Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation [NO MECHS] Tranche 7

[Yukonastan]

Would any modern tank be capable of looking mostly intact after taking:
A recoilless rifle shot in the fuel cell;
Thermite grenades in the crew compartment;
A HEAT shell into it;
AGM114 Hellfire and AGM65 Maverick hits.
I'm talking, of course, about the M1A1 "Cojone Eh" here.

[Imperializt Russia]

At least one tank in Iraq, in 2008 or so, was struck by both AGM-114 and AGM-65 to deny it to the enemy. I think it had already been hit by an IED and another Abrams' tank gun.

The AGM-65 had left a hole 10 or 12 inches in diameter in the outermost layer of the turret face, while the AGM-114 had left a significantly smaller entry hole in the turret side. Possibly three inches.
Besides the scorch marks, the holes and the totally collapsed suspension, it "looked" okay. Probably 100% unsalvageable.
I assume you mean by this, "still looks tanklike".

[Korva]

At least one tank in Iraq, in 2008 or so, was struck by both AGM-114 and AGM-65 to deny it to the enemy. I think it had already been hit by an IED and another Abrams' tank gun.

The AGM-65 had left a hole 10 or 12 inches in diameter in the outermost layer of the turret face, while the AGM-114 had left a significantly smaller entry hole in the turret side. Possibly three inches.
Besides the scorch marks, the holes and the totally collapsed suspension, it "looked" okay. Probably 100% unsalvageable.
I assume you mean by this, "still looks tanklike".

Isn't that the tank that Yuko mentioned?

Cojone Eh.

[Yukonastan]

At least one tank in Iraq, in 2008 or so, was struck by both AGM-114 and AGM-65 to deny it to the enemy. I think it had already been hit by an IED and another Abrams' tank gun.

The AGM-65 had left a hole 10 or 12 inches in diameter in the outermost layer of the turret face, while the AGM-114 had left a significantly smaller entry hole in the turret side. Possibly three inches.
Besides the scorch marks, the holes and the totally collapsed suspension, it "looked" okay. Probably 100% unsalvageable.
I assume you mean by this, "still looks tanklike".

Mhm.
That's Cojone Eh you're talking about.
Question was, is it to be expected for an MBT of today to be able to look as if it might still be functional after being hit with a figurative metric fuckton of ordnance?

[Imperializt Russia]

Apparently so.

More like 6-8 inches for the Maverick and 4-5 inches for the Hellfire, as it happens.

[Spirit of Hope]

At least one tank in Iraq, in 2008 or so, was struck by both AGM-114 and AGM-65 to deny it to the enemy. I think it had already been hit by an IED and another Abrams' tank gun.

The AGM-65 had left a hole 10 or 12 inches in diameter in the outermost layer of the turret face, while the AGM-114 had left a significantly smaller entry hole in the turret side. Possibly three inches.
Besides the scorch marks, the holes and the totally collapsed suspension, it "looked" okay. Probably 100% unsalvageable.
I assume you mean by this, "still looks tanklike".

Mhm.
That's Cojone Eh you're talking about.
Question was, is it to be expected for an MBT of today to be able to look as if it might still be functional after being hit with a figurative metric fuckton of ordnance?

Define "looks as if it might still be functional", because most such tanks probably would look at a distance like they were fine. Unless the ammo or fuel explode the exterior is most likely to just have a couple of holes in it. Those probably won't be noticeable at any real range, but a closer inspection would readily reveal them.

[United Marxist Nations]

Goddamn it, I can't stop being indecisive.

Alright, which would be better:

My ~2200 T-80U modernizations, or ~1700 Black Eagle.

I already had said I had decided on the T-80U modernizations when deciding on what my military would use in this thread, but then I saw the Black Eagle, and its aesthetics are so amazing, plus the capacity for one-piece munitions. Also, with comparison to cost, is that a reasonable proportion I could expect to see?

EDIT: And yes, I know about the Standard Turret, but I can't find any pictures of it actually mounted on anything.

EDIT 2: Also, since I only put it in a preliminary part of my factbook, I could change it before putting it on an "official" thing where it would be a costly process of putting them in-service, instead being the existing status-quo.

[Aelas]

Goddamn it, I can't stop being indecisive.

Alright, which would be better:

My ~2200 T-80U modernizations, or ~1700 Black Eagle.

I already had said I had decided on the T-80U modernizations when deciding on what my military would use in this thread, but then I saw the Black Eagle, and its aesthetics are so amazing, plus the capacity for one-piece munitions. Also, with comparison to cost, is that a reasonable proportion I could expect to see?

EDIT: And yes, I know about the Standard Turret, but I can't find any pictures of it actually mounted on anything.

