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

[Tule]

A proper minefield isn't intended to stop anyone, its intended to encourage them to go where you want them. You lay a mine field to block a specific path and encourage them to take another path of your choosing.

Like into the Purpelian rivers, canals or marshes... and the forests. Did I mention the forests? This said, I wonder if I can have a marshland forest in an European climate.

You certainly can in the oceanic climates of Western Europe.

"Let's go on a Sunday drive, oh it's raining."
"Let's go on a picknick, oh it's raining."
"Let's go to the beach, oh never mind it's raining"

[Yukonastan]

Is this a stealthed upgrade for the leo 2? Or are they just stealth smoke launchers on the back there?

[San-Silvacian]

Naah, i'm an Imperial xD

I see. But what about the GSh-6-30?

GSh-6-30 would have the same problems, except with the added comedic effect of lulzy recoil vibrations.

To be honest the general "gatling gun = 10x damage versus infantry" logic doesn't work as well IRL as video games suggest. Added dakka can be very effective for suppression, but it will also burn through a lot of ammunition, and in many cases will be superfluous for the job at hand. There's a reason the 2A42 comes with "high" and "low" rate-of-fire settings.

Personally I plan on fitting a 50mm autocannon to the Soodean "Tank Support Vehicle" - whenever I get around to designing it in detail. My rationale is that it would offer greater effective range and hitting power than the 30mms on the IFVs, but better rate of fire and anti-helicopter performance than the 125mms on the tanks, without venturing into the 60-100mm gap where the tradeoffs aren't worthwhile. But that's just my two cents.

Newest Russian/French developed IFV has a semi-auto 57mm cannon it.

[Gallia-]

>russian
>french

will be great

100%

[Triplebaconation]

(Image)
Is this a stealthed upgrade for the leo 2? Or are they just stealth smoke launchers on the back there?

Those are stealth holes. They make it stealthy.

[Fordorsia]

Also M23 Heavy Siege Tank. Everyone loves da sieging

Just waiting for World of Tanks to use my blueprints even though there is literally no information on them.

[Gallia-]

what's a siege tank and what makes it heavy?

[Fordorsia]

what's a siege tank and what makes it heavy?

A tank that moves through cities not giving a fuck about anything. Ludacris armour and firepower

It's how Fordorsia do

[Yukonastan]

what's a siege tank and what makes it heavy?

A weight of over 70 tons, armored to take hits from all sides, 3 gallon a mile fuel efficiency, and a ludicrous main gun.

---

(Image)
Is this a stealthed upgrade for the leo 2? Or are they just stealth smoke launchers on the back there?

Those are stealth holes. They make it stealthy.

Still don't know why the Swiss would plate over their Leo's smoke launchers, never seen that before.

[Padnak]

In essence a siege tank is basically this:



40cm rocket guns woop woop

[The Kievan People]

It's probably a Galix smoke launcher system. Like on the Leclerc and Strv. 122.

[Yukonastan]

SO.

Tangent time.

Who here has heard of the Abrams Dieselization anno 2014? Takes an MTU 883 V12 and pops it in place of the jet engine it uses now. Figures of a 50% reduction in fuel use, a 50% increase in combat range, the ability to walk behind it without getting fried like a chicken, low maintenance, and all that fun stuff are being tossed around.

Do you think it's worth it, should the US consider re-engining the Abrams fleet whenever they come in for a refurb?

[The Akasha Colony]

SO.

Tangent time.

Who here has heard of the Abrams Dieselization anno 2014? Takes an MTU 883 V12 and pops it in place of the jet engine it uses now. Figures of a 50% reduction in fuel use, a 50% increase in combat range, the ability to walk behind it without getting fried like a chicken, low maintenance, and all that fun stuff are being tossed around.

Do you think it's worth it, should the US consider re-engining the Abrams fleet whenever they come in for a refurb?

They probably won't. Even better engines than MTU 883 have been developed in the past (dAIPS), and were not adopted then. The heat problem isn't really an issue anyway as long as an exhaust deflector is attached. And the problem with the maintenance isn't the engine design for AGT-1500, it's the age of the engines in service and an insufficient maintenance budget. If the Army has to choose between other updated systems or an updated engine, they'd choose the former, since currently the AGT-1500 provides satisfactory mobility and range. It's expensive to fuel and support, but those costs are usually not paid attention to as much as upfront procurement costs.

[Yukonastan]

SO.

Tangent time.

Who here has heard of the Abrams Dieselization anno 2014? Takes an MTU 883 V12 and pops it in place of the jet engine it uses now. Figures of a 50% reduction in fuel use, a 50% increase in combat range, the ability to walk behind it without getting fried like a chicken, low maintenance, and all that fun stuff are being tossed around.

Do you think it's worth it, should the US consider re-engining the Abrams fleet whenever they come in for a refurb?

