Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation [NO MECHS] Type 6

[Registug]

This makes me want to write up the stuff for the Cooksland Cruiser Sentinel.

LT-1 Emu

Armour: Hardened steel with protection up to 14.5mm on the sides; additional AMAP-B plates to protect up to 30mm on the frontal arc.
Length: 6.5m
Gun Forward: 9m
Width: 3m
Height: 2.5m
Weight: 28.2 tonnes
Crew: 4

Main Armament: Royal Ordinance 105mm L7A3 Rifled cannon
Ammo:
Secondary Armament: 1x 7.62 Coaxial FN MAG; 1x 7.62 anti-aircraft FN MAG
Ammo:
Engine: MTU-MB 890 diesel 6 cylinder 830hp engine
Transmission: Semi-automatic rear driven transmission
Power/weight ratio: 28.9hp/ton
Suspension: Hydropneumatic suspension
Range: 600km
Speed: 75km/h road speed

Still needs work

haha, top page

[Riysa]

Thoughts on a 15cm RAVEN gun?

Boop

[Registug]

Thoughts on a 15cm RAVEN gun?

Boop

Artillery?

[Riysa]

Boop

Artillery?

MBT gun.

[Aqizithiuda]

Thoughts on a 15cm RAVEN gun?

Boop

How do you imagine this gun working, in your own words.

[The Dominion Of Deathcoria]

I'm looking for some guidelines basically a rough idea

Yes, but to what?

What do you want your armed forces to do?
What do you want your armoured vehicles to be capable of doing?
Depending on the above two, how do you want to be able to use your armoured vehicles in an action?
You describe your primary unit, the "Legion", thusly.

Numbering 15,000 total a legion broken down looks like so.


I'm looking for kinda a combined arms mechanized expeditionary force. Thank you for pointing out the faults in my plan its always good to have another eye and opinion.
504 tanks.
156 AA tanks.
120 IFVs.
90 APCs.
16 Gunships.
455 Mobile Artillery.
1 brigade paratroops.
platoon of Commandos.
2 regiments of mechanized infantry.
battalion of light infantry auxiliary.

This essentially reads as an oversized and very tank and artillery heavy division.
In order to squeeze into barely two hundred infantry-carrying vehicles, your three regiments (especially since at least two of those are mechanised) must be heavily undersized.

What sort of size would you describe your Paratrooper Brigade and Mechanised Infantry Regiment as?
How are vehicles split between them?

Why does your Division-sized unit feature so many tanks and artillery and so few infantry vehicles?

Purely by numbers, I'd recommend reducing your tanks by a half (minimum), your artillery to a third and boosting your infantry vehicles by at least three times.

I'd also recommend removing the paratroopers and commandos.
Paratroopers and other airborne forces would be significantly more effective in their own division, and replace them here with more mechanised infantry. Not certain light infantry (without vehicles) are of much use in a mechanised formation.

Special forces should be an independent unit above the "Legion", which can be attached to it on an ad-hoc basis.

[The Dominion Of Deathcoria]

Accursed computer, I'm searching for a mechanized combined arms corps to give my dominions military greater flexibility in the field. Your help and advice is much appreciated.

[Riysa]

Boop

How do you imagine this gun working, in your own words.

What I'd like to know if its feasible or not. It would be useful for reducing recoil on a lighter 50+ ton chassis, IMO.

[Connori Pilgrims]

First off, wow new thread! (didn't see this earlier, live in different timezone from the rest of you)

Thoughts on a 15cm RAVEN gun?

Boop

The point of RAVEN is to mount large calibre weaponry on very light vehicles. So if your goal is to mount a 15cm piece on a 30ton or so platform, then sure whatever floats your boat.

Otherwise, I wouldn't bother really. You can mount normal 15cm+ class guns on tanks of 50+ tons (the Russians already built prototypes - the Object 292 and the more famous Object 195/T-95)

[Riysa]

First off, wow new thread! (didn't see this earlier, live in different timezone from the rest of you)

Boop

The point of RAVEN is to mount large calibre weaponry on very light vehicles. So if your goal is to mount a 15cm piece on a 30ton or so platform, then sure whatever floats your boat.

Otherwise, I wouldn't bother really. You can mount normal 15cm+ class guns on tanks of 50+ tons (the Russians already built prototypes - the Object 292 and the more famous Object 195/T-95)

Ja, my main MBT right now clocks in at 52 tons and mounts a 157mm. I've been running some tests though on the gun calcs NV and TKP posted previously, and to achieve the desired perforation and higher, I'm getting pretty close to the safe limit for recoil force. While its not necessary, RAVEN I can see helping to greatly reduce the recoil felt, so I can probably employ a longer barrel (currently L/45) and some more powerful rounds.

