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

[Mitheldalond]

So I'm thinking of making an armored force formed of WWII tanks as a sort of last ditch emergency reserve force. They'd be upgraded with modern engines (and probably suspension) and electronics as far as they are able. Excess crew members (radio operator) would be removed.

Matilda IIs as infantry support vehicles (so no change there). Their armor is probably good enough to stop some autocannon rounds, and certainly machine guns. I'd probably upgrade the 2 pounder (40mm) gun to a 40mm autocannon. It would probably need a larger turret for that, but that's no problem; they fitted a Cromwell turret to a Matilda, so we know it can be done. Engine and suspension would be replaced too, to hopefully increase the speed to around 30+ mph. Crew reduced to three, or possibly two (combining commander and gunner, with autoloaded gun). Necessary electronics installed in their place.

Panthers and/or Sherman Fireflies would be used to provide more firepower, and to kill IFVs and APCs and such. They would use modern ammo designed for their guns.

Tiger I would be used as a mobile gun system like the 105mm Stryker. Some might be modified and crammed into the role of a less than ideal MBT. They'd be up-gunned to mount a (probably low velocity) 105mm gun, and loaded up with LAHATs, since 105mm APFSDS isn't adequate to combat modern MBTs. Armor would be augmented with something like MEXAS. They'd mostly be used in this configuration to flesh out the main MBT force of 120mm armed Leopard C2 MEXAS tanks.

M18 Hellcats would be used as armed reconnaissance vehicles like the LAV-25. The gun is already good enough (with modern ammo) to deal with light armored vehicles at decent range, and 55-60mph (assuming that's accurate) is pretty darn good.

[The Akasha Colony]

So I'm thinking of making an armored force formed of WWII tanks as a sort of last ditch emergency reserve force. They'd be upgraded with modern engines (and probably suspension) and electronics as far as they are able. Excess crew members (radio operator) would be removed.

Matilda IIs as infantry support vehicles (so no change there). Their armor is probably good enough to stop some autocannon rounds, and certainly machine guns. I'd probably upgrade the 2 pounder (40mm) gun to a 40mm autocannon. It would probably need a larger turret for that, but that's no problem; they fitted a Cromwell turret to a Matilda, so we know it can be done. Engine and suspension would be replaced too, to hopefully increase the speed to around 30+ mph. Crew reduced to three, or possibly two (combining commander and gunner, with autoloaded gun). Necessary electronics installed in their place.

Panthers and/or Sherman Fireflies would be used to provide more firepower, and to kill IFVs and APCs and such. They would use modern ammo designed for their guns.

Tiger I would be used as a mobile gun system like the 105mm Stryker. Some might be modified and crammed into the role of a less than ideal MBT. They'd be up-gunned to mount a (probably low velocity) 105mm gun, and loaded up with LAHATs, since 105mm APFSDS isn't adequate to combat modern MBTs. Armor would be augmented with something like MEXAS. They'd mostly be used in this configuration to flesh out the main MBT force of 120mm armed Leopard C2 MEXAS tanks.

M18 Hellcats would be used as armed reconnaissance vehicles like the LAV-25. The gun is already good enough (with modern ammo) to deal with light armored vehicles at decent range, and 55-60mph (assuming that's accurate) is pretty darn good.

The amount of time, effort, money, resources, and training involved means you may as well just make new vehicles. In the end all you're recycling is the basic metal chassis and steel hull, and steel's cheap. If you're already going to be making new electronics, new guns, new suspensions, new turrets, new autoloaders, plus allocating the manpower to install these, you may as well just make a newer, lighter, and more efficient hull to carry it rather than recycling the old tubs since you really aren't saving anything in the end. You're already paying for the components that make up 90% of the vehicle's cost. Just build more modern vehicles your crews will actually know how to use.

And if you're so hard pressed that you've exhausted your supplies of everything more recent, including 1990s, 1980s, 1970s, 1960s, and 1950s vehicles so that you're all the way to the 1940s, I don't think they're going to save you even if they're completely overhauled.

[Kouralia]

Yes, this is actually a thing in the Gaiaverse, there's also still bayonet charges.

What, like in Real Life?

[Imperializt Russia]

You will still run out of RWS-mounted ammunition, and manually loading more of it is the only way to fix the problem in that case. As Akasha you said, having an internal supply nearly defeats the purpose of using such a unit. Having a limited but low-profile allotment of ammunition stored on the RWS itself is likely the most practical way to take care of these problems.

Or you can do what I did, and say screw RWS's, there for hippies! Real men come out of their tank and let the machine gun do the talking.

