Talk:M808B Scorpion

Reload
I'm wondering, because in mondern tanks the crew that's in the tank has a loader and the tanks have more of an inside then these do,so you know how they reload, but how do Scorpions reload their Main Guns? Voy101


 * The Scorpion probably has a simplified AI that conrols the reloading of the main cannon. After every shell is launched, it activates the mechanism for relaoding. It could also be a blowback-reload, in which the shock of the reload will the cause the mechanism to fuction. Demon Razgriz 18:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It could very well and is likely (definately) using an autoloader, which is used on modern tanks. It works in a similar (basic) way as a repeating firearm, ejecting a shell then loading in a new one automatically. They're often more sophisticated than that, due to the different types of munitions that tanks need to be able to switch between (fragmentation-blast, anti-armor penetrator, smart munitions, etc) but the M808B seems to only use 90mm High Velocity Frangible Tungsten Penetrators. The Russian T-72M1 Main Battle Tank has an autoloader which may be exactly like the Scorpion's. Murder of Crows

gas extractor
what is it, and what does it do?


 * It does exactly what it sounds like, extracts gasses from the vehicle. Normally gas extractors on vehicles are for relieving gas pressures from the interior, but this one may be related to the internal autocannon, releasing cartridge gasses. Murder of Crows

Shotgun?
It says that in Halo 1 and 3 you can ride on the treads' jumpseats. How? Skinr Leader of Iconic CrescentSworn Enemy of Pablo GM the Buffet Bandit

you can only ride shoutgun in halo ce just walk to its left side and you will se press x to ride in scorpion tank

Either side. but it neads a driver first. Maiar 10:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Main Battle Tank?
The M808B Scorpion is a mystery to me. It seems to be a light tank (more accurately, a "armored reconnaissance/airborne assault vehicle") due to the way it is used, a highly mobile (able to go over lots of terrain), air-lifted (delivered by D77 Pelicans), lightly armed (90mm cannon), minimally-manned (pilot is all you need) assault vehicle, not a main battle tank. Like a MBT it is robust and armored against other assault vehicles, but it is vunerable to small arms fire and infantry weapons (rockets, grenades) which is not like a main battle tank (which would only suffer paint scratches and minor dings from M9 grenades and all infantry firearms and would be able to suffer quite a few hits from rockets) MBTs are the most vunerable to anti-tank mines and heavy anti-tank munitions, while the driver of the Scorpion can be killed by a sniper, grenaded to death, or PUNCHED TO DEATH by a border. This does not make me want to classify it as a main battle tank. It also has a light gun (90mm, main battle tanks have 120mm typically), is smaller in volume (you can barely fit two people in it without being unreasonable about mechanical space contstraints) and yet it is as long as the M1 Abrams and weighs about as much, and is SLOWER. The Scorpion makes no sense to me. Murder of Crows

actully it needs one marine to drive and anorther to shoot but spartans have neural intyerface systems (god now what that is)wich let them drive and shoot at the same time

SPARTAN 456

It does seem quite odd. What really caught my attention was the 2 meters per second part. That's about 7.2 kilometers per hour, or 4.5 miles per hour. That's like jogging speed. During World War II, even the ungainly Tiger I could maintain speeds up to around 25 miles per hour. The Scorpion seems to be a slight step up from WW2, but nothing compared to a modern MBT. The Abrams is smaller in all directions, but sports heavier armor and a bigger gun (well, larger round size, the Scorpions gun is gigantic for having such a small round). Five hundred years of thinking, and this was the best we could come up with?
 * -- Master Gunnery Sergeant  Hank J Wimbleton IV COM 06:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Yea really I must agree that modern day MBT's are EXTREMLY more powerful, but I must also agree that this is due in part to the fact that Bungie problably doesnt know much about modern Military technology/tactics. But this might also be due in part to the fact that the Scorpian was designed before the Covenant attacked wherest it's only function was to police colonie worlds and fend off Rebels which would not require such a large armament. So its not that Scorpian we should be overannylizing for it was made for a more passive purpouse than modern MBTs but the Wraith we should closer examine. Why is the Wraith considered an equal to the Scorpian, a tank that I pressume was made to fight not other tanks but support troops, when the Wraith's purpouse as far as we can presume is to fight other tanks, an advanced alien race and thats the best they can come up with? It can barly hold its own agaisnt a Scorpian the Wraith wouldnt last 5 seconds against an M1A2 SEP V2 Abrams or a Challenger 2 --ECWUSA1995 14:07, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I think this can be blamed on Bungie's lack of knowledge about military ordnance. Smoke. 16:18, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Please note that the 2 meters per second max acceleration portion is invariably incorrect. 2 meters per second is not a a unit of acceleration, if it were "2 meters per second per second" it might be correct, even though it sounds strange. It does not say what the top speed is, as well. I have not edited, as I do not know if 2 meters per second is the top speed, or supposed to be the acceleration.