They probably won't. Even better engines than MTU 883 have been developed in the past (dAIPS), and were not adopted then. The heat problem isn't really an issue anyway as long as an exhaust deflector is attached. And the problem with the maintenance isn't the engine design for AGT-1500, it's the age of the engines in service and an insufficient maintenance budget. If the Army has to choose between other updated systems or an updated engine, they'd choose the former, since currently the AGT-1500 provides satisfactory mobility and range. It's expensive to fuel and support, but those costs are usually not paid attention to as much as upfront procurement costs.

But that's the thing, since the engines are continually being refurbished and worn out, they're at something like half the design maintenance interval between overhauls now. At some point they will have to be replaced (especially as the plans are for the Abrams fleet to serve through the 2040s), and since Honeywell doesn't produce AGTs any more, at some point the US will seriously have to start thinking about new power packs, and the pack that GDLS has developed at this point is basically drop-in. There's not a lot more research that needs to be done to get them installed, and diesel engines are far more advanced now than they were in the '70s/'80s.

[The Akasha Colony]

But that's the thing, since the engines are continually being refurbished and worn out, they're at something like half the design maintenance interval between overhauls now. At some point they will have to be replaced (especially as the plans are for the Abrams fleet to serve through the 2040s), and since Honeywell doesn't produce AGTs any more, at some point the US will seriously have to start thinking about new power packs, and the pack that GDLS has developed at this point is basically drop-in. There's not a lot more research that needs to be done to get them installed, and diesel engines are far more advanced now than they were in the '70s/'80s.

But in turn that's also the thing: the engines are old, they're worn out, but they can still be used, and the people making the procurement decisions aren't the ones maintaining the engines on the ground.

That aside, the MTU 880 series dates from the 70s/80s. MTU already developed the newer 890 series. The US AIPS program in the 1980s-1990s achieved better results from both its turbine and its diesel competitors than the 883 (smaller volume, greater power output). The US didn't take Cummins or GE up on their offer back then (although the GE turbine entrant was the LV-100 that was supposed to be used in the ill-fated Crusader). The MTU 883 is also a good deal heavier than the AGT-1500, which is rather problematic when the goal is to reduce the weight (or at least severely restrict further increases) of future generations.

Could the Abrams use a new engine? Sure. But it could use a lot of other things too, in the eyes of the procurement and program management officials. Which is why ATM the engine is lower on the priority list at the moment. Especially since despite the Abrams' huge fuel consumption, it's a minority among the vehicles in a brigade, and that's before considering usage patterns and other units (e.g. aviation brigades) that may use even more fuel.

[GraySoap]

Newest Russian/French developed IFV has a semi-auto 57mm cannon it.

German Marder I prototype had a 57mm:


Damn beautiful.

[New Vihenia]

Newest Russian/French developed IFV has a semi-auto 57mm cannon it.

German Marder I prototype had a 57mm:


Damn beautiful.

So, how many ppl it can carry ?

[Elan Valleys]

So according to the Steel Beasts wiki, the L7 105 can penetrate 530mm RHAe at 4000m. Does anyone have any figures for closer ranges?

[The Soodean Imperium]

Personally I plan on fitting a 50mm autocannon to the Soodean "Tank Support Vehicle" - whenever I get around to designing it in detail. My rationale is that it would offer greater effective range and hitting power than the 30mms on the IFVs, but better rate of fire and anti-helicopter performance than the 125mms on the tanks, without venturing into the 60-100mm gap where the tradeoffs aren't worthwhile. But that's just my two cents.

>Not a 50mm smoothbore APFSDS cannon for rekking BMPs with a 30mm airbursting coax for removing ATGM campers

You've failed son.

50mm rifled cannon with HE and APFSDS-T (slip ring or however 2A42 does it) and a 38mm (?) airbursting AGL on the commander's RWS for rekking MANPATS teams when the 50mm is busy.

Will probably have ATGMs too, possibly Oyashimese CKEM if that isn't too lulzy.

[Laywenrania]

Would be a not-Tunguska be at a major disadvantage if mounted at a wheeled chassis? (Asking because apparently many SPAAGs are mounted on tracked vehicles).

And rather mount a Tunguska-like missile or an IR Igla-like?

[Malay Raya]

Also M23 Heavy Siege Tank. Everyone loves da sieging

Just waiting for World of Tanks to use my blueprints even though there is literally no information on them.

1. Get access to a nation's tank design archives
2. Plant the blueprint inside any suitable documents
3. ???
4. Profit

[Stahn]

Davidian IFV with universal turret:

[New Tyran]

That's gorgeous.

[Mefpan]

I wish I could into IFVs and APCs.

But I'm never satisfied with how they turn out.

[Stahn]

That's gorgeous.

Thanks!