"Tango boats" Topic
9 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please be courteous toward your fellow TMP members.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Vietnam War Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Workbench Article
Featured Profile ArticlePart II of the Gates of Old Jerusalem.
|
uglyfatbloke | 26 Aug 2019 7:41 a.m. PST |
Building some Merrimack Tango boats for my better half…according to Wikipedia they would have 4 x M1919s , 2 x 20mm cannon and 1 x Mk 19 grenade launcher, the models have 2 fully-enclosed cylindrical turrets which I'm guessing take the 20mm cannon and an open turret for a gun that is a bit smaller than a bofors….so where do the 4 x MGs go? As ever hive-help would be appreciated! |
Legion 4 | 26 Aug 2019 7:48 a.m. PST |
A lot of pics here … don't know if you have seen these ? link Some pics on GHQ too … link
Don't know if any of this will help ? |
uglyfatbloke | 26 Aug 2019 8:02 a.m. PST |
Checked them out already, but not really very helpful, however another source says the boat had 4 M60s rather than M1919 so maybe they are crew personal issue and not mounted anywhere specific? I don't think the gun provided is the grenade launcher, it looks a lot bigger. |
Legion 4 | 26 Aug 2019 8:35 a.m. PST |
Well the M60 was issued to ground troops and mounted on vehicles etc. e.g. the ACAV. I don't doubt the M1919 would be mounted on some boats, etc., possibly. They are heavier than an M60. Now the Mk.19 is larger than any MGs. But it has a shorter barrel, but thicker, obviously. Makes sense the M60s would be not mounted anywhere specifically, so they could be brought to bear anywhere as needed. You could do the same with the M1919s. And some M1919s had a bipod like the M60s. Found this pic … may help ? Those are M1919s [and M2 .50s too] …
And this one …
|
uglyfatbloke | 26 Aug 2019 9:59 a.m. PST |
Much obliged Legion4…as ever! |
Legion 4 | 26 Aug 2019 3:51 p.m. PST |
Glad to help ! |
Prof Pate | 07 Oct 2019 10:48 a.m. PST |
Soooo.. Only 30 passengers per Tango? I did seriously did not know that they had seats. So what was size of crew? 'S lot of MGs to staff. Moving around during a contact must have been a pain too. |
deadhead | 07 Oct 2019 12:03 p.m. PST |
I too never knew that they had seats as shown. I could imagine that they might recline, to take in some sun, but had to be raised when meals were brought around and the table in front was folded down. Am I imagining it or do they actually really have seat belts? They do…What possible purpose could….oh never mind. Vietnam was like that |
Legion 4 | 08 Oct 2019 8:07 a.m. PST |
Most likely the seats would usually be removed, I'd think. To make more space for troops, etc. E.g. when we transitioned from the UH1s to UH60s in the 101, about 82 ?. We did take out the UH60s seats, which had seatbelts too. So did the Hueys but we didn't always use them. If you took the seats out of the UH60 your ACL went from 11 or 12 to about 23. With everyone sitting on the floor. The good thing was you could get more troops on the ground more quickly without the seats. But the negative was if the bird goes down you could lose not only the 3 man crew, but the 23 troops too, KIA'd or WIA'd. Like so many things is the military it's a trade off. That being said, Div HQ sent down orders. That the Blackhawk was designed with those seats to be more crash-worthy. And those could save your life, etc. Plus besides … tax payers $ paid for those seats for you to use. So the seats had to be put back in. We rarely used the seatbelts though, IIRC … True story … |
|