"Stryker MGS .50: Count as Coax?" Topic

So I just noticed that the .50 on my 1/72 Stryker MGS model is mounted to the right of the main gun turret and the way the hatch opens it's virtually impossible for the crewman to shoot in any direction except roughly "straight ahead" or inline with the main gun (maybe 45 degrees to the right of the main gun).

It's certainly impossible to shoot to the left of the gun since the turret and gun block the line of fire and trying to aim 90 degrees or more to the right of the main gun looks well nigh impossible for all practical purposes.

Should one treat the .50 on the Stryker MGS as a coax for gaming purposes? I just can't see awarding it as much flexibility as a fully functioning ring mounts or even a pintle mount with a decent arc of fire.

Below is the best photo I could find online that shows the hatch and .50. You can clearly see how the hatch door (which opens to the right-rear of the opening) prevents the gunner from firing to the side/rear of the turret and how the turret blocks the .50 from firing to its left.

Depends on the rules. But keep in mind the .50 is manually aimed and does not get the advantages of the stabilized mount and optics systems.

Damon.

Co-ax to me means sharing the main gun mount, in the case of the Stryker, it is a pintle mount with a limited traverse or field of fire…………..does the turret hatch not rotate on a ring?
Edit-the .50 is mounted on the 'swing arm' pintle allowing it to be moved out and away from the hatch to some degree……other photos indicate some clearance over the breech etc allowing distant targets to be engaged at least.

link

co-ax is in line with the main gun and fired by the gunner, The .50 is the commanders/AA weapon used for other targets or to ID targets for the gunner

Nothing stupider in my trained opinion than a commander exposing himself to fire such a weapon unless it is for air defence, or against soft targets a good distance away with no support.

Creighton Abrams said that the commander's .50 was the M4's main weapon.

Clearly, we should ignore the opinion of such an inexperienced, uninformed, and incompetent "authority."

Found some photos of it pivoting out to the side.
tank-masters.de/?page_id=1721

Not sure if that's as far a it goes or not.

Thanks McKinney! Looks about 45 degrees off angle from the main gun.

I should not have used the word "coax". That was really intended as wargamer shorthand for "can't fire in a direction different from that of the turret."

Damon raises a related issue and one which probably deserves its own thread. I'm also certain that Ditto can speak to it: should there be a significant difference in effective range for different vehicle MG mounts (i.e. coax, pintle, ring, etc.)? We like to keep our rules simple and don't drill down to the individual weapon level-of-detail. But I've always been curious about that topic and it seems that most rules ignore it.

BTW…I just love how the MGS looks. I know it's only light armor but it looks so cool and the turret looks neat. Could not find one in 15mm and decided to start another small 1/72 collection just so I could field a Stryker company using a proper MGS model.

Couldn't find a 1/72 Stryker Mortar Carrier and kit bashed one with the doors closed. Not as impressive as one with the doors open but it works.

Creighton Abrams said that the commander's .50 was the M4's main weapon

Is there a source for that, or is it just anecdotally attributed to him?

@VIS: As I understand it, a pintle-mounted weapon, whether a 7.62mm MG or a 30mm cannon, has a range of about 1200m at best. It's the limits of the Mk1 eyeball and hand-aimed.

I will leave it to the tankers as the effective range of a coaxial MG, but I bet it varies with the tank.

VIS-have a look at this M1129-

link

Is there a source for that

Decided to do a little Googling… cant find that directly attributed to him, but I did come across this from the M4 Sherman at War:

link

"….because firing the machine gun detracted from the tank commanders primary duties, the cupola was often rotated to the rear to allow another soldier to stand on the rear deck…"

"…the .50-caliber machine gun saaw use on almost anything that did not require the firing of the 75mm main gun. Lieutenant Colonel William Hamberg of the 5th Armoroed Division remembers, "The .50-caliber machine gun was constantly fired at anything that could hide a German antitank weapon of any sort. In farm country, the machine gun was always fired at small and large haystacks. If the .50 caliber ammon hit something hard inside the haystack and bounced off, it would be immediately fired upon by the 75mm main gun. We also liked the fact that the .50 caliber machine gun could fire an incendiary round, which was excellent for setting wooden barns on fire…"

However in a copy of Armor magazine, it stated: "…a tank commander is more effective when he fights his crew [provides overall command of the tank] than when he spends a large part of the action firing the turret-mounted cal. 50 machine gun…"

So, sounds like the .50-cal was used frequently, but not by the tank commander who had much better things to be doing with his time. I doubt that Abrams advocated firing the gun himself, as that would seem contrary to his experience as a commander, but it would make sense that he saw it as a 'main weapon' used to flush out and identify targets for the big gun.

Cant find anything where he actually says it though…

Great info Geoff, thanks!!!

Another good book on the subject from the modern era perspective is Carnivore. It covers a Bradley crew for the most part with lots of close combat between Bradleys and Iraqis. Many of the fights came down to M4s and pistols from the hatch.