Bungie needed to make the game balenced. If it was realistic it would be un-fucking-beatable with the lack of good anti-armour weapons in Halo games. the 90mm gun is already VERY powerfull (compared to others in-game), the 7.62mm machine gun is deadly (exept in halo 1, its to innacurate) to the level of being unrealisticly powerfull, the vehicle is very resillient but the driver is vulnerable somehow, as for punching the hatch of... the bones of the fingers (even for a spartan, elite or brute) are definately NOT stronger than ceramic-titanium armour. Maiar 10:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

About variants...
"Strangely, every Halo game manual describes the tank as the M808B. This is odd since the Halo 3 Scorpion is clearly a variant from the original tank. Furthermore, this fact is even more marked with Halo Wars, in which many Scorpion variants appear. " From trivia section... it's not really strange, easiest way to explain this is it's a retcon. Same as same weapons appeareances or, say, grunts voices in Halo 3. Oh and HW will have (at least accroding to HW page) 2 variants of Scorpion, one with bigger gun, maybe this variant is the one in Halo:The Flood with 105mm gun. 88.115.124.211 10:51, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Max acceleration
In response to Razza119's edit - is the maximum acceleration 2 metres or 2.5 metres? The 888th Avatar (Talk) 10:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Just so you peepz know, acceleration (s) is measured in m/s^2, not m/s. What this means, is that for every meter it travels, it adds 2.5 meters upon the speed of the object. Corrected this in the article page 85.145.187.194 10:39, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Measurements converted incorrectly
I understand that it says that you guys got these measurements from the handbook that came with their respective games (Halo 1, Halo 2)? Bungie must not be very good at conversions. 66 tons isn't 145,500 pounds - it's actually around 13,000 pounds less than that. Going by the pounds, the actual weight of the tank would be more like 72.6 tons or something like that. I'm going to make the appropriate changes now. Smoke My pageMy talk 15:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Erm. It is if you are using METRIC Tons. 66 Metric Tons comes to 145,505.0930520 Pounds exactly. Most infomation you hear to do with numbers in Halo is in METRIC. VhenRa 15:30, 10th April 2009 (UTC)


 * Then they ought to have specified that. They always say "tons", instead of "metric tons". Typically, when metric tons are being referred to, it is always referred to as "metric tons" (at least from what I've seen). Smo ke  14:21, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Well in all countries but Burma, Liberia, and the United States. it is called the impearel ton and the tonne. And im gueassing if the UNSC would use the metric system becuse all but 3 countries use it. ArMyGuY277_GUNS 01:56, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

question
Ok, here is the senerio, Blood gulch, Blue in tank, red on hill near blue base, is it possible for the shell to kill the red (without exploding), continue going and then explode upon impact with the wall 50 feet or so behind the player
 * i'm just wondering if it's possible or not.

No, dont tank shells detonate on impact in Halo:CE?

glitch
The tank shell seems to do no damage if the shell directly hits the enemy (like if the shell hit them mid air). Has anyone had this happen?

Ya me too it often leaves me yelling over the mic...--Sangheili wunna be 21:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Bungie probably just designed the shell to kill with blast damage not the shell itself. But it wasn't the best move now was it?SNOR { 3 } 23:07, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Referances
Could we get some referances on the Varients?? Because it seems kinda like fanon to me. Thanks.--CR8ZY-ArAB  21:23, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
 * They're from Halo Encyclopaedia.-  5 əb'7 aŋk (7alk ) 21:33, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ahh, thanks for clearing that up.--CR8ZY-ArAB  16:15, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

MG Question

Okay, so I am a newcomer to the series and I only have Halo Wars, Halo 3 and ODST. I know the MG is co-axel in Halo Wars, but seprate in 3 and ODST. Is it seprate in Combat Evloved and 2 ?
 * No. Check out this link.-  5 əb'7 aŋk (7alk ) 19:31, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

Multiplayer
Can we have more tactics aimed at when the player is USING the tank? There seems to be loads of info on ways of attacking the armoured vehicle, so can we have some effective ways of using it as well? EpicMailMan 23:07, February 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Scorpion Tank.- <font face="Century Gothic"> <font color="#FF4F00">5 əb<font color="#FF4F00">'7 aŋk (<font color="#FF4F00">7alk ) 23:09, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

Huh?

