舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲
| 回應本題 | 自選底色↑ | 返 回 |
| 海防砲 於 2004/03/02 08:40 | |
| 舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
反共匪漁船登陸, 當然不會用到反艦飛彈, 舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲仍然是有效的反登陸武器, 只要是還有庫存砲彈, 舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲不可輕言報廢, 舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲的射程比戰車砲還遠, 用之於反登陸, 比戰車砲還好用, 如何改裝 ? 不妨將舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲安裝在拖板車上, 這樣我們就得到一艘陸地行舟的軍艦, 安裝在拖板車上可以沿海岸公路南北移防, 有機動性, 隨行的有彈藥車, 改裝的技術, 當然要考慮到艦砲本身的重量, 拖板車的承載量, 機動性, 戰車每小時跑不到50公里, 而改裝拖車軍艦砲每小時跑60公里, 顯然機動性高過戰車, 更可以及早趕赴戰場, 制敵機先, 不妨請聯勤單位先試行改裝並且演習反登陸, | |
NO:114_1
| XF 於 2004/03/02 12:06 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
嗯..這時的陸基的海蜂部隊在哪呀？ 還有呀，雷霆兩千呢？ | |
NO:114_2
| Rock 於 2004/03/02 12:42 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
1.拖車對路況要求超出戰車許多,拖車真的有辨法能夠全台灣海岸據點走透透嗎???? 2.艦砲後座力不小,這問題要如何解決????? | |
NO:114_11
| 曾公 於 2004/03/03 12:23 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
其實,我是建議把這些退下來的砲擇其狀況較好的,檢修後送到太平島等地替換那些已經老舊不堪的火炮.除增強其守備戰力外,也能提升官兵的操作安全 | |
NO:114_12
| 雪風 於 2004/03/03 13:25 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
本來是不太想回應這個問題••• 做為固定砲台是有可行性，MK12型5吋(127mm)艦砲有些早已從除役艦隻移到外島砲堡內，至於早期除役的陽字號MK30型單管砲塔有些也已經安置在軍港附近當岸防炮，而從比較晚退役的陽字號上拆下的只剩MK32雙聯裝砲塔。假如要就像上述安裝在拖板車上作戰，第一，在艦上時砲塔下有深入艦身的揚彈機連彈藥庫，現在沒有了所以要跟一部彈藥車，第二，MK32雙聯裝砲塔的編制操作人員是二十幾人(含揚彈機作業員，但現在變人工方式，所以人數還是差異不多)這些人也需一部車載不然砲塔根本擠不下；第三，射擊觀測及指揮系統，在陽字號艦桅上有射控雷達及光電指標儀，總不能不瞄目標亂轟吧？再一部車載射控儀吧。第四，你拖板車要多大？雙聯裝5吋艦砲後座力可是不小，拖板車加裝油壓助鋤未必解決的了問題，可能轟沒幾砲就翻車。 終歸一句，花費如此投資和人力，為什麼不去搞更有效益的雷霆2000？ | |
NO:114_13
| Blow BB 於 2004/05/05 20:54 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
舊陽字號軍艦, Grand Father eat Viagra!! ^_^ | |
NO:114_14
| 極光三色 於 2004/06/24 02:32 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 已有實例了 在北部某些固定陣地已有舊艦艦砲安裝 目的在於反海口滲透登陸 外島也有 | |
NO:114_16
| INER 於 2004/06/24 17:23 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
如果未來不幸引進M1A1/A2 有淘汰的CM11或M60A3炮塔 是否可比照辦理作為岸置直射砲台 防核生化, 防彈, 還可放熱焰彈, 又有夜視功能 | |
NO:114_17
| 恆愛台 於 2004/07/19 00:46 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
高雄港還有一批陽字號軍艦......封裝除役或是後備艦艇,我搞不太清楚？ 但我確信在二代艦退下來前∼∼有遠見的郝掰掰可花了半艘新艦艇裝了【武進三號】系統武器？ 這麼給它【短命】休息........看了真捨不得∼∼上個月底,一艘訓練艦被自外海拖進港。。。 心裡想∼∼∼它ㄋㄋ的......從前不休息操得像隻虎∼一休息病得像隻貓∼∼幹！ 如果要靠它們保家衛國？........不如早點去當魚礁,壽正終寢！炮拆一拆∼∼留給歐吉桑打共匪！ | |
NO:114_18
| Hydonsingore 於 2004/07/20 00:50 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
高雄港裡面那些是已經除役的武進一武進二，武器也都拆的差不多了， 武進三的七艘都還在服役，除了颱風天之外，不會隨便出現在高雄港。 這些船也都是1945前後造的，實在太老了。 | |
NO:114_19
| 恆愛台 於 2004/07/20 01:08 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
Hydonsingore 兄 謝謝告知！∼∼ 每次黃昏時遊港拍那些夕陽艦艇,都很感傷.........^+++++^ 對了！錦江艦使用狀況可好？.......好像是高雄民間造艦的吧？ 想知道高雄這些造遠洋漁船的民營公司水準如何？........感覺上很便宜！ | |
NO:114_20
| PeterMiao 於 2004/07/20 01:53 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
Hydonsingore 於 2004/07/20 00:50 Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 高雄港裡面那些是已經除役的武進一武進二，武器也都拆的差不多了， ........... | |
