Pictures of Technicals

[entropy]

WABmen,

Hereby I open a thread when one can post pictures of military vehicles. But not just any vehicle, it must be an armed truck or a technical.

A vehicle is qualified as a technical if it possesses at least some of the following characteristics:

It is a Toyota

It is still in it's original paint

It is crewed by soldiers holding machetes and yelling RUF or the like

Accepted weapons are DSHK, KPM, BMG, AGS, recoilless rifles and mortars. ZU/ZPU installations are acceptable, as are all modifications of abovementioned weapons.

Any visible armor on the vehicle makes it an armored car and therefore unacceptable as a technical.

Technicals can be light...






or heavy...





A real technical comes from Sub-Saharan Africa or Iraq, so watch out for possible counterfeit!

[Shek]

Little know fact. "Technicals" should actually be called "technos." During Somalia, the gunned up Toyota pickups would race around with techno music blaring and earned the nickname "technos." Somehow, this morphed into "technicals."

[entropy]

Another story suggests that the Red Cross in Somalia had to pay armed guards for protection. The money was later written off as "technical expenses".

Somalians listen to gangsta rap, I suppose. Techno is for the foreign devils.

[entropy]

I wonder if it's possible to fire the RR forward if someone crews the MG.

[gunnut]

Whoa...that is one pimped out ride.

[BD1]

does tatchanka count as technical ?
It basicly fits :
It is a Toyota - no

It is still in it's original paint - yes

It is crewed by soldiers holding machetes and yelling RUF or the like - Batka Mahnoīs anarchists probably fit the description
Accepted weapons are DSHK, KPM, BMG, AGS, recoilless rifles and mortars. ZU/ZPU installations are acceptable, as are all modifications of abovementioned weapons. - Maxim

Any visible armor on the vehicle makes it an armored car and therefore unacceptable as a technical. - no

īīFor those unfamiliar with the term, "tatchanka" refers to a
horse-drawn fighting vehicle, usually a cart or an open wagon with a
stationary heavy machine gun (or "maxim") installed in the back. It had a crew
of 2 or 3 (one driver and a gun crew). Nestor Makhno pioneered the use of the
tatchanka in a mass charge. A large number of the vehicles would assault the
enemy position as if they were cavalry, then wheel in a coordinated manoeuvre
so that all at once suddenly had their muzzles to the enemy, and fire a point-
blank burst of machine gun fire, all of it going into the same point of the
enemy line. This manoeuvre required very precise coordination between the
crews, but Makhno was good enough to make it work, using it to win a battle
with Deniken's forces in 1919.

[BD1]

UAZ from Bosnia seems to have been used a lot...

[entropy]

Tachanka most certainly fits. I never said anything about engine. And Nestor Machno and his drunken anarchist force were more barbaric than all African liberation armies taken together.

UAZ is actually a Soviet/Russian car. Russian militsia drives in them. Uralskij AftoZavod, if memory serves.

[ArmchairGeneral]

I wonder if it's possible to fire the RR forward if someone crews the MG.

Forward might be possible, if deafening, but it sure as heck better not fire backward.

[entropy]

One could turn around the RR for close combat :D

[ArmchairGeneral]

Someone hijacking your technical? Nooo problem. Want him medium or well done?

[sappersgt]

Firing that weapon (107mm?) anyways but perpendicular to the vehicle would be a disaster. Unless you wanted to remove the dashboard instrumentation all at once.

[entropy]

Firing that weapon (107mm?) anyways but perpendicular to the vehicle would be a disaster. Unless you wanted to remove the dashboard instrumentation all at once.

How big of a tactical disadvantage does it make? Not that big it seems to me, as they will have to stop to aim the rifle properly.

It's not often that I see mortars on technicals. I wonder why. Is it the recoil that would screw the humble Toyota suspension or are there other reasons?

[BD1]

US experimented with Humvee + 82mm. Sov.autom. mortar , donīt know what would have been the purpose of it .

[sappersgt]

Comfort vs recoil

by entropy
How big of a tactical disadvantage does it make? Not that big it seems to me, as they will have to stop to aim the rifle properly.

You have to stop the vehicle anyway to fire the gun. You just have to think ahead a little bit.

It's not often that I see mortars on technicals. I wonder why. Is it the recoil that would screw the humble Toyota suspension or are there other reasons?

You would like to have a stable platform to fire from. When firing a mortar the whole suspension would bob up and down the same way it does when you hit a pot hole. Doesn't lend itself to accuracy. That's why aside from HMGs usually the only guns you see mounted on technicals are recoilless.