[Dostanuot Loj]

Update on the Savannah Leopard stuff.

Leopard 1A4 Upgrade process:

Early in 1987 a requst for proposals on improving Sumerian armour was put forward by the Armoured Corps General Staff in an effort to ensure the future viability of Sumer's Armoured Regiments. The Armoured Corps was at this point fully equipped with domestically produced Leopard 1A4s licence produced from Germany starting in 1977. Although only a decade into service the ACGS wanted to ensure that by the mid-1990s the Leopards would continue to retain an advantage as the new Leopard 2 and vehicles like it became more widespread. Over 30 proposals were recieved from various foreign and internal providers, ranging from simple updates to software to several new-vehicle procurment offers. In mid 1990 a comparative trials evaluation was held at the Nineveh Proving Grounds by the ACGS at the behest of the Parlimentary Defense Contracts Assembly, which invited the latest generation tanks to compete. Foreign examples which took part included the American M1A1 Abrams, British Challenger, German Leopard 2, Soviet T-72, and French AMX-40. The ACGS was uncomfortable with being forced to hold competition, and viewed the process not as an opening to procurment but rather as a learing experiance. No official standards were set and the individual vehicles were put through their paces in what has since been described as a circus of trials which were little more then normal maneuver and fire exercises. The lack of direction, and clear disinterest in procurment caused a number of the competitors to pull their vehicles from the evaluation by early 1991, forcing the closure of the trials early with no declared winner.

Within a year of the disasterous closure of the comparative trials, Nineveh Heavy Armour Works Inc., the licensed manufacturer of the Leopard 1 in Sumer, put forward a paper proposal to incorporate newly emerging technology into existing vehicles. The proposal included a complete rebuild of the Leopards in service with an array of improvements, including new digital systems, new power pack, new gun, and a rebuilt turret with an autoloader. Another set of comparative trials was ordered from Parliment, this time with a clear comparasin against the new proposal. Nineveh Heavy Armour was contracted to build three prototypes of their proposal, all modified from in-service Leopard 1A4s which were granted back to the factory for this purpouse. By mid 1993 the prototypes were ready, and the previous foreign providers were called back to provide their vehicles. The US entry declined to return, citing clear bias in the process, and the former Soviet providers of the T-72 declined without citing reasons. Vickers Defence Systems returned in a private venture with their Challenger 1, as did the German entry with the Leopard 2. the French entry included the original AMX-40, but a trials vehicle for their new AMX-56 was offered if the trials could be more clearly defined. In the end the AMX-56 was not sent, and the AMX-40 pulled from the trials half way through. The only new provider was the newly independent Ukraine, which provided a diesel engined version of the Soviet T-80. The trials closed with the end of 1994 and while the Leopard 2 was declared the winner, the ACGS declared it was not going to procure a new system, and instyead opted for the final Nineveh proposal for upgraded Leopard 1s. Funding was awarded and production was to commence by the end of 1997, with deliveries matching a schedual of granted-back tanks as the ACGS replaced the Leopard 1s on a one for one basis. Reality proved to be somewhat different, while the ACGS was well aware of what it was getting from Nineveh Heavy Armour, the official report to Parliment specified simply upgrading existing chassis, and the reality was that Nineveh Heavy Armour was producing the vehicles new-build to new specifications, and only retained a superficial resemblence to the original Leopard 1. Nothing could be done to prevent the contract, the ACGS refused to adjust their budget, as their funding was their own control. Parliament threatened legal measures against Nineveh Heavy Armour if it continued, but the threat was dropped as quickly as Parliament realized employment by Neneveh Heavy Armoured had to more then quadruple to handle the order, and Parlimentary elections were to come up in 1999. Because of this Nineveh Heavy Armour attained royal assent from the Emperor's office in late 1998 and transformed into a Crown Corporation under the name Royal Armourd Works Nineveh.

The first unit, the Royal Tank Regiment's training cadre of eighteen vehicles officially stood up with the new vehicle, designated Leopard 1S, in spring of 2000, with the rest of the unit, and subsequent regiments, converting by companies shortly afterwards. All vehicles are new build, using not just knowlege learned from licence production of the Leopard 1, but techniques and jigs, as well as much of the technical work. The collected Leopard 1s would be rebuilt by Royal Armoured Works Nineveh starting in 2003 as an assortment of vehicles to fill support roles for the Army, using technologies for the Leopard 1S.

