Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation [NO MECHS] Mk.V

[Saphirasia]

Anything armed with the KwK/PaK 43 8.8cm L/71. JagdPanther, Ferdi/Elefant, Royal Tiger. MAYBE the KwK/PaK 42 7.5cm L/70, but not totally sure.

What about the 17pdr, 90mm on the Jackson/Pershing, etc

17pdr with APDS...possibly. Normal APCBC, probably not.

As for the 90mm M3, I don't think so. The higher-velocity 90mm on the M47 and M48 Pattons, though, yes.

[Oaledonia]

>Needs a modern version of the M3 Lee
</3

[San-Silvacian]

Mind you, most of these shots will only work in the rear and rear-sides of most IRL MBTs.

[A Hooloovoo]

>Needs a modern version of the M3 Lee
</3

just get an Abrams or whatever the fuck, sponson mount a 105 or 120, and then have a remote turret on top with a chain gun/autocannon like the Bushmaster or something

[Registug]

>Needs a modern version of the M3 Lee
</3

just get an Abrams or whatever the fuck, sponson mount a 105 or 120, and then have a remote turret on top with a chain gun or something

But then you won't have the hilariously tall vehicle profile

[Oaledonia]

>Needs a modern version of the M3 Lee
</3

just get an Abrams or whatever the fuck, sponson mount a 105 or 120, and then have a remote turret on top with a chain gun/autocannon like the Bushmaster or something

That's such a bad idea it cannot into fail!

[Saphirasia]

>Needs a modern version of the M3 Lee
</3

just get an Abrams or whatever the fuck, sponson mount a 105 or 120, and then have a remote turret on top with a chain gun/autocannon like the Bushmaster or something

Stick a Bushmaster turret on top of one of the German casemate-tank prototypes based on the MBT-70 hull.

[A Hooloovoo]

or S-tank with a turret on top

[Oaledonia]

I'll just use the M3 in PMT.

What could possibly go wrong?

[A Hooloovoo]

I'll just use the M3 in PMT.

What could possibly go wrong?

nothing, M3 Lee is glorious

were there any M3 Lees that had the turret removed? then it could into TD yes?

[Mizrad]

Possibly, I've heard of many different modifications made to the M3 Lee.

[A Hooloovoo]

M3 Lee can into glory

also why did the Lee and Sherman both have that rounded glacis?

[San-Silvacian]

M3 Lee can into glory

also why did the Lee and Sherman both have that rounded glacis?

cast hulls.

Rivets on tanks are totes bad.

[Connori Pilgrims]

I'll just use the M3 in PMT.

What could possibly go wrong?

nothing, M3 Lee is glorious

were there any M3 Lees that had the turret removed? then it could into TD yes?

Gun Motor Carriage T40/M9. M3 without turret with a 3" M1918 gun like the Wolverine. Open topped. Did not enter service because they weren't fast enough and because the gun to be used was no longer in production.

[San-Silvacian]

I'll just use the M3 in PMT.

What could possibly go wrong?

nothing, M3 Lee is glorious

were there any M3 Lees that had the turret removed? then it could into TD yes?

Nothing of that sort, however there were a number of variants that used the chassis.

i.e. the M3 Priest, Ram Tank, etc.

Though it didn't number the Pz IV, M4 or T-34 in terms of everything produced off it, it powered the early-WW2 allies tank forces until proper units were able to replace it, even then some M3 chassis were used into the mid-1950s by the Commonwealth.

[Rich and Corporations]

Isn't the M4 simply built on top of the M3 chassis?

Thus nearly every tank of WWII was based on the M3?

[Elan Valleys]

Isn't the M4 simply built on top of the M3 chassis?

Thus nearly every tank of WWII was based on the M3?

I'm sure that the Churchill, P I, P II, P III, P IV, Panther, Tiger, Matilda, Valentine, Cruiser tank series, Crusader, Covenanter, King Tiger, T34, IS 2, KV series would be surprised to know that they were based on the M3 Lee.


Especially the ones which predate it.

[Rich and Corporations]

Holy durp. I mean nearly every vehicle built in WWII by the United States.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

I'd like to see you try and fit some bustle stowage around that or move a box over a metre in length elsewhere in an existing turret.

Considering that NS tank rounds are also roughly a meter in length....
I don't understand your point. I mean, it's the size of four tank rounds as well as part clearances for them.


And that tank you linked? It's a light tank. Not a MBT.

It's kind of an irrelevance.
It's a big fucking box.
Big fucking boxes detract from the already spartan interior space of a battle tank.
You'd need a specially built turret to accommodate this.

You wouldn't put it in the bustle because it would reduce (in the best estimate, in an orientation we don't know is even effective or efficient) your capacity by at least four rounds. It'd also be just as vulnerable to fire as your ammunition.

[Crookfur]

also thanks guys, this has been a neat little discussion. I always love wondering how an underdog tank could do against a vastly superior one.

