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

by **Mozria** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 11:38 am

Questers wrote:
Mozria wrote:Well, the armor would be made up of RHA and thermoplastic, with several layers of steel sandwiched together and the gaps filled with plastic to increase HEAT resistance. The first layer of RHA would be the thickest, with the the next dew being thinner and then a lower thickness towards the rear of the module. An entire unit, meant to be bolted onto the flat-fronted composite armored turrets on my tanks would probably be about 300-400 millimeters thick, with the initial plate being about fifty millimeters thick. ERA or NxRA could also be tacked onto it to reduce HEAT damage on the applique armor.
That's going to be some heavy shit bro.

The question is, though- Would it work?

I could also put some thermoplastic-bedded tungsten scaling into the rear layer, just in case. Or I could do that and decrease the length of the module a bit. Perhaps 200-250 mm?

by **Nirvash Type TheEND** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:09 pm

Questers wrote:As you can see, Leopard 2 main weakness is lower front hull.

(Image)

This seems to correlate to the same area where the ammo is.

(Image)

That kind of weakness is acceptable on the sides of any tank. But on the front, where the armour is supposed to protect catastrophically against any penetration, it's a big problem. Ok, against inaccurate platforms that the Leopard 2 was designed to fight against, its more acceptable. But to today's standards, and apparently by the standards of even the 80s according to the British, it's a serious flaw.

So do what that one Soviet project loosely based on the T80 did and give it a frontal slab.

by **Oaledonia** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:59 pm

Imperializt Russia wrote:u wot m8

This I must know.

Escalation

by **The balkens** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:04 pm

OT-810: sure, it may not be that good. BUT it's good enough to get the job done.

In use by mechanized detachments of the Chimera Korps only.

by **San-Silvacian** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:08 pm

So in this MBT i'm drawling up, its going to have a dual 20-25mm low-profile RWS on top to ward of silly aircraft and helicopters and to fuck up anything else that rolls around it to long.

Another thing is a 15.5mm coaxial and a 120-130mm smoothbore main gun.

Its going to be a ultra modern MBT made in the last ~10 years or so to supplement the Leclerc.

tbh I'll still be using AMX-30 goodness for infantry support and colonial defense.

by **Fordorsia** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:12 pm

Things are happening.

by **Imperializt Russia** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:14 pm

Oaledonia wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:u wot m8

This I must know.

Escalation

I'm guessing it costs. Too bad, I'm in dire need of Rossiya Stronk on that game.

by **San-Silvacian** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:14 pm

Fordorsia wrote:Things are happening.
(Image)

Have the skirt go farther down and fit it with ERA.

Also modern gunner's sights, optics an such are a nice thing to have.

by **Fordorsia** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:16 pm

San-Silvacian wrote:
Fordorsia wrote:Things are happening.
(Image)

Have the skirt go farther down and fit it with ERA.

Also modern gunner's sights, optics an such are a nice thing to have.

The fully kitted-up model will be next.

Got any examples I could use? I'd have no idea what I'd be looking for.

by **San-Silvacian** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:28 pm

Fordorsia wrote:
San-Silvacian wrote:
Have the skirt go farther down and fit it with ERA.

Also modern gunner's sights, optics an such are a nice thing to have.

The fully kitted-up model will be next.

Got any examples I could use? I'd have no idea what I'd be looking for.

really looking up most modern tanks will bring up how it should look.

AMX-30 + 142mm GLATGM = win.

Turret layout

to bad I didn't pay attention in French.

by **New Tsavon** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:37 pm

Fordorsia wrote:Things are happening.
(Image)

Its nice, but it needs an autocannon cupola damnit!

by **Mozria** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:45 pm

Given my prior proposal (beginning of page), would 200-250 mm of module LOS thickness be a good guess?

by **Fordorsia** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:46 pm

San-Silvacian wrote:
Fordorsia wrote:
The fully kitted-up model will be next.

Got any examples I could use? I'd have no idea what I'd be looking for.

really looking up most modern tanks will bring up how it should look.

AMX-30 + 142mm GLATGM = win.

Turret layout

to bad I didn't pay attention in French.

The modern optics are usually the large boxy things, right?

by **The Akasha Colony** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:55 pm

Fordorsia wrote:
San-Silvacian wrote:
Have the skirt go farther down and fit it with ERA.

Also modern gunner's sights, optics an such are a nice thing to have.

The fully kitted-up model will be next.

Got any examples I could use? I'd have no idea what I'd be looking for.

Such Leclerc. Much tank.

