Your Nation's Main Battle Tank (No Mechs) [Part 1]

[Soviet Haaregrad]

This should sum it up:
(Image)

Lrn2properlyupgradeyouroldT-72s.

Look up the PT-91 Twardy, M-95, Tank EX and TAR-125 for some ideas.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

why do people keep using that image from battlestrats?
anyway a T-84 could beat a T-90

But a T-90 can outperform a T-84 across a wide variety of roles.
Plus, a T-90 can likely out-kill a T-84 -

Due to the collapse of Soviet Union, Malshev Factory was no longer able to obtain ceremic armour modules from Russia and only the initial batch of T-84 were produced with such. Instead, later batches of T-84's composite armour is composed of special purpose rubber sandwiched between steel and alloy plates. The exclusion of ceremic plate from the tank's armour may indicate downgraded protection compared to older models.

- due to having more substantial armour systems with additional add-ons.

[Australien]

why do people keep using that image from battlestrats?
anyway a T-84 could beat a T-90

T-90 is cheaper and more similar to the T-72.

[Coltarin]

LY4A1 Wolfhound Main Battle Tank - Protectorate of LyrasKey Data

Crew 3 (Driver, Commander, Gunner)

Dimensions
Length (With Gun Forward) 9.52m
Height 2.68m
Width 4.1m (+ 0.60m with slat armour fitted)
Weight 75.83 tonnes
Ground Clearance Variable. Default at 50cm

Performance
Maximum (Governed) Speed 87 kph (54.4mph)
Cross Country Speed 63.4 kph
Speed, 10% Slope 31 kph
Speed, 60% slope 15 kph
Acceleration 0kph to 32 kph in 6.8 seconds
Range 600 km (505 km at operational cruising speed)

Manoeuvrability
Vertical Obstacle Crossing 116 cm (45 in)
Trench 300 cm (10 ft)
Suspension Hydropneumatic

Armament
Main Armament 120mm 55 calibre ETC smoothbore LY402 (45 rnds)
Coaxial Weapon KWF PAK2 25mm automatic cannon (550 rnds) OR 14.7mm LY60 HMG
Commander's Weapon 7.62mm machine gun, LY64 (2,400 rnds) on powered remote rotary platform OR 14.7mm LY60 HMG (700 rnds).
Additional Laterally mounted 4 barrelled multi-purpose grenade launchers
2 x TPFMI MkII “Helios II” BVR ATGM


Power
Propulsion 50L LY664 V10 multi-fuel propane-injected twin-turbo diesel 2,000 HP (1,500 kW) at 3000RPM.
Transmission Hydropneumatic automatic transmission (5 fwd gears, 2 rvse)
Power-to-Weight Ratio 26.37hp/ton

Armour and Protection
Armour Chobham, 4th Generation Composite, ERA blocks, slat attachments, dU mesh, North Point applique armour.
NBC Protection SCFM, clean cooled air, LYMkII CBRN overpressure system.
Missile Countermeasures GOLIATH APS.

[New Korongo]

-snip-

I highly doubt owning one makes it your main battle tank

[Anemos Major]

My Mountain Armour uses Lyran tanks.

[Xin Ming]

why do people keep using that image from battlestrats?
anyway a T-84 could beat a T-90

Cheaper > More > Quantity is a Quality all it's own, 6 T-90s own the shit out of the T-84.

[Mikedor]

It comes down more to crew quality than tank when the differences are that small.

[Xin Ming]

It comes down more to crew quality than tank when the differences are that small.

IRL speaking both nations who field it use a conscription policy in their army; there wouldn't be that much difference in crew quality, a bumbling moron is a bumbling moron whether he speaks Ukrainian or Russian.

[Greater Mexicania]

Right got it down now.

The Mexicanian Army operations 200 M-60A4 Battle Tanks as produced from the United States of Amerika as it's main battle tank.

The Mexicanian Republican Guard operates 40 CATTB Heavy Tanks in it's elite armored division.

