop working half way when loading a round. Some tanks do have backups (like chain pulls or able to manual load), but it takes much longer (and it's not something a crew member would be used to doing). Ammo having to be grouped is also prone to easier detonation and changing ammo types can increase the load time for the initial round of such type.

Human loader? These guys are well trained. A good human loader can load a 120mm in a modern tank in around 4-6 seconds. They also have access to multiple types of rounds to easily load right away and can do extra work when not needed on the gun. With a human loader, more space is often in the turret (to make room for him) so the turret crew does have extra space to work in, making it a bit easier on them.

Downsides? Well, they are human and prone to physical problems. A loader can always risk injury (muscle injury, hurting yourself on anything inside, etc.) and the normal 120mm ammunition is close to the weight limit a person can work with for an extended amount of time. Having this 4th man also means training and equipment for him and another man for the commander to watch over and command. Really, I think the pros and cons of a Human loader are quite obvious for the most.

In the end, it's more down to what the country has and needs as well as they way they see it. If you just can't have that fourth man (be it numbers, training, cost, etc), an autoloader may be a better choice, or maybe you just need a smaller tank. If you can take on the extra man and possibly larger machine and don't want to risk or deal with an extra mechanical system, then that extra man working the ammo may be the better choice.

[Leinad]

Originally posted by Stuhlknartsch:

I think this thread can be closed now, everything has been said.

[Obamenau]

Originally posted by Katokevin:

It's a split between what you have and need. If you have less men to man tanks or need to save a bit more on space, an autoloader can be the better choice. You can go down to a 3 man crew, place a lot of the ammo in a spot the autoloader can do all the work, and if maintained, can go on longer in combat over a human loader (autoloaders don't get tired per say). The Japanese have even gotten an autoloader (Type 10 with a 120mm) down to about 2 seconds.

Drawbacks? It's a machine. They have to be well maintained to ensure it works in combat and does not stop working half way when loading a round. Some tanks do have backups (like chain pulls or able to manual load), but it takes much longer (and it's not something a crew member would be used to doing). Ammo having to be grouped is also prone to easier detonation and changing ammo types can increase the load time for the initial round of such type.

Human loader? These guys are well trained. A good human loader can load a 120mm in a modern tank in around 4-6 seconds. They also have access to multiple types of rounds to easily load right away and can do extra work when not needed on the gun. With a human loader, more space is often in the turret (to make room for him) so the turret crew does have extra space to work in, making it a bit easier on them.

Downsides? Well, they are human and prone to physical problems. A loader can always risk injury (muscle injury, hurting yourself on anything inside, etc.) and the normal 120mm ammunition is close to the weight limit a person can work with for an extended amount of time. Having this 4th man also means training and equipment for him and another man for the commander to watch over and command. Really, I think the pros and cons of a Human loader are quite obvious for the most.

In the end, it's more down to what the country has and needs as well as they way they see it. If you just can't have that fourth man (be it numbers, training, cost, etc), an autoloader may be a better choice, or maybe you just need a smaller tank. If you can take on the extra man and possibly larger machine and don't want to risk or deal with an extra mechanical system, then that extra man working the ammo may be the better choice.

I'd like to add than an human loader is also a bonus outside of combat. Tanks need alot of work, of which alot of is done by its crew. Having an extra man can ease the burden and stress on the crew quite alot.

[Obamenau]

Originally posted by Stuhlknartsch:

I think this thread can be closed now, everything has been said.

Eehm why do you decide that?

Originally posted by Shagorath:

hi,

Autoloader = modern tank
Humans loader = WW2

So = unbalanced mm game modern vs ww2 tank...
But dont wry soon gaijin will add spoutnik with laser gun emport, and t34 plasma launcher.
And the next update UFO + megahyper Antimatter canon.

This comment makes 0 sense

[Scheneighnay]

With an autoloader, you have fewer hands in the event that something goes wrong.
That's fewer people to do something like carry a casualty to safety.

[Katokevin]

Originally posted by Mindstream:

I'd like to add than an human loader is also a bonus outside of combat. Tanks need alot of work, of which alot of is done by its crew. Having an extra man can ease the burden and stress on the crew quite alot.

I knew I was forgetting something. Yes, always great to have a 4th man to help with general maintenance as well as serving as an extra hand and weapon in the event that the crew has to bail out in combat.

[Meowscarada]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOg0AQeI_sw this vids show the the Pros and Cons of an autoloader.

[Vriz]

Autoloaders don't care about the weight of a projectile.

An M103 with it's 120mm 23kg (50ish pounds) ammo compared to a more modern 120mm with subcalibre ammunition like APFSDS should be taken into account in how fast a crew can load.

[Scheneighnay]

Originally posted by Vriz:

Autoloaders don't care about the weight of a projectile.

An M103 with it's 120mm 23kg (50ish pounds) ammo compared to a more modern 120mm with subcalibre ammunition like APFSDS should be taken into account in how fast a crew can load.

High calibers can still be manually loaded with a mechanical assist, like the (real) Chi-ri has, and which ships historically used.

[Vriz]

Originally posted by Scheneighnay:

Originally posted by Vriz:

Autoloaders don't care about the weight of a projectile.

An M103 with it's 120mm 23kg (50ish pounds) ammo compared to a more modern 120mm with subcalibre ammunition like APFSDS should be taken into account in how fast a crew can load.

High calibers can still be manually loaded with a mechanical assist, like the (real) Chi-ri has, and which ships historically used.

Thats still my point