 * M808B2 Sun Devil: A modification with four 40mm Autocannons.
 * M808B3 Tarantula: A variant with twin Scimitar 4x178mm rocket pods.

Source?

Halo Encyclopedia. See "References" section above. And don't forget to sign your comments <font color="blue" size="2px">Zero-G_Mako aka Orodum 14:30, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Barrel Getting Blown Off
Did anyone else notice that? In the OXM Comic-Con video about Reach you could see a Scorpion get its barrel, not the whole turret, just the barrel, blown clean off by another Scorpion and it DIDN'T DIE. It did right after but that was from a second shot... Alex T Snow 12:38, August 2, 2010 (UTC)

Crew
Ok, the article for the tank says it takes one person to operate it, with a second one only needed in the Halo 3/Halo 3 ODST varients. Therefore, it is saying that the tank only needs one person to opereate it in Halo CE and Halo 2. However, the instruction manual for Halo Combat Evolved says that the Scorpion needs TWO crewmembers (unless the operator has an AI, or something like that.) Should this be mentioned in the article, mabey the Spec's section under the main picture? Just checking. --Rprince418 22:23, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Halo: Reach has original M808 variant
Thumbing through the Halo: Reach game manual, the Scorpion is listed as the M808 MBT, without the "B". This would explain some visual differences (and mechanical). Anyway, the UNSC Army typically uses older variants of armament, so this would make sense.-- Fluffy Emo Penguin ( ice quack! ) 13:23, 31 October 2010 (EDT)

Removal of speed?
I just noticed the old adress has it's top speed, why doesn't this one? Jabberwockxeno 12:58, 9 January 2011 (EST)

Potential Canon Problem?


Here is the scanned page from the Halo Encyclopedia. Hopefully it will clear up this potential canon problem about the Scorpion Tank, requested by Subtank. So, here it is, as promised. May need to look at it a little closer though. Printer scanner's not big enough to get all the page, but I think I got enough of it though. Xamikaze330 23:03, 10 June 2011 (EDT)Xamikaze330


 * Thank you for the scanning of the page. This is to address Fluffy's previous comments about the M808 and the M808B, specifically which one is which.
 * In HCE and Halo 2, tanks are labelled as the M808B; this makes some sense as the design is similar between the two games. HW also uses this model, though refers them generally as Scorpion tanks.
 * In H3, the tank undergoes significant design changes, namely the coaxial machine gun is detached from the cannon's body and that the pilot no longer has control of it. This tank was only referred to as the Scorpion, without any formal title.
 * H:R uses the same tank design used in H3, but refers vehicle as the M808. This leads to the presumption that the tank with a detached weapon system is the M808 while those with a combined weapon system is the M808B.
 * How about the Encyclopedia?, you might ask. Well, the Encyclopaedia, riddled with errors as it always has, labelled the H3 tank as the M808B. However, it is clear from these analyses from each game that there is a M808 model and a M808B model. Thus, it is suggested that two articles of the tank to be created, the first being the M808 Scorpion (HCE, H2, HW) and the second being M808B Scorpion (H3, H3R and HR). @Xamikaze330: This is the potential canon problem. :P —  subtank  07:35, 11 June 2011 (EDT)

The only potential reason I can think of this being is that it's a pure graphical and/or gameplay difference. It's been done many times in the past with little disregard for major changes. However, i'm more inclined to think that the H1/H2/HW Scorpion is an older model while the H3/ODST/Reach variants are a newer variant. Possibly using the "Mark" system used by various other systems. And before someone says anything about regional differences, there are still frontline U.S. Army and Marine Corps, Canadian Army, etc. units that use the older version of tanks (M1A1 Abrams and Leopard I, respectively) in-conjunction with newer ones.

"...the first being the M808 Scorpion (HCE, H2, HW) and the second being M808B Scorpion (H3, H3R and HR)." Wait, you got those mixed up. The Reach and Halo 3 Scorpion are the M808.-- Fluffy Emo Penguin ( ice quack! ) 15:15, 17 July 2011 (EDT)


 * I blame copy+paste feature.— subtank  09:51, 23 August 2011 (EDT)

Halo 1/2 has the newer m808b scorpion tank
I think the scorpion used in halo 1 and 2 is newer than the ones in Halo Reach Halo 3 and Halo 3 ODST because see that having the coaxial gun mounted on the cannon a good idea because it eliminates the need for a gunner at all But IN Halo 3, Halo 3 ODST ,and Halo Reach it needs a person manning the turret so i am, thinking that the Halo 3, Halo 3 ODST and Halo Reach ones are the original m808 scorpion which proboably needed a man on the turret or maybe they are damaged m808b's that needed a frame over haul like #12-9f5 which is a halo 2 scorpion that was damaged getting past the New Mombasa bridge that possibly got a frame overhaul with an original scorpion body/frame because of the fact it reappeared in halo 3 with the original m808 scorpion tank body/frame. Am i correct ?

