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

[Khytenna]

but the new one will be smoothbore

i am thinking have best of both worlds.

meaning that my Main battle tank will use Smoothbored whilst a my medium tanks will be rifled. so that means my Armoured divisons will have MBT, Med tanks, HIFV's and IFVs.

Medium tanks and MBTs fulfill a very similar role doctrine wise, and using both a medium tank and MBT would likely be redundant and piss off logistics officers. You could probably go extended range full bore, which offers the advantages of rifling and smoothbore.

hmmm, but Accuracy would be lost, well at lest the IFV i will be using riffled weapons, not so much a big hitter, but at lest it can hit.

i am also planing for my Mechinised divisons (which i plan to be manly based around the idea of mobility) to use light tanks so that it can have something that is very hitting but also fits in with the Mobility thing.

would you say this is a good idea?

[United States of PA]

What's funny is that one of my prototype tanks the Atrox bares a quite interesting resemblance to the M8 Li Toneur Medium Tank, at least to me it does. (not saying anything is going on, only that its funny that I think they are similar)

Arjun? M8s picture is really a combination of a Type 90 turret and M1A1 Hull.

Albeit this leads to a incredibly reduced barrel life, and why i recently asked about which composites make the best barrel wear reducers, since Chromium Lined no longer does the job.

OI, just remembered. I have an article that I've taken a lot (literally like taken stuff) from about how to reduce barrel wear. Its from '04 so its not that old and should be a good starting point.

Here you go:
http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/pdf/AMPQ8_4ART08.pdf

Thanks

this has got me thinking about tanks for my nations, i dont no what to get i like the lethality you can get from smoothbore but the range and accuracy of rifled is certainly something i would like.

what do you think is better NS?

Depends on the range you expect to be engaging at. Is it over 3,000m or under? Rifled is superior past because it is more likely to reliably hit the target. Smoothbore is superior under it because of greater MV and a wider range of shells.

but the new one will be smoothbore

Everyone loves to state this but does not know the reasoning behind it.


The reason the Brits are considering replacing the L30A1 with a Rheinmetall L/55 Smoothbore is because they stopped ammo production for the L30A1 a long time ago, and are now running short of ammo stocks. The government wants to switch to smoothbore because than they can take advantage of German production and lol massive American stocks. The Army wants to restart production because the L30A1 is in pretty much all ways superior. Nothing will occur on this matter until they do literally run out of ammo, at which point i predict they will restart ammo production, because the army will through one helluva hissy fit if they had to use Rheinmetall guns.

Medium tanks and MBTs fulfill a very similar role doctrine wise

MEDIUM TANKS AND MBTS ARE TWO TOTALLY DIFFERENT DESIGNATIONS.


Medium Tank fits the nation who uses it. Main Battle Tank simply means your main, or most numerous tank. Therefore, you can have 400 medium tanks like say, the Leopard 2A6M, and 1,200 like tanks like the M551 Sheridan. The Sheridan would be your MBT.

You could probably go extended range full bore, which offers the advantages of rifling and smoothbore.

NO IT DOESNT.

This misconception probably has something to do with my own wording of the writeup for the M8, but all ERFB does is slightly increase the MV using the same propellant charge and shell. It does not do it to Smoothbore levels, only slightly, because you have a lot more friction to deal with.


The only reason why i manage similar MV to a smoothbore gun is because i trash my guns to like, 250-300 rounds before the barrel is completely shot. Smoothbores can manage over a thousand last i checked.

[Urban Metro]

[Soviet Haaregrad]

Medium tanks and MBTs fulfill a very similar role doctrine wise, and using both a medium tank and MBT would likely be redundant and piss off logistics officers. You could probably go extended range full bore, which offers the advantages of rifling and smoothbore.

To be nit-picky, a MBT is a medium tank packing the armament of a heavy tank. Once this gap was closed the lower cost and higher mobility of the MTB made the last heavy tanks obsolete.

[Deltania X]

if you think that panther is great tank quote

[Arisinga]

We use the Merkava mark 3 and in urban situations, Mark 4

[United States of PA]

Code: Select all

To be nit-picky, a MBT is a medium tank packing the armament of a heavy tank. Once this gap was closed the lower cost and higher mobility of the MTB made the last heavy tanks obsolete.

No it isnt, a Main Battle Tank is just that, your Main tank, as in Most numerous. It has nothing to do with the design of the tank.

[-Atlantias]

PT.


MT.


FT.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

Medium tanks and MBTs fulfill a very similar role doctrine wise, and using both a medium tank and MBT would likely be redundant and piss off logistics officers. You could probably go extended range full bore, which offers the advantages of rifling and smoothbore.

hmmm, but Accuracy would be lost, well at lest the IFV i will be using riffled weapons, not so much a big hitter, but at lest it can hit.

i am also planing for my Mechinised divisons (which i plan to be manly based around the idea of mobility) to use light tanks so that it can have something that is very hitting but also fits in with the Mobility thing.

would you say this is a good idea?

