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

[Imperializt Russia]

I'm currently dreaming up a six-inch gun project for the Tsar Davida that will put even yours to shame.

Stopped reading there.

Samoz, the recoil from my 152mm design requires a soft-recoil mounting and muzzle brake before it can be mounted on a chassis weighing less than 80 tons.

The full rounds are taller than the average American man, and the penetrator alone on the APFSDS round weighs 71 lbs, with a penetration capability of 1200mm of solid steel.

You come at me.

I'm going for a three-stage shell.
And not "three stage" like this piddly thing.

[Orussia]

I'm going for a three-stage shell.
And not "three stage" like this piddly thing.

Then what sort of powder development have you kept to yourself? Or are you going to accept sub-100 round barrel life in exchange for the increased performance over my 152?

[Imperializt Russia]

Yes.

Originally, I wanted this to simply fall by the wayside as some hilarious curio until I remembered how hilarious the designs got here at time.
Now I feel like competing.

[Orussia]

Yes.

Originally, I wanted this to simply fall by the wayside as some hilarious curio until I remembered how hilarious the designs got here at time.
Now I feel like competing.

Samoz, it is with a heavy heart that I must inform you...there is a huge difference between competing and...this.

Besides. As it stands, my 152 design is kinda at the limits of current metallurgy to create. Otherwise, the barrel gets too heavy and starts to droop under load, creating an eccentricity in your projectile's flight path.

Go with your first instinct. Let it fall by the wayside and be remembered as a design that was before its time.

[Imperializt Russia]

DAMN

Well, maybe I won't make it compete with yours then.
But I'm still designing a silly-powerful three-piece 152mm gun here.

[New Vihenia]

DAMN

Well, maybe I won't make it compete with yours then.
But I'm still designing a silly-powerful three-piece 152mm gun here.

why not add another 2-3 mm so you'll have my 158mm

[Orussia]

DAMN

Well, maybe I won't make it compete with yours then.
But I'm still designing a silly-powerful three-piece 152mm gun here.

why not add another 2-3 mm so you'll have my 158mm

Because 152mm is a standard Russian caliber.

[New Vihenia]

Because 152mm is a standard Russian caliber.

wat ?!... Well if so one need gun launched hypervelocity missile then.

[Anemos Major]

Because 152mm is a standard Russian caliber.

It's a standard howitzer caliber, which doesn't really have much bearing on a smoothbore tank gun that's going to have different munitions, rounds and propellant charges.

I'm going for a three-stage shell.
And not "three stage" like this piddly thing.

Shells are a bit like rockets - the more stages you have, the more complex they become, without necessarily contributing to their end-objective. To use a rough analogy, I suppose, Saturn V used 3 stages to get to the Moon and back, while N1 used 5 stages to crash and burn.

A 152mm round so long you need to divide it up into three stages is going to require a radical new barrel material, some sort of high performance propellant that doesn't wear down the barrel as quickly, a novel ignition system that can divvy up the ignition of the propellant effectively along the length of a rationally sized gun, radical new round materials and designs to address the fact that, in the case of the KEPs, the power of the detonation is far past the point where bigger explosions behind KEPs start to have diminishing returns in efficiency terms, some way of storing and loading this ridiculously long shell that doesn't mean your loading speeds lag in the ten seconds range behind your enemies, and probably quite a lot more.

Adding stages to your rounds isn't a replacement for increasing the size of your gun - it doesn't make your rounds better 'by default' at all. Trust me - I'm still wondering whether adopting a two stage round was a good idea.

E: And incidentally, adopting a 152mm gun that's long enough to make the most of a three stage round is probably, as Orussia notes, going to droop when stationary unless you find some sort of radical new barrel material, let alone fire anywhere near reliably on the move. To put this in context, I'm already using what you might term 'tricks' to ensure that my 128mm gun doesn't shift too much while the tank is moving to allow it to engage targets while mobile.

Anemostatbloc is sexy, so I'll copy down what I remember of my T-14 off the top of my head, and start filling in later. Anemos, if you have the time, can you link this post to my T-14 listing in the OP?

I can't double-link - if you could put your image (in link or image form) above the statblock, I'll put it up later today.

[United States of PA]

If i can say something..... Dont like the M8H. Thats as much of work in progress as i have had in..... well in two years lol

[Orussia]

Because 152mm is a standard Russian caliber.

It's a standard howitzer caliber, which doesn't really have much bearing on a smoothbore tank gun that's going to have different munitions, rounds and propellant charges.

Nevertheless, the production capability for barrels of that caliber was still already in place.

EDIT2: Why didn't I remember this before.
Object 268 and ISU-152-2/ISU-152BM say hello.

The main purpose of the ISU-152BM was the fight against heavily armoured tank destroyers such as the Elefant and the Jagdtiger. It was armed with the 152.4 mm BL-8 (БЛ-8) long barrel gun, which unlike the ISU-152's gun wasn't a gun-howitzer.

Stop making me argue at 11pm, I can't think very well.