NO:114_21
| INER 於 2004/07/20 05:02 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
武三已經退四艘了 | |
NO:114_22
| Luke-Skywalker 於 2004/07/20 08:48 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
↑除921和929外，前兩艘是........... | |
NO:114_23
| jumbo 於 2004/07/20 10:13 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
928和925呢？ | |
NO:114_24
| jumbo 於 2004/07/20 10:15 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
＞每次黃昏時遊港拍那些夕陽艦艇,都很感傷.........^+++++^ 其實武進三型還是很有戰力的，被迫退役應是經費問題。 | |
NO:114_25
| Mind1985 於 2004/07/20 11:17 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
被迫退役應是經費問題 還有人力的問題要考慮， 海軍養不起保留武三的人啊！ | |
NO:114_26
| 張鍚銘 於 2004/08/05 13:07 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
做為固定砲台是有可行性，MK12型5吋(127mm)艦砲有些早已從除役艦隻移到外島砲堡內，至於早期除役的陽字號MK30型單管砲塔有些也已經安置在軍港附近當岸防炮，而從比較晚退役的陽字號上拆下的只剩MK32雙聯裝砲塔。假如要就像上述安裝在拖板車上作戰，第一，在艦上時砲塔下有深入艦身的揚彈機連彈藥庫，現在沒有了所以要跟一部彈藥車，第二，MK32雙聯裝砲塔的編制操作人員是二十幾人(含揚彈機作業員，但現在變人工方式，所以人數還是差異不多)這些人也需一部車載不然砲塔根本擠不下；第三，射擊觀測及指揮系統，在陽字號艦桅上有射控雷達及光電指標儀，總不能不瞄目標亂轟吧？再一部車載射控儀吧。第四，你拖板車要多大？雙聯裝5吋艦砲後座力可是不小，拖板車加裝油壓助鋤未必解決的了問題，可能轟沒幾砲就翻車。 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 748000磅，參考一下 ^^ | |
NO:114_27
| 隆巴頓 於 2004/08/05 14:15 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
小弟是外行。不過以前德國海軍好像曾經把Bismark的姊妹艦Tirpitz在岸邊開啟艦底活門，自沈後固定在岸邊作為岸防砲。 這樣說不知道對不對？^_^||| | |
NO:114_28
| fer-de-lance 於 2004/08/05 16:06 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
不對 「開啟Tirpitz艦底」的是RAF 的1200lb Tallboy ... :) | |
NO:114_29
| 香煙 於 2004/08/05 21:20 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
最理想海防砲應該是除役的空軍防砲90高砲，牽引移動方便，5分即可架設完成， 優點數不完，比飛彈更好用更省錢： 本身有輪胎移動架設方便， 可雷達操控，或瞄準鏡瞄準射繫，超長炮管初速快，精確度高，美軍曾有瞄準鏡射擊四千米餅干木箱一發命中記錄。 數量多二百門，砲彈存量多五十萬發以上，高爆榴彈有效涵蓋50米，穿甲彈是坦克殺手，韓戰多次立大功。 射速快每分鐘22發，射程遠對地最大射程19000米，VT距離感應信管對登陸船團人員殺傷效果特佳。 | |
NO:114_30
| 清潔工 於 2004/08/05 23:09 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
↑ >>> 「開啟Tirpitz艦底」的是RAF 的1200lb Tallboy ... :) well...Should be 12000lb ^^ | |
NO:114_31
| 葛萊恩 於 2004/08/09 00:46 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
請問-所謂海軍之恥的-8/7海戰-實情如何-有人知道嗎- | |
NO:114_32
| 雪風 於 2004/08/09 01:35 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
是八六海戰 | |
NO:114_33
| 雪風 於 2004/08/09 01:37 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
↑已經和主題無關了，請在別欄詢問 | |
NO:114_34
| fer-de-lance 於 2004/08/09 11:45 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
>well...Should be 12000lb ^^ Mea culpa ... :( As for the M-1 and M-3 90mm AA guns, shooting landing craft at relatively short ranges (2-3km) would be fine but it is not suited for dealing with main battle tanks (MBT). It should be remembered that the tank guns on the M-47 and M-48 have much higher chamber pressures than the original AA guns. While the tank guns can safely fire the older ammunition for the AA gun, the reverse is not true. The old M-1 AA guns cannot safely fire the M-431 HEAT shells which are needed to defeat MBT