Why can't they build tanks with two guns?

[Kiljan Arslan]

I have wondered why tanks can not have a two gun turret like old navy cruisers?

[Bootsiuv]

I think some did. Although, I'm no tank historian. So I could be way off.

[JP226]

The Lee's and Grants had two cannons and so did the Char B1.

[Daovonnaex]

You've been playing too much Command and Conquer

Yes, it's doable

The Germans had plans on the drawing board for "land cruiser" mammoth tanks

For a modern main battle tank, it makes no sense

To begin with, a modern MBT can typically only carry about 60 shells or so

Secondly, the armament of medium, heavy, and later main battle tanks has always been designed to penetrate the armor of its opponent

In case of inadequate power, firing two guns at once would be useless...they'd both just bounce right off

Being able to fire a second shot after a first shot is similarly useless, as the recoil of the shot is absorbed by the turret and the chassis...in the time it takes the tank to stabilize sufficiently to fire another shot, the main gun is reloaded

Adding a second barrel would just add needless cost, complexity, and weight to the system

Naval gunfire has been commonly used as a form of artillery, so additional throw weight is always helpful

The Lee's and Grants had two cannons and so did the Char B1.

These weren't in the main turret, and one gun was weaker

Many modern tanks have mortars and flame throwers

[Bootsiuv]

You've been playing too much Command and Conquer

That's the first thing I thought of too. Good ol' command and conquer. Actually, Generals was rather fun. Makes me wish I didn't give it to my buddy after I discovered Rome.

[Kiljan Arslan]

Actually I havn't played any C&C games in about a year its just that I always wondered why tanks can't have two gun turrets. Actually I believe I can chart where I first wondered that would have been in 2000 when playing Starcraft.

[Luxchamp]

the german 'maus' tank featured two guns, one 128mm and one 75 mm


edit:


there were only 2-3 built by the end of the war, and never saw any combat action. instead the germans blew them up in their factory, and the russians built 1 from the pieces of they picked up..

[mightyfenrir]

the german 'maus' tank featured two guns, one 128mm and one 75 mm
edit:


there were only 2-3 built by the end of the war, and never saw any combat action. instead the germans blew them up in their factory, and the russians built 1 from the pieces of they picked up..

It comes into play in the game Blitzkrieg. So does the M26 Pershing (http://www.granddadshobbyshop.com/DML6801.JPG)
Anyway... The M2A1 had two cannon on it. (http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/U...usmt-M2A1b.jpg)
The M42 Duster had twin barrels, but, as it's more common in that genre, it's an anti aircraft vehicle (http://content.answers.com/main/cont...r-latrun-1.jpg).

There are a ton of cool tanks and some fantastic guns on those tanks, but without arguing because I know it wasn't the greatest gun or most accurate... I think the Sturmtiger Sturmpanzer has one of the most frightening looks of any tank head on:

[Kiljan Arslan]

It comes into play in the game Blitzkrieg. So does the M26 Pershing (http://www.granddadshobbyshop.com/DML6801.JPG)
Anyway... The M2A1 had two cannon on it. (http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/U...usmt-M2A1b.jpg)
The M42 Duster had twin barrels, but, as it's more common in that genre, it's an anti aircraft vehicle (http://content.answers.com/main/cont...r-latrun-1.jpg).

There are a ton of cool tanks and some fantastic guns on those tanks, but without arguing because I know it wasn't the greatest gun or most accurate... I think the Sturmtiger Sturmpanzer has one of the most frightening looks of any tank head on:

Didn't they use that for the Warsaw uprising?

[Holger Danske]

Because why would you spend a trillion dollars on a "Mammoth" tank when a modern MBT do just fine? Since you properly just played C&C3 I'll tell you why a Mammoth tank just wouldn't do with our current technology.
1: The tank is far to big and heavy to be transported, and is also slow compared to a Challenger II tank.
2: The top edge gun of today is the German 120mm Smoothbore cannon, which can penetrate any armour currently used. There is really no need for calibers above the 120mm, and adding two of them would be terrible overkill and would be a pain to maintain, not to mention the extra 5tons of weight.
3: The size of the proposed tank would also make it a favorite target for air strikes, and a easy one too.

