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

[Virana]

While crew comfort is partially a concern, one of the main uses for air conditioning in armored vehicles (esp in the desert) is to prevent computers/electronics from overheating iirc.

You're in a big metal box, with a large heat source in the rear, and heat generators from the electronics and hydraulics.
NS-scale air conditioning is impossible.

Not entirely sure how this is relevant to my comment, but I agree.

edit: tank porn

[Rich and Corporations]

German tanks spraying hot projectiles at a target.

[Stahn]

Perhaps unmanned killing machines should be outlawed? What do you think?

I am talking about remote conrolled as well.

[The Akasha Colony]

Perhaps unmanned killing machines should be outlawed? What do you think?

I am talking about remote conrolled as well.

Not really. It's a pretty arbitrary concept, from a moral point of view. Especially since the nature of a 'killing machine' is incredibly vague. Does this mean all missiles are banned? After all, what's the difference between a VLS operator on an Arleigh Burke 500 miles off the coast pressing the launch button for a Tomahawk and some guy in an air base in Colorado firing Hellfires from a Predator?

[Anemos Major]

Thought this ought to be shared.

Oh, and - page mandatory porn -

[Imperializt Russia]

Perhaps unmanned killing machines should be outlawed? What do you think?

I am talking about remote conrolled as well.

Not really. It's a pretty arbitrary concept, from a moral point of view. Especially since the nature of a 'killing machine' is incredibly vague. Does this mean all missiles are banned? After all, what's the difference between a VLS operator on an Arleigh Burke 500 miles off the coast pressing the launch button for a Tomahawk and some guy in an air base in Colorado firing Hellfires from a Predator?

According to public opinion?
Everything, because the guy in Colorado is objectively evil. Apparently.

[Oaledonia]

tank pr0n for the pr0n godz

[Stahn]

Ah, the Advanced Mortar System or whatever it is called.

Yes, it is pretty awesome. And I like the CV-90 as well.

[The Soodean Imperium]

Another mandatory -90- image:



The famous "Flying Tank" stunt. Not to be confused with the Soviet Union's other attempt at a flying tank.

[Oaledonia]

Another mandatory -90- image:

(Image)

The famous "Flying Tank" stunt. Not to be confused with the Soviet Union's other attempt at a flying tank.

American vehicles master race

[The Kievan People]

Perhaps unmanned killing machines should be outlawed? What do you think?

I am talking about remote conrolled as well.

The "drone" debate is the DU debate all over again. Empirical evidence of a real problem is conspicuously absent, the possible alternatives do not not actually address the alleged problem, the only ones who care are the usual crowd of image-conscious European governments that can safely take cover under the US security umbrella...

[Purpelia]

Perhaps unmanned killing machines should be outlawed? What do you think?

I am talking about remote conrolled as well.

The "drone" debate is the DU debate all over again. Empirical evidence of a real problem is conspicuously absent, the possible alternatives do not not actually address the alleged problem, the only ones who care are the usual crowd of image-conscious European governments that can safely take cover under the US security umbrella...

I don't really see what you want to say there. Empirical evidence of a real problem is not only present but outright obvious for anyone willing to look. That problem being that america is killing innocent civilians all around the world. Now where we agree is that the fact that they are using drones to do it is completely secondary. And that the focus of the problem has been shifted from the crime to the means. And the reason for this is that image-conscious European governments want to have their cake (american superiority bulling the rest of the world for them whilst they stay away looking clean) and eat it too (look as if they are doing something against said bullying).

But that's capitalist imperialism for you.

[Vetok]

tank pr0n for the pr0n godz

What is that and where can I get one?

[Purpelia]

tank pr0n for the pr0n godz

What is that and where can I get one?

It's a CV90 with an AMOS turret. Basically a full auto heavy mortar carrier.

[The Kievan People]

That problem being that america is killing innocent civilians all around the world. Now where we agree is that the fact that they are using drones to do it is completely secondary.

Killing Islamists is a service to humanity.

[Imperializt Russia]

The "drone" debate is the DU debate all over again. Empirical evidence of a real problem is conspicuously absent, the possible alternatives do not not actually address the alleged problem, the only ones who care are the usual crowd of image-conscious European governments that can safely take cover under the US security umbrella...