Yes, this is actually a thing in the Gaiaverse, there's also still bayonet charges.

Because bayonet charges into a weakened enemy position is cool.

Or in the case of the Boer War. Where two regiments, one Boer, the other Fusilier, ran low on ammo and settle it like men.

*end tried rant of not able to go to sleepness.*

Bayonet charges still happen in RL, even against insurgent opponents.

They're a highly effective tactic that are performed in certain circumstances.

[Kampala-]

You make bayonets versus insurgents sound like an exception.

If anything, that's the norm on undisciplined, untrained bushmen.

[Zeinbrad]

Yes, this is actually a thing in the Gaiaverse, there's also still bayonet charges.

What, like in Real Life?

More brutal and often ending in heavy casualties for both sides.

Bayonet training was all but abandoned by the GDF after the Boer rebellion, only the two shock troop regiments continued to practice it, due to be shock troops.

[Zeinbrad]

Or you can do what I did, and say screw RWS's, there for hippies! Real men come out of their tank and let the machine gun do the talking.

Yes, this is actually a thing in the Gaiaverse, there's also still bayonet charges.

Because bayonet charges into a weakened enemy position is cool.

Or in the case of the Boer War. Where two regiments, one Boer, the other Fusilier, ran low on ammo and settle it like men.

*end tried rant of not able to go to sleepness.*

Bayonet charges still happen in RL, even against insurgent opponents.

They're a highly effective tactic that are performed in certain circumstances.

I.....I know there was a horse charge during the early days of Iraq or Afghan.

I am now tempted to make a literal cavalry regiment for the GDF......

[Imperializt Russia]

Horse charge? No, just a bayonet charge in 2006.
The insurgent unit was routed and the British troops took no casualties.

[Anemos Major]

Horse charge? No, just a bayonet charge in 2006.
The insurgent unit was routed and the British troops took no casualties.

There was, but not by a conventional Western military force. Afaicr Northern Alliance and their attached Special Forces advisers used horses in transport and combat roles because the infrastructure and logistics chain to support the same number of personnel in vehicles wasn't in place at the time (2001 onwards).

As for bayonet charges, it's not that they're 'even' used against insurgents, but more that they can only really be utilised effectively 'because' they're insurgents, in a way. Not that I'm precluding their use in conventional warfare or anything, but it's a lot harder to do when the enemy is organised like you, manoeuvres like you and, critically, is armed with the same standard of rapid fire and suppressive armaments as you, which makes crossing a combat area with fixed bayonets much less of a realistic prospect.

(don't stray too far from the thread's stated purposes, guys)

Incidentally, I haven't been around for a while, but have many people been putting up designs? I can update the OP list now if that's the case, but if not I'll leave it for later.

[Anemos Major]

-snip-

It's not that the idea in principle is a bad one, but the execution's not good. There're a select few tanks from that time period, mostly a bit after it, that'd be functional when used as you've described them, but overly archaic hulls, non-standard weaponry, poor automotive characteristics and limited capacity for modification are all fairly detrimental when your ultimate objective is to create a low-cost fleet of tanks to mothball. When you maintain a reserve fleet of vehicles, you need to maintain their ammunition supplies and spare parts in parallel, and so long as they incur continuous costs of that kind it ceases to be a simple matter of trying to improve archaic designs up to a point and then dumping them under a mountain somewhere. So, Matilda II is out of the question - not a good idea, it's just too old and too hard to improve.

Tiger I and Panther are 'maybe vehicles' - their basic characteristics aren't as flawed as those of the Matilda II, on the simple basis that they're not hellishly outdated. On the other hand, when put up against contemporary tanks they're fiddly, expensive, complex and unreliable (not to mention fairly inefficient, fuel-wise) - in order to make them competent reserve vehicles, you'd have to rework the transmission and the engine at the very least to make them easier to maintain (for the same reasons the French decided on the basis of post-war use that the Panther was fine on paper and in general tactical terms but, from a strategic point of view, was too difficult a tank for general use), on top of having to invest in new-build ammunition periodically to replenish stocks. Whether that's worth it is up to you.

