75mm GMC Halftracks Can't Bombard

[cfulbright]

The Provisional FA Regiment in the Philippines has 48 75mm GMC Halftracks and is typed as an Artillery unit. Yet it can't bombard. I notice in the Device database that the US model is replaced by the M7 Priest self-propelled artillery. Not there yet in the game, so question whether that can bombard either, since they're both listed in the database as Vehicles rather than Artillery.

Can this be fixed in next patch?

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: cfulbright

The Provisional FA Regiment in the Philippines has 48 75mm GMC Halftracks and is typed as an Artillery unit. Yet it can't bombard. I notice in the Device database that the US model is replaced by the M7 Priest self-propelled artillery. Not there yet in the game, so question whether that can bombard either, since they're both listed in the database as Vehicles rather than Artillery.

Can this be fixed in next patch?

These are self propelled anti-tank guns. They used the same 75mm gun as the one used in the hull sponson of the M3 Medium Tank.

[Barb]

But they were also frequently used for direct artillery fire...

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Barb

But they were also frequently used for direct artillery fire...

They were equipped with 75mm field guns, which were a bit better than a 105mm howitzer in direct fire (more accurate) and worse for indirect fire (significantly smaller lethal area, despite a higher rate of fire). They should have a barrage capability. The Priest was a 105mm howitzer on a modified M3 tank chassis. The only AT capability it had was a shaped charge shell late in the war.

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: Barb

But they were also frequently used for direct artillery fire...

Indeed. DIRECT, not indirect bombardment fire, which is why they can't bombard, and why this won't change.

[wdolson]

The M7 Priest has a 105mm and was SP artillery.  Vehicles in game with a long enough range can bombard.  The 75mm halftrack is classified as an AP AT gun and it can't bombard (range is too short).  The Priest has enough range to be used as artillery.

Unless somebody changed something between when I worked on bombardment combat and release, that is the way it should work.  I remember dealing with SP artillery AFVs specifically.

Bill

[Feltan]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
These are self propelled anti-tank guns. They used the same 75mm gun as the one used in the hull sponson of the M3 Medium Tank.

No argument. However, they should be classified as a tank destroyer unit (TD) rather than artillery.

Regards,
Feltan

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: Barb

But they were also frequently used for direct artillery fire...

Indeed. DIRECT, not indirect bombardment fire, which is why they can't bombard, and why this won't change.

Actually, indirect fire as well. The M1897A4 75 mm gun had an indirect fire range of 9,200 yards (8,400 meters), and the carriage had about 60 rounds aboard, mostly HE. (See wikipedia.) Despite being designed for direct and antitank fire missions, these GMCs were equipped for and usually used in indirect fire.

[Oliver Heindorf]

and we had this discussion already two and a half months ago [:o] just after release [;)]

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: Barb

But they were also frequently used for direct artillery fire...

Indeed. DIRECT, not indirect bombardment fire, which is why they can't bombard, and why this won't change.

Actually, indirect fire as well. The M1897A4 75 mm gun had an indirect fire range of 9,200 yards (8,400 meters), and the carriage had about 60 rounds aboard, mostly HE. (See wikipedia.) Despite being designed for direct and antitank fire missions, these GMCs were equipped for and usually used in indirect fire.

HERWIN. You are correct about the gun..., but not on this mounting with this fire control equipment. This was a direct fire mounting..., and useless for bombardment. Doesn't matter how far the gun can shoot if you can't bring the shell down on target

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Oliver Heindorf

and we had this discussion already two and a half months ago [:o] just after release [;)]

Mind providing a link?

[cfulbright]

and we had this discussion already two and a half months ago just after release

Oliver - what is your point? I used the search function in the forum and found nothing, therefore posted my question. But even if I hadn't, isn't this forum supposed to be about helping each other and answering questions? If I missed a conversation two months ago, am I not allowed to ask the question?