Scorpion retirement

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Horse Soldier RE:Scorpion retirement 6/12/2003 8:46:54 AM

Think it depends on the role envisioned -- 76mm has merits for a light tank supporting infantry, but for reconnaissance rapid fire 30mm is superior for killing comparable enemy recon AFVs.

Quote Reply

Heorot RE:Scorpion retirement 6/12/2003 4:05:34 PM

Hose soldier is right. The British Army uses these in a purely recce role. It is not used in conjunction with infantry so the gun is just for defense. However, in Kosovo the 30mm proved great at taking out snipers.

Quote Reply

LMF RE:Scorpion retirement 6/13/2003 12:09:32 PM

So why the 76 in the first place. What was the difference in the role of the Scimitar to the Scorpion that required a bigger gun if there was no inf support envisaged. I know they used both as inf support in the Falklands but that seemed more out of necessity as they couldn't get anything biiger to run on the soft ground. As I recall against limited at defence they were both quite good at it. Did any country buy the Scorpion 90 with the Cocerill gun that the Brits never bought, IIRC I saw some pics of the indonesians using them. If I am correct anyideas about how the Indo's used them apart from internal security? The whole CVRT series fascinates me. Alluminium and petrol seem a poor mix to but they have seen quite a lot of combat with quite a high degree of successs. One of the few succesful light tanks, or not? any comments from people who served in them would be most welcome.

Quote Reply

rocket doctor RE:Scorpion retirement 9/4/2003 2:52:20 PM

I was serving in the British army at the time of the retirement. One reason that I heard was that the 76mm gun was being withdrawn because the crews firing it were being exposed to excessive levels of toxic products from the weapon. (Seems plausible as there was no bore evacuator / muzzle brake on this weapon). I have to say that having seen both weapons fired, the 76mm being lower velocity was less likely to hit a moving target than the Rarden. The 76mm did have the advantage of a useful illuminating round though. The reason for the 76mm was that it was used on the forerunner of the Scorpion, the Saracen (6 wheeled) armoured car. The other point is that the general idea of a recce vehicle of this type is not to fight for information, but to gain it by stealth!

Quote Reply

gunner RE:Scorpion retirement 9/4/2003 4:31:12 PM

"What was the difference in the role of the Scimitar to the Scorpion that required a bigger gun?" IIRC 60's/70's BAOR doctrine called for scimitars to perform long range recce, with scorpions behind them, only a few miles ahead of the tanks. I guess the concept was thought up when BMP's where still unknown and NATO expected hordes of Soviet infantry to rush our defensive positions in human waves, with tank support. The counter to this was concealed recce to identify the main force and it's axis of advance (scimitar), and close-in recce, forming a screen with infantry recce patrols (scorpion). I've seen the scorpion described as an FSV in some sources, though this may be a misnomer based on it's armament rather than it's role. However, the 76mm is definitely better suited to infantry support against personnel and big, slow BTR's. Meanwhile the tanks would plink at WarPac tanks at long range from commanding hull-down positions behind the screening troops. With the emphasis on mechanised/armoured assault in Soviet doctrine of the 70's and 80's, the need for infantry fire support was deemed secondary to the requirement to defend against enemy AFV's. Plus there was a lot of logic in retaining only one other AFV main weapon besides the 120mm.

Quote Reply