The gunner's sight is on the left, with the commander's independent viewer to the right on top of the turret. Most gunner's sights are just a box or cutout on one side of the turret aligned with the gun, while the commander's independent sight is boxy or cylindrical attachment on top of the turret to give a full 360 degree view. For instance, note how on the Type 10 the gunner's sight is still a box, but now mounted on top of the hull rather than in front of it. The commander's sight is obscured by the turret ring but is very similar to the Leclerc's, just on the other side of the vehicle and slightly further to the rear. On my own tank I cheated a bit with the gunner's sights and mounted them on the right side of the tank (same as the Leclerc), which is coincidentally the profile I didn't draw. I did draw a full CIV, but it ended up getting mostly blocked by the RWS.

Mozria wrote:
Questers wrote: Sorry, what is a "spaced armour/thermoplastic sandwich" and what LOS thickness and TE do you expect it to have?

Well, the armor would be made up of RHA and thermoplastic, with several layers of steel sandwiched together and the gaps filled with plastic to increase HEAT resistance. The first layer of RHA would be the thickest, with the the next few being thinner and then a lower thickness towards the rear of the module. An entire unit, meant to be bolted onto the flat-fronted composite armored turrets on my tanks would probably be about 300-400 millimeters thick, with the initial plate being about fifty millimeters thick. ERA or NxRA could also be tacked onto it to reduce HEAT damage on the applique armor.

It isn't spaced armor if the spaces are filled.

by **Mozria** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 2:07 pm

The Akasha Colony wrote:It isn't spaced armor if the spaces are filled.

The thermoplastic is of a much lower density than the RHA, and reacts very differently to both KEPs and shaped charges.

Spaced armor, by definition, can have the spaces filled with another material, such as with the Whipple Shield.

by **The Akasha Colony** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 2:14 pm

Mozria wrote:
The Akasha Colony wrote:It isn't spaced armor if the spaces are filled.

The thermoplastic is of a much lower density than the RHA, and reacts very differently to both KEPs and shaped charges.

Spaced armor, by definition, can have the spaces filled with another material, such as with the Whipple Shield.

There are no spaces if they are filled. It becomes composite armor if filled, as it is now composed of multiple materials. Ceramics also have much lower density than RHA, but sandwiching them between steel plates does not create 'spaced armor.' Classic Whipple shields have void spaces, not filled spaces, which is why shields with filled spaces are referred to separately (as 'stuffed' shields).

by **Fordorsia** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 2:57 pm

More WIP

by **Mozria** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:24 pm

The Akasha Colony wrote:
Mozria wrote:The thermoplastic is of a much lower density than the RHA, and reacts very differently to both KEPs and shaped charges.

Spaced armor, by definition, can have the spaces filled with another material, such as with the Whipple Shield.

There are no spaces if they are filled. It becomes composite armor if filled, as it is now composed of multiple materials. Ceramics also have much lower density than RHA, but sandwiching them between steel plates does not create 'spaced armor.' Classic Whipple shields have void spaces, not filled spaces, which is why shields with filled spaces are referred to separately (as 'stuffed' shields).

Well, what is the performance difference versus KEPs in relation to either true spaced armor or an RHA/thermoplastic composite?

Can KEPs break apart in the same manner within the composite, or is this action retarded by the filling within?

by **Graditora** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:28 pm

Which is better? ERA or NERA?

by **Mozria** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:34 pm

Graditora wrote:Which is better? ERA or NERA?

NxRA is only good in that it can be placed in vulnerable areas without the risk of damaging them like ERA would, as well as being more safe for close combined-arms operations. In other respects, it performs disappointingly.

by **Gallia-** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:36 pm

Fordorsia wrote:More WIP
(Image)

Wrong ERA for a round turret. It will look like M60 Blazer.

by **Fordorsia** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:39 pm

Gallia- wrote:
Fordorsia wrote:More WIP
(Image)

Wrong ERA for a round turret. It will look like M60 Blazer.

The sides aren't curved.

by **Gallia-** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:41 pm

Fordorsia wrote:
Gallia- wrote:
Wrong ERA for a round turret. It will look like M60 Blazer.

The sides aren't curved.

Why did you draw an M1 Abrams?

by **New-Found Land** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:44 pm

Update.

Internal.

Space for 42 rounds of 115mm Local.
24x Front Hull.
12x Turret Bustle.
6x Turret Basket.

by **Gallia-** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:46 pm

One man three children?

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

Who will OP the next MGVoYN[NM] thread?

Who is online