A good way of setting yourself standards and points of reference for this sort of thing is to look at equivalent tank usage elsewhere. What do other countries using older tanks do to make them viable designs? A number of things tend to come through when you look at everything between the Super Sherman to the M48s the Taiwanese still use in their frontline forces - in essence, what most of these tanks do is shoehorn current-generation weapons and automotives onto older hulls to maximise their potency without too much trouble, and to cut down on costs by reducing maintenance frequency and also to fit these tanks into existing supply chains and logistics arrangements (hence the up-gunning of M48s and Centurions by NATO or otherwise aligned states during the Cold War - why bother designing improved ammunition for a non-standard gun when you could just buy new guns and ammunition from current production lines and fit them into the tank?). So, in light of the above, what you'd ideally be looking into is finding a fairly simple, maintenance-light tank capable of being fitted with a 105mm gun that can utilise current specification rounds, or otherwise rounds you can purchase in bulk at competitive prices and keep in storage for, say, half a decade. Matilda can't do that (and infantry tanks, let alone infantry tanks that old, would be questionable useful by any measure anyway), Sherman already has historically, but requires modification to do so, and Tiger I and Panther might be able to, but require extensive modification to bring them up to the useability standards determined above.

Of course, this being 2014, whether WWII tanks are the best idea is a whole different question (though I understand that beyond realism, it's really a personal matter for the individual player to resolve), but realistically speaking just buying and refurbishing early Cold War MBTs and sticking them in storage gives you a similar reserve for a lower price, ceteris paribus. Fitting a 105mm gun onto a tank designed to take a 105mm gun is much easier than shoehorning it onto a Tiger.

[Novorden]

Le snip

As Anemos said an end of ww2 or cold war design might be a better idea. Several countries used versions of the centurion which would probably be quite cheap for you to buy:

Sweden had several hundred of these until 2000 and they all already have the L7 105mm.

[Order of pheonix]

snip

Well the biggest reason to do that is cost. I imagine it would be much more cost effective as a last resort tactic to have conventional cars turned technicals with like 3 ATGMs and a launcher.

[Zeinbrad]

Okay two things.

1: How effective/ineffective a towed 76mm AT gun will be against British AFV's? Note, it will be trying to get shots on the sides and rear.

2: How effective is a Molotov cocktail against modern tanks?

[The New Lowlands]

Okay two things.

1: How effective/ineffective a towed 76mm AT gun will be against British AFV's? Note, it will be trying to get shots on the sides and rear.

2: How effective is a Molotov cocktail against modern tanks?

Which AFVs?

[Zeinbrad]

Okay two things.

1: How effective/ineffective a towed 76mm AT gun will be against British AFV's? Note, it will be trying to get shots on the sides and rear.

2: How effective is a Molotov cocktail against modern tanks?

Which AFVs?

Off the top of my head, the Fusiliers use the Scorpion Light Tank, Challenger 2 and I don't know what the third one should be.....

I want to say Chieftain....

[Novorden]

1: How effective/ineffective a towed 76mm AT gun will be against British AFV's? Note, it will be trying to get shots on the sides and rear.

Scorpion Light Tank- Disabled/destroyed, if you can hit it that is
Challenger- Whilst i cant say for sure, i reckon that the crew compartment would be pretty hard to penetrate, engine from the rear not so much.
Chieftain- Similar to the Challenger but to a lesser extent.

2: How effective is a Molotov cocktail against modern tanks

Whilst it wouldn't kill the tank, it is likely to do a number of the engine or the crew if they have open cupolas.

[Zeinbrad]

1: How effective/ineffective a towed 76mm AT gun will be against British AFV's? Note, it will be trying to get shots on the sides and rear.

Scorpion Light Tank- Disabled/destroyed, if you can hit it that is
Challenger- Whilst i cant say for sure, i reckon that the crew compartment would be pretty hard to penetrate, engine from the rear not so much.
Chieftain- Similar to the Challenger but to a lesser extent.

2: How effective is a Molotov cocktail against modern tanks

Whilst it wouldn't kill the tank, it is likely to do a number of the engine or the crew if they have open cupolas.

I hope the British don't get suspicious of me asking how to destroy their militarizes vehicles.

Thank you by the way.

[The Akasha Colony]

Off the top of my head, the Fusiliers use the Scorpion Light Tank, Challenger 2 and I don't know what the third one should be.....

I want to say Chieftain....

The Chieftain is an older MBT that was replaced by the Challenger 1 and then by the Challenger 2. If you have the CR2 in service, you probably don't have the Chieftain.

[Zeinbrad]

Off the top of my head, the Fusiliers use the Scorpion Light Tank, Challenger 2 and I don't know what the third one should be.....

I want to say Chieftain....

The Chieftain is an older MBT that was replaced by the Challenger 1 and then by the Challenger 2. If you have the CR2 in service, you probably don't have the Chieftain.

Well, I thinking it would be smart for the GDF to use older vehicles for anti-rebel/insurgency operations, so the more modern vehicles can be focused on frontline combat.