Differences between the Leopard 1A4 and Leopard 1S include, but are not limited to, the following:

Turret:

Although resembling a Leopard 1A4 turret with an extended bustle, the Leopard 1S turret is a wholly new piece. The primary difference externally are the new gunner's primary sighting system, located on the left side of the turret where the gunner has been relocated, the commander's PERI-R 17 A2 normally seen fitted to the Leopard 2, as well as the mounting systems for the HMA heavy armour modules.

Internally, the new turret is simmilar to the Leopard 1A4 turret structure with a new composite filler in place of the previous spacing. The gunner has been moved to the left side of the turret, and the commander's station has been moved slightly forward. Because of this new internal climate/cooling systems have been able to be installed, much to the pleasure of Sumerian crews, as well the new digital systems have been relocated from the bustle. The bustle now houses a chain-system autoloader holding 26 rounds of 105mm with a digital indexing system. A further twenty rounds are stowed in the left front hull next to the driver and can be reloaded by the gunner into the autoloader system through a reverse loading setting on the autoloader. Otherwise loading can be completed via two doors to the extreme sides of the autoloader in the roof of the turret bustle. Two blow out pannels are also included, as well as an armoured door and bulkhead seperating the autoloader from the crew.

The Leopard 1S is armed with the British 105mm Improved Weapon System, allowing compatability with previous 105mm stocks, as well as improved lethality. The combination of autoloader and the 105mm gun allows a higher rate of fire then larger bore systems. Although the German 120mm L44 smoothbore was trialed, the ACGS decided to retain a weapon capable of making use of both the existing, rather large, stocks of 105mm rifled ammunition, and existing production and stowage capability for said gun. The British IWS was adopted instead as it offered leathality comparable to the larger gun, and retained compatability with existing stocks. In 2009 a new round, locally produced and based on the IWS high pressure round, would be intriduced incorporating an improved tungsten alloy, as well as more advanced APFSDS design, which would continue to maintain the lethality of the 105mm gun in service. Both the new fire control system, derrived from the German EMES 15, and the gun/autoloader combination are compatable with the Israeli Lahat missile system, which has seen widespread adoption by the Armoured Corps to augment the lethality of the main gun.

Secondary armament for the Leopard 1S is the coaxial FN MAG in 7.5x54mm. This is the standard round of the entire Sumerian Land Forces, and as such is retained for standardization. The coaxial weapon is relocated to the right side of the turret, and is serviced by the commander. The weapon is fed by a large 1000 round feed box, using disintegrating links that can be refilled with conventional 250 linked round boxes. Provision for a pintle mounted machine gun or grenade launcher is provided for the commander's hatch, however in Sumerian practice it is rarely used.

The vehicle is fitted with the Israeli CL-3030 IS-10 series of smoke dischargers. Two systems are fitted to the forward turret next to the gun mantlet in recesses in the armour. Two more systems are fitted to the rear of the bustle pointing forward on either side. A covered stowage basket is placed between the rear dischargers for personal gear or tools.

Hull:

The original torsion bars were replaced by a variant of the Teledyne 2880 in-arm suspension unit. All suspension arms are capable of individual height adjustment by a central computer system controoled by the driver. This allows the vehicle to adjust both its angle of depression and ride height, as well as cant angle and other things. The suspension was considered more effieicnt, and the space savings internally were applied to better volume management.

[Aqizithiuda]

How do you imagine this gun working, in your own words.

What I'd like to know if its feasible or not. It would be useful for reducing recoil on a lighter 50+ ton chassis, IMO.

I just want to make sure you know the limitations of the gun before I comment one way or the other.

[Lydenburg]

-snip-

I would buy it.

[Gallia-]

I bet you picked CL-3030 because it's just a box, so it's easier to draw.

I am happy someone is using 105mm IWS on NS, though.

[Dostanuot Loj]

I bet you picked CL-3030 because it's just a box, so it's easier to draw.

I am happy someone is using 105mm IWS on NS, though.

I deleted Photoshop for ethical reasons for a government job application. No intent on getting it back, so no. I picked it because it's awesome.

Trying to figure out Sketchup now. For awesome.

[Gallia-]

I bet you picked CL-3030 because it's just a box, so it's easier to draw.

I am happy someone is using 105mm IWS on NS, though.

I deleted Photoshop for ethical reasons for a government job application. No intent on getting it back, so no. I picked it because it's awesome.

Trying to figure out Sketchup now. For awesome.

Canada wouldn't check your computer for keygens come on.

At least not all your computers anyway. o:

Sketchup is dumb now that it isn't Google but some dumb company. I heard they broke the workflow and GUI into some unintuitive mess.

You should use Blender tbh.

[Orussia]

Rhino master race reporting.

Blender is a little bit shit, and Sketchup has a lolwut UI.

[Gallia-]

No one has made decent Orion battleships in Sketchup yet, either.