[Bears Armed]

Guise guise, we all know that King Tigers mounting massive rail drivers and Chobam/composite armour is the best.

And with the crew armed with katanas, just in case, of course...

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

Anyway, I am working on the writeup for mine and Banjamos' joint tank project, and we have already agreed on several things, one of them being the existance of an unmanned turret. However, I have an idea that may be a great idea, or literally cause the turret to collapse in on itself. My idea is to have two turrets so to speak, an inner unmanned turret, and an outer 'fake turret' the outer turret would be significantly wider than the inner turret and would simply be thin plates of armour, and empty space. My idea is that the 'fake turret' would allow my tank to have lolzy amounts of spaced armour, giving the side of the turret almost the same CE protection value as the front due to the massive amount of spaced armour.

My questions are

Is this even possible, or will the outer turret just collapse? What if I added support beams or something?
Will it actually add any real protection?
Will it add so much weight that it isn't even worth it?

In reality the main reason I thought of doing this is because unmanned turrets may be more practical, but they are ugly, and I want a sexy tank, not an ugly monster with a puny looking turret.

[BorderWorlds]

Fix'd.

1. Chobham doesn't like sloped armour, IIRC.
2. lolwut?
3. Get out.

Why should he get out? Is it because you automatically rage at FT?

[Greater-Prussia]

Yuh, but that's too old, even for an impoverished army.

M46/47/48 series might be an idea.

pfft, DPRK uses T-34-85

NATO would tell you straight off the bat that that old bit of shit can still really fuck your day up in that shiny new tank of yours.

So go back to mocking the North Koreans now by all means.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

1. Chobham doesn't like sloped armour, IIRC.
2. lolwut?
3. Get out.

Why should he get out? Is it because you automatically rage at FT?

Because his ideas are awful, and after the 1950s the T-34 sucks no matter how you upgrade it.

[Mikedor]

Why should he get out? Is it because you automatically rage at FT?

Because his ideas are awful, and after the 1950s the T-34 sucks no matter how you upgrade it.

So much that NATO tankers were specifically warned about it in the Balkans?

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

Because his ideas are awful, and after the 1950s the T-34 sucks no matter how you upgrade it.

So much that NATO tankers were specifically warned about it in the Balkans?

Just because something sucks doesn't mean that you are invulnerable against it. Tanks are always a threat, but when it comes to other tanks, the T-34 is crap. Comparing a t-34 to a modern tank is like comparing a knight to Scorpion light tank.

[The Soviet Technocracy]

pfft, DPRK uses T-34-85

NATO would tell you straight off the bat that that old bit of shit can still really fuck your day up in that shiny new tank of yours.

So go back to mocking the North Koreans now by all means.

cuz i totally said otherwise

huge derp to you, bro

given North Korean training and ability, though, it's likely we'd see a Desert Storm 2: Electric Boogaloo with m1 tanks and k2s with steel penetrators sticking out of their armour plating, and probably a few isolated incidents of intelligent tank commanders using their vehicle's abilities to it's advantages and knocking out maybe one or two M1 or K1 tanks.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

So much that NATO tankers were specifically warned about it in the Balkans?

Just because something sucks doesn't mean that you are invulnerable against it. Tanks are always a threat, but when it comes to other tanks, the T-34 is crap. Comparing a t-34 to a modern tank is like comparing a knight to Scorpion light tank.

The T-34 has the exact same advantages it has against modern tanks as it did against the monstrous Tiger and King Tiger tanks of WWII - it's smaller and faster (those two I'm not 100% about), lighter, cheaper to produce, and faster to produce. En masse, I'd like to think they could obliterate NATO tank divisions, until you realise how 2,000 T-54 type tanks were obliterated in the 'Gulf by M1 Abrams and massed airstrikes without a single M1 lost to enemy fire. Then again, there was a lot of air power involved in that.

Nice 12,000 get as well.