with homogenous steel armor. (Against composite armor, even the M-431 is not effective, that is why the ROC Army moved to the M-68 105mm tank gun). For real coastal defense against ships at longer ranges, 5 inch 38 with the proper fire controls would be needed. Personally, I think the guns should be manned by the Navy (or the Marien Corps) with training for shooting at moving (ship) targets at long range 8+ km. Experience from WWII (such as the action at Wake Island) showed that, with a good plotting team, 5in and 6in coastal defense guns directed using the follow-the-pointer (sight setting) methods can obtain very good accuracy against ships maneuvring offshore. The plotting team uses the successive position of the ship target to plot speed and range-rate. Then using the range tables for the gun, the lead angle and super elevation angle needed to hit the target is projected. The data is transmitted to the talker or gun captian via battle telephone who, in turn, tells the sight setter to off-set the sights of the trainer and pointer (with the proper lead and elevation angles). After that, the pointer and trainer need only to keep the cross-hairs of their sights on the target for accurate shooting. Corrections are then made based on spotting of the splashes made by the shells. With a laser range finder and a simple laptop program, the plotting part can be done very accurately. The data can be transmitted to the sight-setters in the same old way (via battle telephone). This is the most cost effective way to improve accuracy. Much simpler than trying to directly control the guns via servos. | |
NO:114_35
| Eric 於 2004/08/09 12:57 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
以前在馬祖高登島時,師砲連的 90 高砲早已經改為對海射擊了. 當時退伍前我們連上的 06 據點要改建聽說有規劃要將海軍的 5 吋砲擺在新建的砲堡中,但是退伍多年不知做了沒有 . | |
NO:114_36
| INER 於 2004/08/09 16:49 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
看樣子戰車炮火力如M68 105mm 似乎在射程及彈種威力都要遠比90高炮要好 更不用提機動力及作戰彈性了 主戰車無法發揮的金馬外島以90高炮充作海防可以理解 未來要是有M48/M60退役就直接把戰車炮塔固定險要灘頭,連掩體炮堡等土木工程都可免了 後勤補給更是統一省事 不然美國報廢的M60系列還真是多, 現在就可以半買半送 不知各位前輩認為如何? 要看90高炮 可到龜山島~~~ 摘自東北角海岸國家風景區簡介 龜山島位於頭城鎮東方外海約十公里處，為台灣東北部海域及蘭陽地區軍事防禦要塞，因此在六十四年開始，軍方接管後，開挖軍事坑道，內有岸炮部署，以交叉火網夾擊侵襲蘭陽平原的敵軍。軍事坑道全長八百公尺，主坑道高三點五公尺、寬三公尺，次坑道高一點九五公尺、寬一點九公尺，坑道內有三座九0高砲陣地、四座四0高砲陣地及一座機槍陣地。 | |
NO:114_37
| 空軍司令 於 2004/08/09 18:48 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
想問有沒有90高炮的照片? | |
NO:114_38
| Luna 於 2004/08/12 06:07 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
要考慮機動拖曳岸防砲~ 為什麼大家都不考慮北極熊的A-222 130mm海岸防砲系統呢? 或是改裝OTO 76mm快砲比較合適吧... | |
NO:114_39
| 雪風 於 2004/08/13 12:34 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
>>想問有沒有90高炮的照片? 90高炮 90高炮系統圖解 三四十年前空軍防炮部隊就是以高中低三種槍炮搭配為對空火網，M1A1 90高炮，M1 40高炮，M55 四聯裝50機槍 | |
NO:114_40
| 678 於 2004/08/14 00:16 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
我們連上就是用40高炮和四管50機槍, 對反登陸來說還是蠻厲害的吧! | |
NO:114_41
| 批鴻海奇美如何 於 2004/08/14 02:15 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