So the Fusiliers will only bring in the NotChallenger 2 if shit gets real.

[The Akasha Colony]

The Chieftain is an older MBT that was replaced by the Challenger 1 and then by the Challenger 2. If you have the CR2 in service, you probably don't have the Chieftain.

Well, I thinking it would be smart for the GDF to use older vehicles for anti-rebel/insurgency operations, so the more modern vehicles can be focused on frontline combat.

So the Fusiliers will only bring in the NotChallenger 2 if shit gets real.

So what happened to the Challenger 1?

[Vetok]

Anyone know if tanks of the early 40's could mount radios in their turrets, or were they forced to mount them in the hull due to size constraints?

[Zeinbrad]

Well, I thinking it would be smart for the GDF to use older vehicles for anti-rebel/insurgency operations, so the more modern vehicles can be focused on frontline combat.

So the Fusiliers will only bring in the NotChallenger 2 if shit gets real.

So what happened to the Challenger 1?

Um..the Venators have it? The Venators are another British based unit type, though their light infantry...

[The Akasha Colony]

So what happened to the Challenger 1?

Um..the Venators have it? The Venators are another British based unit type, though their light infantry...

Why do your light infantry have so many tanks? The entire point of introducing a new tank model is to replace the older ones in service, since vehicles get harder to maintain over time and are eventually no longer worth the time, money, and manpower to overhaul and keep in service. There's no point keeping the Chieftain if you have the CR1 and especially the CR2. Now you're just paying for three separate logistics trains for no discernible benefit. If you can't afford to replace your old tanks, you should reconsider developing a new one.

[Zeinbrad]

Um..the Venators have it? The Venators are another British based unit type, though their light infantry...

Why do your light infantry have so many tanks? The entire point of introducing a new tank model is to replace the older ones in service, since vehicles get harder to maintain over time and are eventually no longer worth the time, money, and manpower to overhaul and keep in service. There's no point keeping the Chieftain if you have the CR1 and especially the CR2. Now you're just paying for three separate logistics trains for no discernible benefit. If you can't afford to replace your old tanks, you should reconsider developing a new one.

Point taken.

It is now a Challenger 2 and 1 and scorpion light tank.

[Vetok]

In order to get us rapidly back on topic, here are the much self-promoted PT tanks and writeups I've been working on.



In the nineteen-thirties, the Imperium completely lacked any form of armoured vehicle, a situation utterly intolerable to the Vetokite Army's General Staff in the face of the threat from the armed forces of the neighbouring states to the security of Vetok, and was believed to be in need of a desperate remedy. Accordingly, throughout 1934-1938, the General Staff ordered and conducted tests on numerous foreign vehicles, such as the LT vz. 35 and the Vickers Mark E. Despite the adequate nature of the designs, they were decommissioned after testing in favour of an indigenous design. The specifications were based on what was seen as the primary attributes of a tank; speed and armour. Firepower, though welcome, was regarded as less-than-necessary, with the belief that massed infantry guns and artillery battalions could overcome what a tank could not.The result was the Model-137A 'Cavalier' Light Tank.

Equipped with a 2-pounder in a mid-hull turret, the Cavalier was produced in large quantities from the moment the design was approved. The decision to focus on the tank's attributes of speed and protection meant that a dedicated loader for the gun was left out, the job instead allocated to the commander. Meanwhile the rear-orientation of the turret, designed to allow the driver and radioman an adequate escape through a hull hatch, precluded the turret from mounting a machinegun with the result that a ball-mounted machinegun was placed in the fore hull for use by the radioman. The awkward positioning necessitates a stooped posture, a common source of complaints with the crews. The necessity of a radioman/machinegunner was justified by the head of the Tank Corps on the basis that while cavalry could use bugles, they were impractical in the confines and noise of a tank, and led to the astonishing decision, in the eyes of signalmen and procurement officials alike, to give each and every Cavalier a radio. From 1937-1942, over nine-hundred Cavalier's were built, and the design served as the basis for most armoured vehicle designs of Vetok during the rest of the 1930's and 1940's, with the last derivative variant only pulled out of service in 1948.

Height: 8.2ft (2.49 metres)
Length: 17.38ft (5.3 metres)
Width: 6.88ft (2.1 metres)
Weight: 10 (long) tons.
Crew: 4x (Commander, Gunner, Machine-gunner/Radioman, Driver)
Engine: Siddley-Puma 98hp petrol engine
Armour: 6-12mm
Main Armament: 2-pounder gun
Ammunition: 80x rounds (AP)
Secondary Armament: 1x 303. machine-gun
Ammunition: 400x rounds