How would accuracy be lost? ERFB guns are pretty much rifled guns, but are designed very differently.

[Soviet Haaregrad]

Code: Select all

To be nit-picky, a MBT is a medium tank packing the armament of a heavy tank. Once this gap was closed the lower cost and higher mobility of the MTB made the last heavy tanks obsolete.

No it isnt, a Main Battle Tank is just that, your Main tank, as in Most numerous. It has nothing to do with the design of the tank.

You are mistaken.

Here's wiki because I'm too lazy to bother with better sources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_battle_tank
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_class ... attle_tank

[United States of PA]

No, i am not. Right there in your own source it states it was first applied to the M60 Patton after we retired that last M103 Battalion. We only had one Battle Tank in service.


Once again, the name Main Battle Tank translates literally into what it says. Your main tank, since every tank is a battle tank.

In fact, the actual definition of Main Battle Tank is that of any means of delivering a Main Gun to the battlefield.

In practical usage however, if you look at all of the tanks to have that name associated with it, they were either the most numerous tank at the time or would eventually/are eventually to become the most numerous. See M60, M1 Abrams, T-90, Leopard 2, Leopard 2, both Challengers, etc.

[Dostanuot Loj]

You are mistaken.

Here's wiki because I'm too lazy to bother with better sources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_battle_tank
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_class ... attle_tank

[My Job]
Actually, you are wrong, and PA is right. The main battle tank, by every definition I have ever come across, is simply the most numerous tank in service. US literature refers to the MBT as such, for example.

A medium tank is, by definition, a tank which holds a weight between what is classified as heavy and what is classified as light, and is itself entirely arbitrary. In the late 1980s the M48A5 and M60 were classified as medium tanks in US service, as they were lighter then the M1, but heavier then the M551. The M1, as intended to replace all Pattons, was simply referred to as the MBT, or new MBT.

The only worth while designations are role-related, not this weight BS or main one.
[/My Job]

This is supposed to be my day off.

[Khytenna]

hmmm, but Accuracy would be lost, well at lest the IFV i will be using riffled weapons, not so much a big hitter, but at lest it can hit.

i am also planing for my Mechinised divisons (which i plan to be manly based around the idea of mobility) to use light tanks so that it can have something that is very hitting but also fits in with the Mobility thing.

would you say this is a good idea?

How would accuracy be lost? ERFB guns are pretty much rifled guns, but are designed very differently.

i was applying my knowledge of muskets to my limted knowledge there, so how are ERFB guns accurate then?

[United States of PA]

ERFB is a rifled gun largely with a different type of shell. They grip the rifling better and create a seamless environment, increasing MV over a similar Rifled Gun but not to the MV degree of a Smoothbore gun.

EDIT: There is a reason ERFB guns are also refered to as FULL BORE RIFLING.

[Sevolpia]

Our current MBT, M1B2 Abrams, still holds the appearance on an Abrams. The armor has been upgraded with a new composite that helps cut the weight of the tank by 1/2 while increasing protection to surpass the M1A2 with reactive armor. The conventional turbine powerpack has been replaced with an arc reactor giving way to the nickname of "Electric Tank". It sports a 90mm rapid fire gauss gun with a coaxial 7.62mm Mini-Gun. There is also a remote comander's turret with the M-307/312 machine gun that is normally set up in the 25mm configuration and can engage airborne targets. The Engineer's hatch also sports a manual M-307/312 Machine gun kept in the .50 configuration. Both the M-307 and M-312 can be dismounted to be used in defensive postions. Top speed is 75mph with practically unlimited range. The tank has recently been fitted with a ground penetrating radar to search and detect mines and burried IEDs, it is tied into the commander's turret for detonation of detected mines.

[Senestrum]

i don't even know if the armor on the abrams makes up half its weight

also i dont see any mention of a lolzily upgraded drive train, which you need to take that kind of speed without breaking your running gear/suspension/transmission

[The Corparation]

(Image)

Our current MBT, M1B2 Abrams, still holds the appearance on an Abrams. The armor has been upgraded with a new composite that helps cut the weight of the tank by 1/2 while increasing protection to surpass the M1A2 with reactive armor. The conventional turbine powerpack has been replaced with an arc reactor giving way to the nickname of "Electric Tank". It sports a 90mm rapid fire rail gun with a coaxial 7.62mm Mini-Gun. There is also a remote comander's turret with the M-307/312 machine gun that is normally set up in the 25mm configuration and can engage airborne targets. The Engineer's hatch also sports a manual M-307/312 Machine gun kept in the .50 configuration. Both the M-307 and M-312 can be dismounted to be used in defensive postions. Top speed is 75mph with practically unlimited range. The tank has recently been fitted with a ground penetrating radar to search and detect mines and burried IEDs, it is tied into the commander's turret for detonation of detected mines.

Lol. Thats all I have to say.

[Rusikstan]

photobucket is filesize tyranny

I <3 u

wish I could be this good. You have no clue how much is upsets me that its done in paint...