艦炮改海防炮要給誰保管使用? 海軍?陸軍?海巡部? 在國軍人力大幅減少的狀況下, 再加上維修保養的困難, 還有艦炮交接操作的問題, 我想還是不要了吧! 還是改用雷霆2000吧! 最重要的還是好裝備沒人用, 自願役的人實在太少了啦! 經驗沒辦法傳承. 還是快快募兵吧! 懷念我在花蓮服役的48高地跟57高地的3門艦炮, | |
NO:114_42
| 恆愛台 於 2004/08/14 04:04 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
交給【民防部隊】就對啦∼∼∼ 歐吉桑們一定搶破頭來報到！.............【任何一顆槍彈.出國時都算USD∼】 既然精簡∼就一定有【舊營區】可使用,平日委由民防常備軍看守,假日回營就是操槍炮....... 每月【測驗】拉去山區或海邊就給他搭搭搭∼開下去..........還付錢留給老外【銷毀】？ㄕ伊娘類∼ 因為歐吉桑年歲有了......沒時間543.321.唱歌答數跳機槍炮操舞耍猴戲.辦家家酒！ 我們只要開下去........問【有準無？】∼∼【死ㄚ袂？】........哪無擱開落去！^+++++^ | |
NO:114_43
| 恆愛台 於 2004/08/14 04:14 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
不相信的話？............ 組一支【民防部隊】實驗連來試看看∼從接到命令,到拉到外海,到直接射擊目標,看誰的反應能力佳？ 我們歐吉桑人脈豐富,只要任何障礙發生,大哥大給他打下去【阿榮把咱兜那隻怪手給我開過來∼∼】 你們大家說？保衛台灣.保衛家園ㄧ定要靠那些娃娃兵嗎？除了專業軍種,我合理懷疑中共最怕台灣歐吉桑部隊！因為【五十歲正少年∼六十歲上勇∼七十歲打頭陣！∼】.........好像阿輝伯的口氣喔？ ㄚ無阿共仔是類賴大？卡大∼嘛無阮阿爸大！.............^+++++^ | |
NO:114_44
| fer-de-lance 於 2004/08/14 04:42 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
Sigh ... is this degenerating into a My-Daddy-is-bigger-than-your-daddy shouting match with the Commies? Good point made previously about the lack of skilled personnel. That is why I think automated systems - especially so-called wooden-round (maintenance-free) missiles are so useful. The Scandinavian countries use ground-launched Hellfire for coastal defense. Laser guided with higher accuracy than any gun - use a blast-frag warhead and it would be equivalent to a 155 mm shell. Put a launcher on the back of a HUMVEE and a laser designator upfront and you have a highly mobile battery. | |
NO:114_45
| CosmoHorizon 於 2004/08/14 10:46 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
But Hellfires costs heaps more than conventional artillery munitions and i doubt ROC army superiors will agree on using HUMVEE+Hellfire instead of their howitzers. Anyway, ROC army has enough howitzers and munitions to keep the beachhead hailing with bomb shells and with personnel-eraser such as the LT-2000 I dont think any army will be capable of landing a successful beach assault with these babies still fully operational....with out severe casualty of course | |
NO:114_46
| fer-de-lance 於 2004/08/14 11:21 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
I think we are talking about coastal artillery here - intended to hit moving ships maneuvring off shore or landing craft hitting the beach. Some countries like Brazil use 155mm SP (AS-90) in the role - but the crews are specially trained for the role and there is a supporting fire control system. Tube artillery (howitzers) and artillery rocket systems can blanket a beach and the surf zone with indirect fire. However, what you really want to do is to hit the landing ships before they can disgorge their landing craft. You want good old fashion DIRECT FIRE! Well maintained 5in/38s with a skilled crew will do very well but, as someone pointed out earlier, skilled personnel are in short supply. Fixed coastal artillery