I don't really see what you want to say there. Empirical evidence of a real problem is not only present but outright obvious for anyone willing to look. That problem being that america is killing innocent civilians all around the world. Now where we agree is that the fact that they are using drones to do it is completely secondary. And that the focus of the problem has been shifted from the crime to the means. And the reason for this is that image-conscious European governments want to have their cake (american superiority bulling the rest of the world for them whilst they stay away looking clean) and eat it too (look as if they are doing something against said bullying).

But that's capitalist imperialism for you.

Even news articles that try to paint the drone programme in a bad light (without going into US IMPERIALISTS madness) admit that it has a 75% combatant casualty rate (or to use the correct term, suspected militant).

[Gallia-]

That problem being that america is killing innocent civilians all around the world. Now where we agree is that the fact that they are using drones to do it is completely secondary.

Killing Islamists is a service to humanity.

This dude knows stuff.

[Spirit of Hope]

I don't really see what you want to say there. Empirical evidence of a real problem is not only present but outright obvious for anyone willing to look. That problem being that america is killing innocent civilians all around the world. Now where we agree is that the fact that they are using drones to do it is completely secondary. And that the focus of the problem has been shifted from the crime to the means. And the reason for this is that image-conscious European governments want to have their cake (american superiority bulling the rest of the world for them whilst they stay away looking clean) and eat it too (look as if they are doing something against said bullying).

But that's capitalist imperialism for you.

Even news articles that try to paint the drone programme in a bad light (without going into US IMPERIALISTS madness) admit that it has a 75% combatant casualty rate (or to use the correct term, suspected militant).

Yes, but most of those drone strikes are in territory not under US control. Pakistan, being the primary place where these drone strikes take place, is in a rather awkward situation. It simply can't control its boarders and keep militants from crossing the boarder or really crack down on them inside its own territory, even though what looks like a majority of the country, and most of its leadership, would probably like to do that. But at the same time the US is going full IMPERIALIST by just deciding that we don't care, flying the drones in and carrying out the strikes anyways.

The big difference comes in that for some reason people seam to be more "ok" with drones violating a nations sovereignty than with maned aircraft doing the same.

But this thread isn't really the place to discuss drone policy, so I'm going to stop and think about armored vehicles.

(Image)

It looks like one of those guys is on a lawn chair to me. Which is really weird.

[Imperializt Russia]

Even news articles that try to paint the drone programme in a bad light (without going into US IMPERIALISTS madness) admit that it has a 75% combatant casualty rate (or to use the correct term, suspected militant).

Yes, but most of those drone strikes are in territory not under US control. Pakistan, being the primary place where these drone strikes take place, is in a rather awkward situation. It simply can't control its boarders and keep militants from crossing the boarder or really crack down on them inside its own territory, even though what looks like a majority of the country, and most of its leadership, would probably like to do that. But at the same time the US is going full IMPERIALIST by just deciding that we don't care, flying the drones in and carrying out the strikes anyways.

The big difference comes in that for some reason people seam to be more "ok" with drones violating a nations sovereignty than with maned aircraft doing the same.

But this thread isn't really the place to discuss drone policy, so I'm going to stop and think about armored vehicles.

(Image)

It looks like one of those guys is on a lawn chair to me. Which is really weird.

I thought that too, on reflection it looks like a weirdly-shaped hatch.
Which it entirely could be, since it's some sort of Merkava.

Pakistan does consent to the drone strikes by the way, since it's a more diplomatically acceptable programme than the US occupying western Pakistan.
It just doesn't consent to the large numbers of civilian casualties in the execution of the programme. Of course, why would you?
But, civilian deaths are broadly going down and make up about 1-25% of the casualties, depending on who you believe who's in a place to actually make an accurate (read, informed) assessment.

[Spirit of Hope]

Yes, but most of those drone strikes are in territory not under US control. Pakistan, being the primary place where these drone strikes take place, is in a rather awkward situation. It simply can't control its boarders and keep militants from crossing the boarder or really crack down on them inside its own territory, even though what looks like a majority of the country, and most of its leadership, would probably like to do that. But at the same time the US is going full IMPERIALIST by just deciding that we don't care, flying the drones in and carrying out the strikes anyways.