WhatImSorryIHaveNoIdeaWhatYiurSayingPleaseHaveSomePunctuationSomwhere. "Say What?!" Vegerot I'm sayimg that the halo 1/2 scorpions are newer than the ones in halo3/odst and halo reach are older models or the halo 1/2 scorpions with an older body/frame of the original scorpion.

Or maybe they're just totally different types of tanks in the 1st place :p. Vegerot. If thats the case they bare a huge resemblance to each other.

Merge this article's content with "M808 Main Battle Tank"
The M808B is clearly the M808 tank with its poorly-positioned machine gun turret removed in favour of a coaxial gun. This change is nowhere near significant enough to merit the M808B having its own article, so I suggest that this article's content be merged into the M808 Main Battle Tank article's "Variants" section.--The All-knowing Sith&#39;ari 09:53, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * Normally, I would not object such proposal. However, there are several things that makes it somewhat credible enough to have its own article. Both vehicles provides different gameplay experience and different tactics (though largely similar). Also, both vehicles have somewhat distinct operational histories... emphasis on somewhat.
 * While this is a very weak justification for opposing the merge proposal, also consider the format used for the M12 FAV and its variants.— subtank  10:16, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * Surely the different gameplay experiences could be described in the "changes between the games" or "tactics" sections of the M808 article?--The All-knowing Sith&#39;ari 10:23, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * A weak argument, as I said. :P — subtank  10:38, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * But if we keep the articles separate purely based on slightly different armament and small modifications to how it works in gameplay, shouldn't that also mean we've got to split many other articles, such as the Wraith, where in CE it had no turret, in Halo 2 it had 2 mini-cannons, and in 3/ODST/Reach it has the Type-52?0044-CIV-ClubErrera-logo1.png<font style="background:white"><font style="color:blue">Alpha Lima Echo Xray <font style="color:blue">Talk 10:33, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * Actually, we already split the Wraith article after it was confirmed that the two distinct variants were canonically-separate and not being just a gameplay alteration.--  Fore  run  ner '' 11:11, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * Warthog is already receiving that treatment since 2010. Perhaps a variant would only be worthy if it presents a significant change in gameplay experience/tactics employed?— subtank  10:38, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * I'm up for merging all of the articles on M12 Warthog variants (i.e.: all those Warthogs with a significant rear turret) into the M12 Light Reconnaissance Vehicle article, since it's fairly clear that all these Warthogs have exactly the same design, bar the turret (which in any case is probably modular and could be replaced with a different weapon to create a different variant if necessary).--The All-knowing Sith&#39;ari 11:01, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * Alright. :)
 * Since we're talking about merging variants, how about the Elephant? The H3 model is known as the M313 while the HW model is known as the M312, as stated in the Visual Guide. To make the M312 as the main article with the M313 being mentioned as a variant would confuse the readers into thinking that the H3 Elephant as the M312. The opposite is true though achieving a different outcome... it would be simply weird to provide a variant an article over its previous model.
 * I would propose using this simple solution: if the object provides some significant change in gameplay experience, it can be said that it satisfies the notability threshold. — subtank  11:17, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * Given its top-mounted turret armament and use as an APC, I would say that the M312 from Halo Wars fulfils an entirely different role to the Halo 3 M313 Elephant (which given its design and designation, was likely built as a recovery vehicle using the M312's chassis').
 * Though I can't disagree with your point about gameplay experience and notability. I guess I'm trying to look at this from a Watsonian as opposed to a Doyalist perspective.--The All-knowing Sith&#39;ari 11:28, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * A balance of both perspectives would be the best. :)
 * Also, allowing these variants to have own articles would increase the wiki's pageviews... and its presence in the web :P — subtank  11:33, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * Subtank, you have convinced me. Given that the Halo Wars Elephant fulfils a blatantly different role to the 3 Elephant, I supposed splitting those into new articles makes sense. I guess my original mentality for merging this article with the M808 article was because it's in need of some clean up.--The All-knowing Sith&#39;ari 11:38, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
 * Glad that we reached a consensus. :) — subtank  11:53, 28 August 2011 (EDT)