positions are also going to be hit hard prior to any assault. Hellfire may be more expensive in terms of unit cost but think about the number of stored kills and also cost per kill - taking into account the support structure, system manning etc. when compared to a battalion of 105 mm howitzers. A HUMVEE will also shoot-and-scoot much more quickly than any towed 105 tube unit. These days with artillery radar which can plot your position and call down counter battery fire very quickly - you cannot be too quick with the scoot part after shooting! | |
NO:114_47
| PAN 於 2004/08/14 12:35 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
由於2003年我國成功自美購得紀德級飛彈驅逐艦，勞苦功高的七艘陽字號武進三號驅逐艦遂得以從2003年底陸續除役；而艦上的H-930MCS戰鬥系統、獨特的標準SM-1防空飛彈發射箱、MK-75 76mm快砲(取代原先艦首的MK-42 127mm 54倍徑艦砲)、導引標準飛彈的STIR 180照明雷達、DA.08二維對空搜索雷達等裝備則將移植到除了首艦濟陽號之外的七艘濟陽級上，能改善本級艦原本貧弱的防空能力。在2004年3月，第二艘本級艦鳳陽號(FF-933)進入船塢，成為首艘展開「武三化」工程的濟陽級。 ...來自軍武狂人夢 這個消息是真的嗎 | |
NO:114_48
| fer-de-lance 於 2004/08/14 13:24 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
>這個消息是真的嗎 Yep! And you have one very visionary flag officer to thank for this optimization of existing assets. Dick Seay would be proud of this effort that enabled the world s first distributed combat system to soldier on in another generation of ships ... Would be great if the Block 1A Phalanx search radar data can be integrated into the system. Gives the system a higher probability of acquiring air threats earlier (especially fast low ones!) | |
NO:114_49
| CosmoHorizon 於 2004/08/14 14:28 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
fer-de-lance前輩 I know, its always better to take out the root of them problem then to solve them one by one, but with ships specifically designed to destroy costal defenses such as these coming under PLANs disposal, these costal guns will not have a good time. I absolutely agree that these direct-firing battery will protect our costs better, but if the invader coordinate a airstrike or artillery barrage on them, the chances are there wouldnt be many of them left when the assault actually begins | |
NO:114_50
| fer-de-lance 於 2004/08/15 01:12 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
Quite right about threat to direct fire shore batteries from air attack and naval fire support, t hat is why specially trained SP artillery units with supporting radar fire control AND HUMVEE or APC mounted Hellfire units would be a good idea. If you really want to get to the root of the problem - it would be a good idea to review the whole defensive posture. Army SP artillery units not trained and equipped to engage ships is a waste of resources for the defense of an island. What, you are going to wait until the other guys get ashore before you can lay down barrage fire? Regarding the Jianghu with MLRS, it would be very interesting to see how the PLAN plans to use it. Antiship missiles with high single round Pk is one thing, shore bombardment is another. In