But sure, a Mammoth-like tank would be so awesome... just not feasable in the real world.

[Luxchamp]

Because why would you spend a trillion dollars on a "Mammoth" tank when a modern MBT do just fine? Since you properly just played C&C3 I'll tell you why a Mammoth tank just wouldn't do with our current technology.
1: The tank is far to big and heavy to be transported, and is also slow compared to a Challenger II tank.
2: The top edge gun of today is the German 120mm Smoothbore cannon, which can penetrate any armour currently used. There is really no need for calibers above the 120mm, and adding two of them would be terrible overkill and would be a pain to maintain, not to mention the extra 5tons of weight.
3: The size of the proposed tank would also make it a favorite target for air strikes, and a easy one too.

But sure, a Mammoth-like tank would be so awesome... just not feasable in the real world.

that's precisely what the germans experienced in the later part of WW2:

their tanks became bigger, better armored, but also more and more slow...itwas almost like a moving bunker which couldn'tbe easily destroyed, butdisabled by blowing up its tracks. a great deal of the 77 JagdTiger had to be blown up by the retreating german troops because they couldn't repair the damaged tracks. another issue was the inadequate motorization and transmission for these huge beasts of war...

[Kiljan Arslan]

Because why would you spend a trillion dollars on a "Mammoth" tank when a modern MBT do just fine? Since you properly just played C&C3 I'll tell you why a Mammoth tank just wouldn't do with our current technology.
1: The tank is far to big and heavy to be transported, and is also slow compared to a Challenger II tank.
2: The top edge gun of today is the German 120mm Smoothbore cannon, which can penetrate any armour currently used. There is really no need for calibers above the 120mm, and adding two of them would be terrible overkill and would be a pain to maintain, not to mention the extra 5tons of weight.
3: The size of the proposed tank would also make it a favorite target for air strikes, and a easy one too.

But sure, a Mammoth-like tank would be so awesome... just not feasable in the real world.

Never played C&C 3. Thankyou for providing me with a answer why.

[Holger Danske]

Never played C&C 3. Thankyou for providing me with a answer why.

Np, btw I gave the idea a try once in SketchUp, before I realized the size and cost would simple make them idiotic to produce.

I bring you the M-32 Tunguska - Super Battle Tank


Basicly, it's just a beefed up version of the Mammoth from C&C3...

[Kiljan Arslan]

Great for sci fi though

[Juvenal]

I can't think of any 2 gun turret tanks other than the Maus and Char B already described above.

There were a number of tanks with multiple guns and even multiple turrets.

The Soviet Union developed several multi-turret tanks between the wars. They were not successfull and were replaced with simpler designs with larger guns. Here are a couple...

The T26



The T28

[Gary88]

two guns on the same yurret would be pointless, you may as well have a bigger gun, if they were on different turrets you run into problems as it would be bigger heavier more mechanically demanding and you would need more people to operate it

[Luxchamp]

two guns on the same yurret would be pointless, you may as well have a bigger gun, if they were on different turrets you run into problems as it would be bigger heavier more mechanically demanding and you would need more people to operate it

one gun fires the other reloads, then the other fires, the first reloads...and so on and so forth...but you're right in the end

[Serious Spamurai]

What about a tank with twin 20mm vulcan cannons instead of a main gun .

[lord o kelly]

wow,that T28 looks like it could kick some serious a**,
too bad it wasnt used

[LSJ]

Having a single turret allows for easier armouring and more ammo storage. Having a single cannon on the turret allows for more accurate fire, and bigger cannons, at the sacrifice of fire rate.
Plus its more effective to have 20 single gunned tanks than 10 double gunned tanks - there are more targets for the enemy and you cover a wider area.

Many tanks with multiple turrets or multiple guns on each turret have been made, but the soldiers have always preferred the single cannon single turret design through experience. Especially the Russians and Germans: they know it better than anyone else!