[The Soviet Technocracy]

Just because something sucks doesn't mean that you are invulnerable against it. Tanks are always a threat, but when it comes to other tanks, the T-34 is crap. Comparing a t-34 to a modern tank is like comparing a knight to Scorpion light tank.

The T-34 has the exact same advantages it has against modern tanks as it did against the monstrous Tiger and King Tiger tanks of WWII - it's smaller and faster (those two I'm not 100% about), lighter, cheaper to produce, and faster to produce. En masse, I'd like to think they could obliterate NATO tank divisions, until you realise how 2,000 T-54 type tanks were obliterated in the 'Gulf by M1 Abrams and massed airstrikes without a single M1 lost to enemy fire. Then again, there was a lot of air power involved in that.

Nice 12,000 get as well.

Older things are generally more expensive and slower to produce, actually.

[Greater-Prussia]

NATO would tell you straight off the bat that that old bit of shit can still really fuck your day up in that shiny new tank of yours.

So go back to mocking the North Koreans now by all means.

cuz i totally said otherwise

huge derp to you, bro

given North Korean training and ability, though, it's likely we'd see a Desert Storm 2: Electric Boogaloo with m1 tanks and k2s with steel penetrators sticking out of their armour plating, and probably a few isolated incidents of intelligent tank commanders using their vehicle's abilities to it's advantages and knocking out maybe one or two M1 or K1 tanks.

stfu dude, i thought you were being a sarcastic ass.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

The T-34 has the exact same advantages it has against modern tanks as it did against the monstrous Tiger and King Tiger tanks of WWII - it's smaller and faster (those two I'm not 100% about), lighter, cheaper to produce, and faster to produce. En masse, I'd like to think they could obliterate NATO tank divisions, until you realise how 2,000 T-54 type tanks were obliterated in the 'Gulf by M1 Abrams and massed airstrikes without a single M1 lost to enemy fire. Then again, there was a lot of air power involved in that.

Nice 12,000 get as well.

Older things are generally more expensive and slower to produce, actually.

I'll admit I have no actual idea, but I'm certain that it doesn't cost anything like the $7 million USD to build an M1 that it does a T-34/85. Less advanced engine, completely mechanically/hand operated, no electronic warfare sensors beyond some IR sensors and minor electronics (maybe an auto-loader) added on post-production... I just can't accept that it can cost that much.

[The Soviet Technocracy]

cuz i totally said otherwise

huge derp to you, bro

given North Korean training and ability, though, it's likely we'd see a Desert Storm 2: Electric Boogaloo with m1 tanks and k2s with steel penetrators sticking out of their armour plating, and probably a few isolated incidents of intelligent tank commanders using their vehicle's abilities to it's advantages and knocking out maybe one or two M1 or K1 tanks.

stfu dude, i thought you were being a sarcastic ass.

no i was just throwing out old tanks still in use tbh

i think t-34 is as old as it gets still in use by modern army tho

[Senestrum]

Just because something sucks doesn't mean that you are invulnerable against it. Tanks are always a threat, but when it comes to other tanks, the T-34 is crap. Comparing a t-34 to a modern tank is like comparing a knight to Scorpion light tank.

The T-34 has the exact same advantages it has against modern tanks as it did against the monstrous Tiger and King Tiger tanks of WWII - it's smaller and faster (those two I'm not 100% about), lighter, cheaper to produce, and faster to produce. En masse, I'd like to think they could obliterate NATO tank divisions, until you realise how 2,000 T-54 type tanks were obliterated in the 'Gulf by M1 Abrams and massed airstrikes without a single M1 lost to enemy fire. Then again, there was a lot of air power involved in that.

Nice 12,000 get as well.

It certainly isn't any faster than most modern tanks. Also, it will only be able to reliably penetrate , oh, an Abrams, from the rear.

Also, I really wouldn't be surprised if an Abrams could take out a T-34 with training ammo.

[Montiar]

This thread just won't die.