a fire support scenario, especially with rockets, you are going to use up ammo at a frightening rate. With all those tubes to feed, how does the PLAN plan to re-supply - UNREP at sea, hustle back to a nearby port? This PLAN focus on land attack is unsettling, especially to uninformed politicians. However, the PLAN is still missing some key enabling technologies to really make these ships a credible threat. (We can say this because, thanks to WWII experience and operations research by the USMC and USN in the past - people have a pretty good idea of what is needed to do this type of mission effectively.) | |
NO:114_51
| 批鴻海奇美如何 於 2004/08/15 01:25 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
交給民防? 經費怎麼計算? 大家也都有自己的工作阿! 出事誰負責? 還是快快募兵, 建立幾個有戰力的實兵單位, 疊床架屋的單位快刪吧! 砍掉無用的軍官, 裁掉基幹營, 就可以養多一點的兵了吧!!! | |
NO:114_52
| 恆愛台 於 2004/08/16 01:48 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
點召.教召不是都有法律保障工作與薪資嗎？ 經費上,我一直以為跳脫舊思惟,採取較自由開放式的【自願】或【後備軍人生活營】等等模式進行！ 例如,為期一週的自費講習戰鬥營,可以請公假,政府補貼部份開銷,有興趣的民眾可自付五千元參與, 也就是責任歸屬不要死賴軍方,自費保險,出代誌∼自己扛回去種！。。。 這是我想到最簡易不麻煩的民防部隊構想！反正愛開槍練準度,就多買點裝備彈藥,不耗費到國家資源！ | |
NO:114_53
| 清潔工 於 2004/08/16 01:51 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
↑ Out of Topic again..... | |
NO:114_54
| 恆愛台 於 2004/08/16 02:03 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
ㄣ∼∼回應一下,應該是容忍誤差範圍內吧？ 至於,海防炮之外,任何舊式二線武器封裝,應該都可以預先部屬防衛區,放在庫房生銹∼∼ | |
NO:114_55
| michael 於 2004/11/12 10:42 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
不妨將舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲安裝在拖板車上, 這樣我們就得到一艘陸地行舟的軍艦, 安裝在拖板車上可以沿海岸公路南北移防, 有機動性, 隨行的有彈藥車, 這想法有點異想天開，不僅容納炮彈是個問題，後座力也是問題。記得我以前在海軍兵器學校打五寸炮時，學校玻璃都無一倖免，海上打靶若所有炮射向同方向，艦身則向另一邊傾斜。 | |
NO:114_56
| 後知後覺 於 2004/11/12 11:11 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
>>>組一支【民防部隊】實驗連來試看看∼從接到命令,到拉到外海,到直接射擊目標,看誰的反應能力佳？ 我們歐吉桑人脈豐富,只要任何障礙發生,大哥大給他打下去【阿榮把咱兜那隻怪手給我開過來∼∼】 ..........那共軍滲透以及槍支保管要如何解決....如處理不好會變成治安的漏洞 | |
NO:114_57
| fer-de-lance 於 2004/11/12 12:22 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
>不妨將舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲安裝在拖板車上 Too heavy, you are much better off using M-109A5 with a GPS-aided nav system. | |
NO:114_60
| 單砲教練. 於 2005/01/13 22:00 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
回批鴻海奇美如何... 老砲手 1476 於 74年守 57/48 砲陣地 當時砲操就是用進出 花蓮的船當目標. 配合海軍雷達傳給諸元..全連出砲操很好玩.. 後下基地就由步兵接防.沒想到傳承就斷了. | |
NO:114_61
| 看熱鬧 於 2005/01/20 11:14 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
請教老炮手操什麼炮? 雷達諸元是直接賦予炮位的射擊口令, 還是只有方位距離;需要射擊指揮所另外計算前置量? | |
NO:114_62
| 金東回頭獅 於 2005/01/27 01:19 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
海防砲是不需要啥雷達,觀測所的喔! 它們的目標都是目視範圍的目標,要用到 觀測和雷達的是後方的砲兵!! 在金門90高砲,3吋艦砲,57戰防砲早就用到後送了^^ 民國79年郝伯伯來看本營澳口防護射擊示範時, 連42防砲車都來了,砲口壓低平射海面,準的勒!! 其實砲兵的榴砲屈射武器,一樣可以拉到第一線直接轟,威力更大! 我忘了是叫挺進射擊還是直接射擊???但這樣用法,代價可能更大QQ | |
NO:114_63
| 看熱鬧 於 2005/01/31 00:01 | |
| Re:舊陽字號軍艦的艦砲改成海防砲 | |
叫挺進射擊. 對海還可以, 在陸上使用要有神風精神. | |
歡迎前往茶黨2005年新論壇TaiwanBBS.ORG參與討論。 以下表格僅供管理人員整理資料輸入之用