The big difference comes in that for some reason people seam to be more "ok" with drones violating a nations sovereignty than with maned aircraft doing the same.

But this thread isn't really the place to discuss drone policy, so I'm going to stop and think about armored vehicles.



It looks like one of those guys is on a lawn chair to me. Which is really weird.

I thought that too, on reflection it looks like a weirdly-shaped hatch.
Which it entirely could be, since it's some sort of Merkava.

Pakistan does consent to the drone strikes by the way, since it's a more diplomatically acceptable programme than the US occupying western Pakistan.
It just doesn't consent to the large numbers of civilian casualties in the execution of the programme. Of course, why would you?
But, civilian deaths are broadly going down and make up about 1-25% of the casualties, depending on who you believe who's in a place to actually make an accurate (read, informed) assessment.

I realized it was a weird hatch, I just prefer the image of someone carting around a lawn chair on top of there tank, and sitting in it while firing. Add in a cooler full of bears (or whatever alcoholic beverage you prefer) and it's not that bad an idea.

Pakistan publicly complains about them, but must have some type of closed door deal letting them happen. Doesn't mean they have to like the necessity of it. Really there is no good way for pakistan to deal with the problem.

[Registug]

Another mandatory -90- image:

(Image)

The famous "Flying Tank" stunt. Not to be confused with the Soviet Union's other attempt at a flying tank.

Did someone say flying tank?

[Crookfur]

All this talks of droens and unmanned tank reminds me that these have been with us since day one. Little Willie or Mother (i cna never remeber which one) drove for over a mile and crossed several obstacles completely unmamnned whislt being demosntrated to the King.

This wasn;t actually deliberate and the King didn't know that it unnmanned, the tank had started out with a full crew but all of them where knocked unconscious after the vehicle experienced a particulalry long drop on the reverse side of one of the demonstration obstacles....


as to tank crew cooling the system the US currently sues is this: http://www.cobham.com/media/418011/mcs%20datasheet.pdf

finally on the guy on top of the tank, it really doesn;t look like a turret but soem sort of solidly mounted and protected seat, probabaly for an instructor or judge/score keeper who is aprt of whatever exercise they are on and IIRC its not unsual for such individuals to use dekc chairs and such like thigns to sit on whislt drillign and keeping an eye on thier charges. FV432 driving instrcutors actually just sat on the hull to the right of the driver's hatch. A particularly exctiing perch but it allowed to to communicate with the trainee by means of shoving your hands in front of the his face if the trainee wasn't listening well.

[The Soodean Imperium]

I realized it was a weird hatch, I just prefer the image of someone carting around a lawn chair on top of there tank, and sitting in it while firing. Add in a cooler full of bears (or whatever alcoholic beverage you prefer) and it's not that bad an idea.

Add in a cooler full of bears (or whatever alcoholic beverage you prefer) and it's not that bad an idea.

cooler full of bears

bears

Meanwhile in Russia...

[The Soodean Imperium]

All this talks of droens and unmanned tank reminds me that these have been with us since day one. Little Willie or Mother (i cna never remeber which one) drove for over a mile and crossed several obstacles completely unmamnned whislt being demosntrated to the King.

This wasn;t actually deliberate and the King didn't know that it unnmanned, the tank had started out with a full crew but all of them where knocked unconscious after the vehicle experienced a particulalry long drop on the reverse side of one of the demonstration obstacles....

On that note, the Soviets actually did built several working remote-controlled AFVs in the 1930s. They were called "Teletanks," and essentially consisted of an existing light tank modified with motorized steering and turret traverse controls. The idea was that a skeleton crew would drive it to the battlefield, dismount, and direct it toward a heavily fortified enemy position from a safe distance. It was armed with a flamethrower or machine-gun (the operator estimate-aimed these from a distance), or a large demolition charge to be dumped off the back.

That being said, this is a textbook case of "things that technically functioned but were utterly useless in practice."

[The Kievan People]

That being said, this is a textbook case of "things that technically functioned but were utterly useless in practice."

OrAreThey?

Remotely operated armored engineering vehicles still occupy their little niche. Notably in the USSR they were used to help build the sarcophagus at Chernobyl.