What's funny is that one of my prototype tanks the Atrox bares a quite interesting resemblance to the M8 Li Toneur Medium Tank, at least to me it does. (not saying anything is going on, only that its funny that I think they are similar)

Arjun? M8s picture is really a combination of a Type 90 turret and M1A1 Hull.

Yes, I imagine scaled up the two would be similar, IMO. Well perhaps not, but I have an eye that says this red card looks the same as the green card b/c of thye both have the blue speckles.

[Licana]

lol and wankishly wank M1 Abrams.

There is no way you're going to cut the weight by half without removing all of the armour...especially with all of that crap you've added. You don't get rapid fire railguns, why? Because the barrel melts. So, unless you've got your barrel covered in liquid helium at all times of the day, with a constant resupply, you're not likely to get a railgun above a single round per minute. Also, I highly doubt that a tank can push 75 mph without destroying itself (treads, transmission, etc.) Not to mention your "25mm cannon capable of engaging air targets" lol, talk about worthless in it's role. This will do next to nothing against most airborne helicopters and CAS aircraft, which are unlikely to stay in one spot and conveniently let you shoot at them. You may as well tell your tank crews to "waste as much ammo as possible by shooting randomly into the sky." Drop the minigun, it's a worthless waste of ammo, and your ground penetrating RADAR is lulzy, because it's doubtful it would work...at all.

[Sevolpia]

i don't even know if the armor on the abrams makes up half its weight

also i dont see any mention of a lolzily upgraded drive train, which you need to take that kind of speed without breaking your running gear/suspension/transmission

well the weight is not only reduced in the armor but other compsites and technologies are used to reduce the weight also. The decreased weight would reduce stress on the drive train but of course any needed upgrades would be included. The tops speed is for road speed.

[GraySoap]

GraySoap Land Defense Forces Nsf-37J3 "Whiplash":

Image:

23rd Mechanized Infantry Division "Walpurges" in desert livery during their tour in the Lef Desert of Nomken
OOC: Yes, I know it is horrible and missing its sprocket. I'm too lazy to draw one (and not sure how).

Nsf-37J3 “Whiplash” Statistics:

Service:
Nsf-37A: 1988-1998
Nsf-37D: 1992-2004
Nsf-37F: 1998-2008
Nsf-37J: 2007-Onwards
Designer: Blautbaven Works (1985-1988),
Manufacturer: Nengom Heavy Industries, Blautbaven Works
Weight: 55,500kg
Height: 2.3m
Length: 10.5m (gun forward), 7.5m (hull)
Width: 3.6m
Crew: 3 (commander, gunner, driver)
Armament: Elevation Range of -6 to 17 degrees
- 1 x 125mm L/56 Smoothbore ETC cannon, bustle mounted autoloader (12 RPM, holds 32)
- 1 x 30x165mm L/80 co-axial ETC auto-cannon
- 1 x 7.62mm general purpose machine gun, remotely operated
- 6 x Smoke Grenade Launcher
- Integrated Fire Control System
Armor:
- Explosive Reactive Armor on glacis, turret front, hull sides
- Ceramic composite armor
Defense:
- Full nuclear, biological, radiological and chemical protection
- Air conditioning and air filtration
- Laser disrupting aerosol disbursal system
- Arena active protection system
- Shtora active missile defense system
Electronics:
- Ku-band radar system
- Battlefield communications and networking
- Laser warning system
- Laser dazzler
- Identification of Friend or Foe
- Forward looking infrared radar and thermal imaging
Engine: Deschen DE-208H 1500 HP twin turbocharged diesel V8 with 25HP auxiliary all-fuel turbine
Fuel Capacity: 1,300L in self-sealing tanks, 500L in external drums
Transmission: Mizzo & Millo 58F Hydro-mechanical (5 forward, 2 reverse)
HP/Tonne Ratio: 27 hp/tonne
Suspension: Hydro pneumatic
Range: 600 km
Speed: 70 km/h
Acceleration: 0 to 32 km/h in 6.5 seconds
Clearance: .5m
Gradient: 60%
Side Slope: 40%
Vertical Step: 1.4m
Trench: 2.8m
Fording: 1.1m (4m prepared)
Unit Cost: Nsf-37J3E: 11,565,000 USD

[St George of England]

Nice.

[Krakadarek]

1700 Upgraded t-55 enigma tanks.
2500 Miller Class Tanks
500 T-90,s
We are currently selling the T-55,s and Miller Class Tanks to replace them with something more modern.

[Esternial]

(Image)
The Rangers are mainly used for heavy assault. They operate best in open terrains.
(Image)
The Partisan is pretty good on every terrain, but pack less of a punch than the Ranger

the ranger looks like he will fell towords front

Don't worry, it has plenty of counterweight to keep it on the ground.

[Licana]

(Image)
The Rangers are mainly used for heavy assault. They operate best in open terrains.

*rolls up newspaper*
No! Multibarrel tanks bad!