I have a couple of queries arising from the way the stats for vehicle mounted weapons are presented in the book:

The first is the fact that it is possible to take "hip" shots with them, but no bulk trait is given, Does this mean that the penalty to such a shot is always the minimum -2?

The second is the lack of a recoil trait, i take this to mean that vehicle-mounted weapons never suffer the effects of recoil? but i've seen videos of MBTs firing their main gun. Especially with older ones, the whole vehicle rocks back on its tracks. If you explain this as even the fastest fire rate representing more time between shots than it takes for the rocking to settle down, i can accept that, but in the case of autocannon with burst fire (especially the 2A42 which has burst4 capability), surely ther should be some recoil effect?

Thanks

Having seen how the swedish armed forces use their mounted 57mm (Navy) and 40mm (them sweet CV9040s) autocannons (these should be on the upper end of the scale as far as AC's go), I'm guessing no. Short bursts are probably used more to conserve ammo than control recoil.

Most tanks now days are stabilized so recoil is no issue. I do NOT know if the Russian Federation tanks (say the T-72 on) do what the T-55s, 62s and 64s did as part of their reloading cycle: The gun automatically cranks to highest elevation while the cartridge was ejected, then auto-laid forward at 12 o'clock. This threw any aiming right out the window and was another major flaw/weakness in Soviet/Russian made MBTs.

For APCs and AFVs with smaller caliber ACs there is maybe minimal stabilization and again recoil has minuscule if any effect at all. Therefore a lower ROF is in my opinion mainly to maintain point of aim.

ok, cool, thanks guys

Bradleys dont Shake at all ..... i was surprised to find this out after pulling the trigger's .....did it fire??? i heard it and i saw the round go down range....why didnt it shake??? lol

so basicly i'm massively underestimating the effectiveness of modern weapon stabilisation systems.....

any thought from developers on the "hip" shot penalty for mounted guns?

It also depends on the caliber to weight ratio. The MGS Stryker main gun rocks that thing like you wouldn't believe. The .50 and the 7.62mm don't so much.

I do not think you are underestimating the stabilization systems at all. My knowledge base is tanks and not IFVs and lower weight things.

The M-60A3 PIP could shoot on the move with it's stabilization system. The Abrams (and other current Gen tanks) can do this and get a hit at almost 100% guaranteed hits.

The earlier gen AFVs would not be able to do anything near what even a M-60A3PIP could do as far as moving and shooting.

As far as I have SEEN (on Military.com videos and Military Channel) I am not sure if the Bradleys and Strykers and such) can get a good round on target accuracy on the move. Yes, they can shoot on the scoot, but I have only seen this in the "demo" videos showing the Wow whee factor. All the others, they've sat and shot at a target essentially by stopping and shooting. (The TOW missile on Brads you DO have to stop to fire so I am leaving them out of the discussion.)

As for the recoil effects you're talking about 10 to 20 tons of metal backed up behind a 20mm to 35mm cartridge charge. Physics says inertia would win over the kinetic effects.

A lot of shooting on the move now is dependent upon the computers installed in your IFV, AFV, whatever.

ok, another question, it's not directly linked to my original post, but it's still on the subject of vehicle weapon systems, so i'm tacking it on here rather than starting a new thread

Co-Axial weapon mountings:

How does this work? (in terms of game mechanics)
Because it seems to me that you end up with two weapons mounted side by side that share a common aimpoint, but dur to the fact that their stats give them different speeds, you can bring one to bear on target and fire it before the other. Which seems odd. Also, It seems that it is possible to hit with one and miss entirely with the other....

Would an acceptable fix to this be to count it as one weapon with the speed trait of the slower of the two guns and then treat all rounds fired as one massive burst? (and just roll the D6s for each calibre separately or in different colours or something)
edit - on second thought this doesn't work perfectly if the two guns have different optimum/max ranges. hmmm.....

No, coax weapons don't have the same aimpoint. Even though there is one set of crosshairs on the gunner's screen, the muzzles of the two guns are pointed in different directions. The targeting computer (or manual sights on older models) automatically adjusts the barrels based on the ballistics of the two types of rounds based on range. For instance, there is a huge difference in the flight path of a 7.62mm round from an M240C coax and a 25mm from a Bushmaster in a Bradley.

The difference in speeds represents lots of factors, my explanation in my mind is that gunner is doing everything he needs to do to get the computer (or manual settings) on target. Some systems respond quicker than others.

Also, keep in mind both the main gun and the coax won't be firing at the same time. These systems are designed so the gunner must select one or the other (as implied in Eddie's post).

ok, thanks.
This query came from a player operating a BTR which is listed as having two machineguns on a co-ax mount. He was in a situation where lead downrange was the thing he cared about most and wnated to pretty much point the guns at the target and pull both triggers. We couldn't quite work out why, once the thing was pointing in the right direction, one trigger would take 3 more ticks to pull than the other.

Since you cant adjust the turret quicker just because you're using the smaller gun on it, I'd say both guns use the slower speed. As for why they can't be fired together, well, they might be using the same trigger with a switch for all I know.