I can't double-link - if you could put your image (in link or image form) above the statblock, I'll put it up later today.

Aye aye, sir, will do.

EDIT: It is done.

[Anemos Major]

Nevertheless, the production capability for barrels of that caliber was still already in place.

There's a considerable difference between having the productive capacity to build a handful of experimental barrels and 'standardising' a barrel in production terms.

EDIT2: Why didn't I remember this before.
Object 268 and ISU-152-2 say hello.

They're rifled barrels using steel and manufacturing processes so outdated that they'd probably burst if you tried to fire a training APFSDS from them. The leFH 18 was 105mm - that didn't give the Bundeswehr the ability to pick up tools off the ground and start producing 105mm smoothbore guns.

Aye aye, sir, will do.

EDIT: It is done.

[LIST UPDATED TO THIS POINT]

[Rich and Corporations]

Funny that a Recon vehicle with lotsa radios iirc doesnt carry lots of passengers.

It aint meant to.

you mean lots of ammunition

It's a standard howitzer caliber, which doesn't really have much bearing on a smoothbore tank gun that's going to have different munitions, rounds and propellant charges.

And barrel thicknesses. Although artillery commonality with the liquid propellants commonly used on NS would be rational.

But no.

That's not why liquid propellants are used.

[Anemos Major]

(and guys - more links! The list of AFVs looks a bit sparse, and I know NS has more vehicles than this >:S)

[Orussia]

They're rifled barrels using steel and manufacturing processes so outdated that they'd probably burst if you tried to fire a training APFSDS from them. The leFH 18 was 105mm - that didn't give the Bundeswehr the ability to pick up tools off the ground and start producing 105mm smoothbore guns.

I would have actually picked the 10.5cm FlaK 38 as an example, rather than the 10.5cm leFH 18, since my original concept was based off of the 152mm 2A64 gun rather than the 152mm D-20 howitzer.

(and guys - more links! The list of AFVs looks a bit sparse, and I know NS has more vehicles than this >:S)

Chill, give me a couple days, I'll get my laptop, and then I can start posting actual stuff that's not off the top of my head.

[United States of PA]

(and guys - more links! The list of AFVs looks a bit sparse, and I know NS has more vehicles than this >:S)

Ask and you will receive.... to some degree




Designation: M1192 Infantry Fighting Vehicle
- Name: Li Tenan

Costs:
- New Production: $3.8mn

Dimensions:
- Length: 8m
- Height: 2.6m
- Width: 3.4m
- Mass: 38 tonnes
- Track Width: 600mm

Internal Systems:
- Crew: 3 + 6 dismounts
- Autoloader: General Dynamics 50(330SS)-150
- Ammunition: 450 (Main Gun) 950 (Coax)
- Transmission: General Motors Heavy Duty (6fwd, 1 rv)
- Fuel Capacity: 930L (Internal)


Powerplant: Caterpillar O-6 RB Model Turbocharged Diesel
- Power: 1,000bhp
- Displacement: 16.6 Liters
- Layout: 6 Cylinder Opposed Piston Horizontal
- Induction: Twin Turbocharged
- Fuel Consumption: ~1.6L per kilometer

Performance:
- Maximum Speed (Road): 65km/h
- Range: 580km
- Power-Weight Ratio: 26.3 hp/tonne


Armament:
- Primary: M992 Electric Chain Gun
- Coaxial: 1x 7.62x63mm General Purpose Machine Gun
-Commander: 1x 15x120mm Heavy Machine Gun
- Dischargers: 10x 70mm Grenade Launchers

[Imperializt Russia]

Because 152mm is a standard Russian caliber.

It's a standard howitzer caliber, which doesn't really have much bearing on a smoothbore tank gun that's going to have different munitions, rounds and propellant charges.

I'm going for a three-stage shell.
And not "three stage" like this piddly thing.

Shells are a bit like rockets - the more stages you have, the more complex they become, without necessarily contributing to their end-objective. To use a rough analogy, I suppose, Saturn V used 3 stages to get to the Moon and back, while N1 used 5 stages to crash and burn.

A 152mm round so long you need to divide it up into three stages is going to require a radical new barrel material, some sort of high performance propellant that doesn't wear down the barrel as quickly, a novel ignition system that can divvy up the ignition of the propellant effectively along the length of a rationally sized gun, radical new round materials and designs to address the fact that, in the case of the KEPs, the power of the detonation is far past the point where bigger explosions behind KEPs start to have diminishing returns in efficiency terms, some way of storing and loading this ridiculously long shell that doesn't mean your loading speeds lag in the ten seconds range behind your enemies, and probably quite a lot more.

Adding stages to your rounds isn't a replacement for increasing the size of your gun - it doesn't make your rounds better 'by default' at all. Trust me - I'm still wondering whether adopting a two stage round was a good idea.