EDIT 2: Also, since I only put it in a preliminary part of my factbook, I could change it before putting it on an "official" thing where it would be a costly process of putting them in-service, instead being the existing status-quo.

I'm pretty sure the reason the Black Eagle tank wasn't adopted is that it's development was viewed as likely being too costly and because the projected benefits didn't outweigh the projected costs. Granted, Russia was broke at the time... but I would still say T-80U.

[United Marxist Nations]

Goddamn it, I can't stop being indecisive.

Alright, which would be better:

My ~2200 T-80U modernizations, or ~1700 Black Eagle.

I already had said I had decided on the T-80U modernizations when deciding on what my military would use in this thread, but then I saw the Black Eagle, and its aesthetics are so amazing, plus the capacity for one-piece munitions. Also, with comparison to cost, is that a reasonable proportion I could expect to see?

EDIT: And yes, I know about the Standard Turret, but I can't find any pictures of it actually mounted on anything.

EDIT 2: Also, since I only put it in a preliminary part of my factbook, I could change it before putting it on an "official" thing where it would be a costly process of putting them in-service, instead being the existing status-quo.

I'm pretty sure the reason the Black Eagle tank wasn't adopted is that it's development was viewed as likely being too costly and because the projected benefits didn't outweigh the projected costs. Granted, Russia was broke at the time... but I would still say T-80U.

But, keep in mind, that my nation didn't go through anything similar to the nineties in its timeline, and we were quite well-off economically. If it matters, NStracker says that my economy is god-lite.

[Aelas]

I'm pretty sure the reason the Black Eagle tank wasn't adopted is that it's development was viewed as likely being too costly and because the projected benefits didn't outweigh the projected costs. Granted, Russia was broke at the time... but I would still say T-80U.

But, keep in mind, that my nation didn't go through anything similar to the nineties in its timeline, and we were quite well-off economically. If it matters, NStracker says that my economy is god-lite.

And when you say the Black Eagle tank, do you mean the 125mm version or the 152mm version?

[Aelas]

I'm pretty sure the reason the Black Eagle tank wasn't adopted is that it's development was viewed as likely being too costly and because the projected benefits didn't outweigh the projected costs. Granted, Russia was broke at the time... but I would still say T-80U.

But, keep in mind, that my nation didn't go through anything similar to the nineties in its timeline, and we were quite well-off economically. If it matters, NStracker says that my economy is god-lite.

Also, is NStracker working ??? I can't get the ;link to open.

[The Akasha Colony]

But, keep in mind, that my nation didn't go through anything similar to the nineties in its timeline, and we were quite well-off economically. If it matters, NStracker says that my economy is god-lite.

It says that about most economies unless you try really hard to implode it.

The real answer is "whichever is better for your doctrine and needs," and we can't really answer that.

[United Marxist Nations]

But, keep in mind, that my nation didn't go through anything similar to the nineties in its timeline, and we were quite well-off economically. If it matters, NStracker says that my economy is god-lite.

And when you say the Black Eagle tank, do you mean the 125mm version or the 152mm version?

125mm, I think 152mm is a bit too NS for me. The capability for both GLATGM's and one-piece ammunition is great for 125mm on Black Eagle, which is why I'm interested.

[United Marxist Nations]

But, keep in mind, that my nation didn't go through anything similar to the nineties in its timeline, and we were quite well-off economically. If it matters, NStracker says that my economy is god-lite.

It says that about most economies unless you try really hard to implode it.

The real answer is "whichever is better for your doctrine and needs," and we can't really answer that.

In all honesty, I don't know enough about doctrines to answer that. I would say something of a mix between NATO and Soviet doctrines, emphasizing quick advances of mechanized units with artillery support, as well as the coordination of anti-air (travelling with the advancing units) and air-force to gain air-superiority (or at least to deny it to the enemy).

[Aelas]

It says that about most economies unless you try really hard to implode it.

The real answer is "whichever is better for your doctrine and needs," and we can't really answer that.

In all honesty, I don't know enough about doctrines to answer that. I would say something of a mix between NATO and Soviet doctrines, emphasizing quick advances of mechanized units with artillery support, as well as the coordination of anti-air (travelling with the advancing units) and air-force to gain air-superiority (or at least to deny it to the enemy).

It sounds to me like you want to go with the Black Eagle Tank. There aren't significant differences between the two in terms of what would effect deployment doctrines, as they are both Russian tank designs so they both conform to the same operational requirements.

[United Marxist Nations]

In all honesty, I don't know enough about doctrines to answer that. I would say something of a mix between NATO and Soviet doctrines, emphasizing quick advances of mechanized units with artillery support, as well as the coordination of anti-air (travelling with the advancing units) and air-force to gain air-superiority (or at least to deny it to the enemy).