Now this'll sound completely retarded but could any WW2 tank kill a modern MBT? Obviously not from the front, I know.

just to throw some last minute (i.e. late) randomness into the equation:

The Stuart has 2 othe roptions both of which require rather uber mary sue gunnrery:

option 1: hit the road wheels and score mobility kill for great justice. An imobilised german tank crew is not going to sit aorund and try to get a revenege kill they are goign to get the F8ck out before the fighte rbombers come for them. IIRC this was not unknown.

option 2: if german big ass tank is sitting on a nice hard surface and you can get the angle right you can try skipping a 37mm ap shot off the ground and into the belly plate. Iirc it has been claimed that allied pilots used this approach to kill tigers with .50cals. However given that anything on the ground that an allied pilot straffed was instantly claimed as a tiger kill you have to take this with a huge pinch of salt.

[San-Silvacian]

Isn't the M4 simply built on top of the M3 chassis?

Thus nearly every tank of WWII was based on the M3?

No there were some serious modifications between the M4 chassis and the M3 chassis

[United Republics of Aralon]

I'm working on my modern forces and I have a wild idea about a hybrid engine driven MBT.
It would have a small turbine type engine for electricity generation, and would be powered by separate electric engines at all driven wheels. It would have a modular outlay for fuel tanks/ accumulator packs.
As I see it would loose some tactical mobility, but it'd be more logisitcally independent due to the fact that it could use conventional fuel as well as power grids, solar panels, left behind battery packs, it could feed off off virtually anything from car batteries to booze. As well as an electric solution is probably more fuel efficient than a complex transmission. Some redundancy would also be gained by using multiple engines and power packs distributed across the chassis.
Could such a vehicle enter service by 2020-30?

[San-Silvacian]

I'm working on my modern forces and I have a wild idea about a hybrid engine driven MBT.
It would have a small turbine type engine for electricity generation, and would be powered by separate electric engines at all driven wheels. It would have a modular outlay for fuel tanks/ accumulator packs.
As I see it would loose some tactical mobility, but it'd be more logisitcally independent due to the fact that it could use conventional fuel as well as power grids, solar panels, left behind battery packs, it could feed off off virtually anything from car batteries to booze. As well as an electric solution is probably more fuel efficient than a complex transmission. Some redundancy would also be gained by using multiple engines and power packs distributed across the chassis.
Could such a vehicle enter service by 2020-30?

For it to feed off anything you'd need a turbine engine, which means for shit range, consumption and a more maintenance intensive process.

iirc Vitaphone Racing has a hybrid MBT engine.

[Vitaphone Racing]

I'm working on my modern forces and I have a wild idea about a hybrid engine driven MBT.
It would have a small turbine type engine for electricity generation, and would be powered by separate electric engines at all driven wheels. It would have a modular outlay for fuel tanks/ accumulator packs.
As I see it would loose some tactical mobility, but it'd be more logisitcally independent due to the fact that it could use conventional fuel as well as power grids, solar panels, left behind battery packs, it could feed off off virtually anything from car batteries to booze. As well as an electric solution is probably more fuel efficient than a complex transmission. Some redundancy would also be gained by using multiple engines and power packs distributed across the chassis.
Could such a vehicle enter service by 2020-30?

Okay.

Yes, you could have a hybrid vehicle in service by 2020. You could have a hybrid armoured vehicle in service right now. The reason why the don't is because hybrid designs are space-inefficient and they aren't really practical or worthwhile unless you're working in the heavier vehicle weights and have reasonably big dimensions to work with.

Electric drivetrains work like this: you have an engine which powers a generator. The generator then feeds electricity through modulators, alternators and all that jazz to an electric motor(s). The devices which provide mechanical force are referred to as motors, not engines. In this context, the term engine and motor aren't interchangeable. "engine" in design typically refers to combustion engines.

Now, the power requirement for the tank doesn't change because you're now using electric motors therefore your "small" turbine won't be small. It's still going to be big enough to produce the same amount of power as you'd need from a non-hybrid engine, maybe slightly smaller if you're using battery pack assistance.

Solar panels aren't energy efficient enough for this and they never will be, regardless of tech. Per square metre, they might provide 2kw. So if you cover your entire tank with panels you'll get a max 6kw. In favourable conditions. Consider that this is roughly 0.6% of the maximum power of your engine, not worth it.

Power grids... not really likely to be up and running in a conflict zone where MBT's are present. Furthermore, stopping for 12 hours to charge them isn't the smartest thing to do.

Replacing battery packs... won't work. It's going to be too hard to extract a battery pack from a tank and swap it. It's an idea that wasn't good enough for cars; it would be much easier to change the pack in cars so think about how unworkable this is for tanks.

So that's something to think about.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Proposed fast-charge stations for electric cars (I believe would be sited at dealerships) were claimed to offer up to thirty minutes to full charge, compared to the 12-hour cycle on a mains socket.

This probably isn't substantially longer than to fill a 1900 litre tank on an Abrams, assuming comparable range is offered.
Since 10% or so of an engine's fuel is spent idling, a battery-driven electric drive might offer range increases, would it not?