[Riysa]

What I'd like to know if its feasible or not. It would be useful for reducing recoil on a lighter 50+ ton chassis, IMO.

I just want to make sure you know the limitations of the gun before I comment one way or the other.

Go for it.

[Aqizithiuda]

I just want to make sure you know the limitations of the gun before I comment one way or the other.

Go for it.

I'm still not sure you know of the limitations. Basically, I'm asking you what you know, so that I know how much I need to go into detail.

[North Mesquite]

I'm posting in this thread to follow it.

[Anacasppia]

Does this seem legit? I'm not too sure about whether I could store 15 rounds in an isolated compartment in the hull, with blowoff panels venting downwards no less. I figured there would be space for it since the original configuration put a carousel of 60 rounds in the hull instead, which has now been moved to the bustle.

M.10A1/90 'Nerio' Expeditionary Gun System
Type: Light Tank
Unit Cost: $6,500,000 NSD
Variants: M.10A1/75, M.10A1/105, M.10A1/120

---

Weight: 19.5 tons
Length:

• Hull: 6.35 m
• Gun-Forward: 8.95 m

Width: 2.75 m
Height: 2.3 m
Crew: 3

---

Armor: Rolled Homogenous Armor

• Modular Applique: RHA/Composite/NERA/ERA

Protection:

• Frontal: 15.5mm AP
• Side: 7.62mm AP
• Top: 7.62mm AP
• Rear: 7.62mm AP

Passive Countermeasures: Radar-Absorbent Paint, Multi-Spectral Camouflage Netting
Active Countermeasures: MUSS, AMAP-ADS

---

Main Armament: 90mm L/60 CTA Rarefaction Wave Swinging Chamber Gun

• Ready: 60 Rounds in Bustle w/ Blowoff Panels
• Stowed: 15 Rounds in Hull w/ Blowoff Panels

Secondary Armament: 15.5mm Coaxial Machinegun (1,200 Rounds)

---

Engine: 750 hp Multifuel Turbine
Power/Weight Ratio: 38.46 hp/ton
Transmission: Hydromechanical Variable
Suspension: Hydropneumatic
Ground Clearance: 0.5 m (± 0.3 m)
Operational Range: 600 km
Maximum Speed:

• Road (Governed): 75km/h
• Off-Road: 60km/h
• Water: 10km/h

[Anemos Major]

[LIST UPDATED TO THIS POINT]

Does this seem legit? I'm not too sure about whether I could store 15 rounds in an isolated compartment in the hull, with blowoff panels venting downwards no less. I figured there would be space for it since the original configuration put a carousel of 60 rounds in the hull instead, which has now been moved to the bustle.

M.10A1/90 'Nerio' Expeditionary Gun System
Type: Light Tank
Unit Cost: $6,500,000 NSD
Variants: M.10A1/75, M.10A1/105, M.10A1/120

---

Weight: 19.5 tons
Length:

• Hull: 6.35 m
• Gun-Forward: 8.95 m

Width: 2.75 m
Height: 2.3 m
Crew: 3

---

Armor: Rolled Homogenous Armor

• Modular Applique: RHA/Composite/NERA/ERA

Protection:

• Frontal: 15.5mm AP
• Side: 7.62mm AP
• Top: 7.62mm AP
• Rear: 7.62mm AP

Passive Countermeasures: Radar-Absorbent Paint, Multi-Spectral Camouflage Netting
Active Countermeasures: MUSS, AMAP-ADS

---

Main Armament: 90mm L/60 CTA Rarefaction Wave Swinging Chamber Gun

• Ready: 60 Rounds in Bustle w/ Blowoff Panels
• Stowed: 15 Rounds in Hull w/ Blowoff Panels

Secondary Armament: 15.5mm Coaxial Machinegun (1,200 Rounds)

---

Engine: 750 hp Multifuel Turbine
Power/Weight Ratio: 38.46 hp/ton
Transmission: Hydromechanical Variable
Suspension: Hydropneumatic
Ground Clearance: 0.5 m (± 0.3 m)
Operational Range: 600 km
Maximum Speed:

• Road (Governed): 75km/h
• Off-Road: 60km/h
• Water: 10km/h

Abrams has blowout panels that vent downwards for its secondary ammunition storage, so that ought to be absolutely fine.

[Anemos Major]

Thoughts on a 15cm RAVEN gun?

Boop

Imagine the burn consistency you'd need to make a concept like that work :S

(and the turret venting being spewed out the back of the tank every time you fire the gun )

[Immoren]

CV-90 120T. Any good?

Use CV90120 in conjunction with AC armed variants for armoured recon. Like me. *nods*