It sounds to me like you want to go with the Black Eagle Tank. There aren't significant differences between the two in terms of what would effect deployment doctrines, as they are both Russian tank designs so they both conform to the same operational requirements.

You're right, I should just go with whatever it is I want, after all, it wouldn't be the most NS thing ever. I mean, look at Padnak.

[Aelas]

It sounds to me like you want to go with the Black Eagle Tank. There aren't significant differences between the two in terms of what would effect deployment doctrines, as they are both Russian tank designs so they both conform to the same operational requirements.

You're right, I should just go with whatever it is I want, after all, it wouldn't be the most NS thing ever. I mean, look at Padnak.

Sorry, don't know Padnak.

[Vancon]

You're right, I should just go with whatever it is I want, after all, it wouldn't be the most NS thing ever. I mean, look at Padnak.

Sorry, don't know Padnak.

Oh you will.

[Aelas]

Sorry, don't know Padnak.

Oh you will.

I just looked him up.

Pretty sure our Emperor got a sudden urge to pick up the red phone and dial up the Strategic Missile Command...



I kid.

[The Akasha Colony]

In all honesty, I don't know enough about doctrines to answer that. I would say something of a mix between NATO and Soviet doctrines, emphasizing quick advances of mechanized units with artillery support, as well as the coordination of anti-air (travelling with the advancing units) and air-force to gain air-superiority (or at least to deny it to the enemy).

It sounds to me like you want to go with the Black Eagle Tank. There aren't significant differences between the two in terms of what would effect deployment doctrines, as they are both Russian tank designs so they both conform to the same operational requirements.

If his doctrine requires a larger number of tanks, however, this may not be the better option as it could leave him with a shortage.

[Aelas]

It sounds to me like you want to go with the Black Eagle Tank. There aren't significant differences between the two in terms of what would effect deployment doctrines, as they are both Russian tank designs so they both conform to the same operational requirements.

If his doctrine requires a larger number of tanks, however, this may not be the better option as it could leave him with a shortage.

Well then he can buy my tanks Our doctrine is "Tanks tanks tanks tanks moar tanks and moar tanks"

Would you like to buy some of our tanks, United Marxist Nations?

[Krazakistan]

Goddamn it, I can't stop being indecisive.

Alright, which would be better:

My ~2200 T-80U modernizations, or ~1700 Black Eagle.

I already had said I had decided on the T-80U modernizations when deciding on what my military would use in this thread, but then I saw the Black Eagle, and its aesthetics are so amazing, plus the capacity for one-piece munitions. Also, with comparison to cost, is that a reasonable proportion I could expect to see?

EDIT: And yes, I know about the Standard Turret, but I can't find any pictures of it actually mounted on anything.

EDIT 2: Also, since I only put it in a preliminary part of my factbook, I could change it before putting it on an "official" thing where it would be a costly process of putting them in-service, instead being the existing status-quo.

You haven't been able to find the Standard Turret mounted on anything because it never made it past the 'scale model showcase' stage in it's development because, in the words of Kiev, "the Omsk bureau never catches a break."

[United Marxist Nations]

My nation has a nasty habit of buying vehicles for "evaluation", then reverse-engineering them to build our own indiginously. We are quite modern (like I said, like if the USSR had not gone stagnant), so we can afford plenty of stuff on our own. I think 1700 Black Eagles or so wouldn't be pushing too much, and I think it would be plenty to accomplish our goals.

Just finished a WIP of my army, what do you guys think?

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=unit ... /id=297704

[Aelas]

My nation has a nasty habit of buying vehicles for "evaluation", then reverse-engineering them to build our own indiginously. We are quite modern (like I said, like if the USSR had not gone stagnant), so we can afford plenty of stuff on our own. I think 1700 Black Eagles or so wouldn't be pushing too much, and I think it would be plenty to accomplish our goals.

Just finished a WIP of my army, what do you guys think?

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=unit ... /id=297704

Good! But if you put your image urls in img brackets, like "[img]CommiePic.jpg[/img]" it'll show up on the Factbook page.

[United Marxist Nations]

My nation has a nasty habit of buying vehicles for "evaluation", then reverse-engineering them to build our own indiginously. We are quite modern (like I said, like if the USSR had not gone stagnant), so we can afford plenty of stuff on our own. I think 1700 Black Eagles or so wouldn't be pushing too much, and I think it would be plenty to accomplish our goals.

Just finished a WIP of my army, what do you guys think?

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=unit ... /id=297704

Good! But if you put your image urls in img brackets, like "[img]CommiePic.jpg[/img]" it'll show up on the Factbook page.

I know, but the images would be so big as to be obstructive.