I was undecided about this one because in WoT it gets a lot of bad press but unlike in WT,in WoT you can't fire the 37mm gun.

I did notice however that Gaijin saw fit to link the 2 guns to one fire button and as the sight is set up for the 37mm by default,the 75mm will always fall short. I fixed this by allocating keys for primary and secondary guns,that way the sights work correctly for each gun.

I had my best round using the 37mm.4 kills whilst I was immobilised in a town.Hitting a moving target with the 75 isn't so easy with its high arc and relatively low velocity.

I think the main drawback with this tank is that it's main killing weapon is in the hull, and that means you have to expose the whole top half of the vehicle to engage with it Which is historical of course...
That said, I researched all components and had fun with it until I could move on to the M4A1 Sherman...

It took me a while to figure out that the 75 fired low by default so for ages I was only effectively using the 37mm But yes,exposing that main gun is a risk especially when everyone seems to be using low graphics settings

Wow, I'm definitely learning about WW2 tanks. It's great

Well Bish, I used to command tanks for real years ago back in the early 80's to 1990... Glad I never had to fight the things for real

That pretty bloody awesome Trooper! I'm gleaning info from your guys' posts and slowly picking things up

How would you rate a tank like the M3 as compared to a normal single gun turret tank ? In it's time period of course, i am thinking like the stress/pressure factor as you have two mainish type guns. Like for instance two targets appear, do you concentrate on one with both guns in hope of a quick knockout and then on to the other, do you have one gun on each, do you swap the 37 between both, take out the bigger threat first ? I just wonder are they trained to not divide fire..or divide fire ? I imagine you would have to have a really tight crew and then take the situation as it comes and training and combat skill kicks in but, does it up the workload and pressure with the ability of more than the standard weaponry in such a small fighting unit or make you a bigger threat ?

I found i was never really comfortable with it as it gave me that extra gun which at times left me worrying about which way to face, covering one area with the 75 and then traversing around with the other. It seems like one of those good on paper ideas but not so great when applied..or am i just talking out of my hat and never got to grips with it

Well, I've never served on a tank with a turret and a hull gun system... I can only quote on tactics and SOP's for my regiment.
The M3 was well received by crews in North Africa and could take on any German tank at that time, it had good firepower and protection, plus it was easy to maintain. All plus points if you are a tank soldier.
On the Tactical side, well we have already mentioned the main problem. Looking at its history, it was really just a vehicle that was used as a 'stop gap' until better types could be produced.
Normally tanks fight in a 'troop', and they are allocated 'arcs' of responsibility, that should overlap with other tanks so that they have mutual protection. That coupled with all round observation and radio comms should mean that any targets are identified and allocated to vehicles in their respective arcs.
If you out range your enemy with a more powerful gun, with the above points and a well trained crew you would expect to give a good account of yourselves.

In the Chieftain MkV that I commanded, if I had given my gunner a target and another tank had appeared whilst he was engaging, I could traverse off my cupola sight and lay onto that target... as soon as the gunner had hit his target I could engage the contra-rotation lever, squeeze my duplex trigger and the turret gun would automatically rotate to line up with my sight onto the new target in short order... something that WWII commanders could only dream of I guess.

I can only imagine that in any WWII tank battle with multiple targets, it would come down to priority of the threat... which one has seen you, which one has the more dangerous main armament, are they moving towards you or moving laterally to your position etc... all factors that determine what you would hit first.

That is nasty Did you have an automatic reload system and how long between reloads ?

Cheers for the reply

No Ajay, the gun was reloaded by a human loader. Projectile in (120mm), followed by a bag charge, (callico bag that is disintegrated when the round is fired), close breech, ram .50 cal into vent tube, (to ignite charge bag), close safety shield, hit safety switch, report 'LOADED'... sounds alot, but it only takes seconds with a good loader

Good read with my morning cup of coffee

Good stuff Trooper!

Love hearing vets talk about what they consider everyday mundane life inside a tank but fascinates the likes of us!

lol!... guys!
I could tell you stuff that would make your hair stand on end... but that would take all day

It's ok- go on.

+1

Would love to hear a tankers opinion on their thoughts of Russian armor at the time and not the stuff we read in books.

Russian armour at the time was considered beatable... the Chieftains 120mm stabilized gun system was the best in the world at that time... unfortunately, the automotive system was pants, lol!
I can hardly remember a time when we were out on the massive FTX exercises in Germany were something in the engine didn't reqiure me to call for REME assistance
The only Russian tank we were worried about was the T-64... they never exported it outside of Russia, so it was an unknown quantity.