E: And incidentally, adopting a 152mm gun that's long enough to make the most of a three stage round is probably, as Orussia notes, going to droop when stationary unless you find some sort of radical new barrel material, let alone fire anywhere near reliably on the move. To put this in context, I'm already using what you might term 'tricks' to ensure that my 128mm gun doesn't shift too much while the tank is moving to allow it to engage targets while mobile.

Anemostatbloc is sexy, so I'll copy down what I remember of my T-14 off the top of my head, and start filling in later. Anemos, if you have the time, can you link this post to my T-14 listing in the OP?

I can't double-link - if you could put your image (in link or image form) above the statblock, I'll put it up later today.

Well, the 39 calibre gun on the M109 propels a 43kg projectile at 800m/s with modular charges equivalent to the 12.7kg propellant charge of the old M203A1.

Granted, the Paladin's obviously not built for round performance but still. It didn't feel too outside the realms of possibility.

[Rich and Corporations]

AFVs of Rich and Corporations

Heavy Tanks
http://www.nationstates.net/nation=rich ... /id=209121
http://iiwiki.com/wiki/Horzesser_Assault_Tank

MBTS
Next Generation Tank 2013 Brochure (NGT-2013 Stats)
PM-77 Tank
T-51 Mk. V

PT MBT: T-51
PT Heavy Tanks: Landcruiser Series of Tanks

T-09 IFV: http://www.nationstates.net/nation=rich ... /id=136133

Light Tank: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-92_Light_Tank



Someone else's tank: viewtopic.php?p=15740545#p15740545

[Anemos Major]

[LIST UPDATED TO THIS POINT]

Apologies, RandC, I cut out the T-92 - this is less about putting up the complete materiel charts of every military in NS and more about listing NS-original designs. I tried my best to put everything else in the right place, tell me if I got anything wrong.

Well, the 39 calibre gun on the M109 propels a 43kg projectile at 800m/s with modular charges equivalent to the 12.7kg propellant charge of the old M203A1.

Granted, the Paladin's obviously not built for round performance but still. It didn't feel too outside the realms of possibility.

There's a fairly hefty difference between an 800m/s indirect fire HE shell and an APFSDS round propelling a dart at around twice that velocity towards a particular target 2-3km away - and you're trying to do a lot more than the latter. The Paladin's not built for round performance, consistency of burn or precision targeting from the point at which it leaves the barrel - it's meant to propel this boot-heavy round upwards and away so it hits something over there. It's hardly an equivalent comparison, unless you want your tank's gun to share the characteristics of a howitzer.

[Rich and Corporations]

I tried my best to put everything else in the right place, tell me if I got anything wrong.

I wasn't under the impression that anyone ever reads the OP.
I shall continue that glorious tradition.

There's a fairly hefty difference between an 800m/s indirect fire HE shell and an APFSDS round propelling a dart at around twice that velocity towards a particular target 2-3km away - and you're trying to do a lot more than the latter. The Paladin's not built for round performance, consistency of burn or precision targeting from the point at which it leaves the barrel - it's meant to propel this boot-heavy round upwards and away so it hits something over there. It's hardly an equivalent comparison, unless you want your tank's gun to share the characteristics of a howitzer.

To chime in, a lighter projectile creates a straighter pressure curve, creating more pressure towards the end of a barrel (unsuitable for howitzers). And APFSDS tend to be lighter then HE shells.

[Imperializt Russia]

I'll go relearn what the hell thermodynamics is, scour ToT and assess what feasibilities may be there to be had.

[New Vihenia]

To chime in, a lighter projectile creates a straighter pressure curve, creating more pressure towards the end of a barrel (unsuitable for howitzers). And APFSDS tend to be lighter then HE shells.

talking about pressure curve. What do you think of a gun that do not have muzzle exit pressure ? Will the projectile inside still able to exit with a speed ? or it'll dead stop there ?

Another thing about exit pressure ? Do you like low muzzle exit pressure ? I heard it's a sign of good thermal efficiency as the pressure from burning propellant is wholly used to propel the projectile instead of wasted in shape of overpressure and blast.

Why i'm asking ? Because my 158mm gun appears to have such trait when firing HE shells.

[Dostanuot Loj]

Hummm....

To Vickers Mk.3, or not to Vickers Mk.3?

[Vetok]

Hummm....

To Vickers Mk.3, or not to Vickers Mk.3?

Why not? I use the Mk.3M variant as a light tank with a few upgrades.

[Stahn]

I have been working on this vehicle for a while now:



It is the Shadhahvar 3 tank destroyer. I am hoping I will get help with the specifications but I was planning to make this an extremely mobile (90km/h off road) and fast vehicle with a very well protected turret. I still haven't decided on what type of armor it has but I have read about armor of high grade steel that has tiny "bubbles" in it that would make the armor more effective against anti tank shells in addition to being of less weight.

It would have a 3 men crew and a sophisticated high velocity electrothermal-chemical 120/140mm gun with an autoloader.Aditional features are a duel mounted laser system that can be used to damage or confuse enemy sensors.

It also has an integrated snorkel system as you can see in the following picture: