Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation [NO MECHS] Tranche 7

[The Greater Luthorian Empire]

I just broadly assume that the tank guns of NS tanks have a reasonable chance at penetrating my tanks from the front.


And try to shoot at these tanks as soon as possible so as little of them make it to shooting my tanks from the front as possible.

Pretty much the same with me. NS guns can pen pretty much anything from the front at least at close ranges, and even if they can't there is always the lower front hull, so unless you plan on remaining hull down for the entire war you can still be killed from the front.

[Imperializt Russia]

I shall link this from the OP.

Our advances in technology, software programs, and maintenance routines negate the problems and we didn't put the T-028 into service until all the kinks and problems were addressed. Plus we really don't use the 028 because after a string of B-52 train sorties and some artillery for good measures most enemy defense our "soft" enough for infantry and light assault vehicles to mop up any survivors.

It offers increased wear and weight for no meaningful improvement in the rate of fire.
So what is the point?

[Rich and Corporations]

Only need for twin barrels: when you have two autocannons for anti-aircraft purposes.

[Imperializt Russia]

Only need for twin barrels: when you have two autocannons for anti-aircraft purposes.

Or two howitzers for artillery purposes.

[Korouse]

Only need for twin barrels: when you have two autocannons for anti-aircraft purposes.

Or two howitzers for artillery purposes.

or cool looks.

[Triplebaconation]

Two guns is a useful way to distinguish between command and grunt tanks.

[Immoren]

Am I wrong, but couldn't tank with carousel autoloader and whole crew in hull with unmanned turret be more survivable in case of catastrophic ammunition explosion, that than carousel autoloader with "traditional" crewlayout+manned turret, because you could then put bulkhead between crew and ammo. Or have I misunderstood how layouts of tanks with crew in hull work?

[Anemos Major]

It would be nice to see Kiev OP for once. Always been among the front runners, anyway.

Although if Anemos gets reelected for the third time I figure he should just as well be declared OP for life.

Kiev ought to be OP next time, and I'll be voting for him accordingly.

I'll be disqualifying myself next time, and most likely CTE soon after.

[Imperializt Russia]

It would be nice to see Kiev OP for once. Always been among the front runners, anyway.

Although if Anemos gets reelected for the third time I figure he should just as well be declared OP for life.

Kiev ought to be OP next time, and I'll be voting for him accordingly.

I'll be disqualifying myself next time, and most likely CTE soon after.

and most likely CTE soon after.

*insert crying gif here

[Bratislavskaya]

Would there be disadvantages to having my artillery composed entirely of Rocket trucks (Eg BM-21) and SPG's?

[Spodystan]

Would you recommend using a 120mm or 125mm main gun for the m13 phalanx indigenous main battle tank that I'm designing.

[Padnak]

Would there be disadvantages to having my artillery composed entirely of Rocket trucks (Eg BM-21) and SPG's?

Lack of accurate long range fire and expensive ammunition-

[Assorted Sucrose-Based Lifeforms]

Would you recommend using a 120mm or 125mm main gun for the m13 phalanx indigenous main battle tank that I'm designing.

Probably 125mm if you increase shell length proportionally and you can keep the muzzle-velocity roughly the same.
The main argument I would personally make against 125mm is the range of ammunition available for 120mm systems, but if you can recreate those for your own 125mm gun, then that point becomes moot.
I guess that 125mm would cause an increase in cannon, charge and ammunition weight and size, but not a drastic increase.

[Spodystan]

Would you recommend using a 120mm or 125mm main gun for the m13 phalanx indigenous main battle tank that I'm designing.

Probably 125mm if you increase shell length proportionally and you can keep the muzzle-velocity roughly the same.
The main argument I would personally make against 125mm is the range of ammunition available for 120mm systems, but if you can recreate those for your own 125mm gun, then that point becomes moot.
I guess that 125mm would cause an increase in cannon, charge and ammunition weight and size, but not a drastic increase.

Thanks I was also thinking about using the 125mm just because I already got T72's and T90's armed with it.

[Kouralia]

...and most likely CTE soon after.

;-;

[Imperializt Russia]

Would you recommend using a 120mm or 125mm main gun for the m13 phalanx indigenous main battle tank that I'm designing.

There is no functional difference. If you accept the origins of those two gun calibres (NATO versus Warsaw Pact) then your only real reasoning behind choosing either would be political reasons.

If those influences do not exist (hence, you're developing your own rounds, technically from scratch), there is no reason to choose one over the other.

[Bratislavskaya]

Would there be disadvantages to having my artillery composed entirely of Rocket trucks (Eg BM-21) and SPG's?

Lack of accurate long range fire and expensive ammunition-

Why is that?

[Padnak]

Lack of accurate long range fire and expensive ammunition-

Why is that?

most rocket artillery is quite inaccurate (makes up for it with extremely rapid barrages) and rockets can be quite expensive

[Immoren]

Would there be disadvantages to having my artillery composed entirely of Rocket trucks (Eg BM-21) and SPG's?

Probably not.
Depending on what kind of troops you've amnd doctrine.

Why is that?

most rocket artillery is quite inaccurate (makes up for it with extremely rapid barrages) and rockets can be quite expensive

Would there be disadvantages to having my artillery composed entirely of Rocket trucks (Eg BM-21) and SPG's?

[Bratislavskaya]

Why is that?

most rocket artillery is quite inaccurate (makes up for it with extremely rapid barrages) and rockets can be quite expensive

Yes, I would have self propelled guns (SPG's) too, to make up for the shortcomings of the Rockets. Should I have regular artillery or Self Propelled guns? Because I will definitely have one battalion of Rockets, as well as either towed or self propelled guns.

[Proskoya]

most rocket artillery is quite inaccurate (makes up for it with extremely rapid barrages) and rockets can be quite expensive

Yes, I would have self propelled guns (SPG's) too, to make up for the shortcomings of the Rockets. Should I have regular artillery or Self Propelled guns? Because I will definitely have one battalion of Rockets, as well as either towed or self propelled guns.

Towed is cheaper while SPGs get into the battle faster. I would say it depends on your doctrine as well, as you would probably want to use SPGs if you are offensively oriented.

[Bratislavskaya]

Yes, I would have self propelled guns (SPG's) too, to make up for the shortcomings of the Rockets. Should I have regular artillery or Self Propelled guns? Because I will definitely have one battalion of Rockets, as well as either towed or self propelled guns.

Towed is cheaper while SPGs get into the battle faster. I would say it depends on your doctrine as well, as you would probably want to use SPGs if you are offensively oriented.

Okay, SPG's it is.

[The Akasha Colony]

most rocket artillery is quite inaccurate (makes up for it with extremely rapid barrages) and rockets can be quite expensive

Yes, I would have self propelled guns (SPG's) too, to make up for the shortcomings of the Rockets. Should I have regular artillery or Self Propelled guns? Because I will definitely have one battalion of Rockets, as well as either towed or self propelled guns.

You should have both, actually. SPGs can emplace and displace faster, but towed artillery can be quickly deployed by helicopter to locations that may be inaccessible (or not easily accessible) by road, as well as air-dropped to support airborne operations.

[The Soodean Imperium]

most rocket artillery is quite inaccurate (makes up for it with extremely rapid barrages) and rockets can be quite expensive

Yes, I would have self propelled guns (SPG's) too, to make up for the shortcomings of the Rockets. Should I have regular artillery or Self Propelled guns? Because I will definitely have one battalion of Rockets, as well as either towed or self propelled guns.

http://fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm100-2-3.pdf
^relevant guide to Soviet organization, enter pg#79 for example Artillery Regiment; basically, assuming Soviet equipment and doctrine you're looking at 2-3 artillery battalions per MLRS battalion.

As for SPGs versus towed units, it's mainly a matter of cost and training. I would recommend equipping front-line Divisions with SPGs, and putting towed artillery in lower-grade units, Army/Front-level artillery groupings, and airborne units (again, assuming a large, heavy airborne force); even in the former two, however, you'd likely be better off using last-gen SPGs.

Ninja'd several times over.

[Proskoya]

Yes, I would have self propelled guns (SPG's) too, to make up for the shortcomings of the Rockets. Should I have regular artillery or Self Propelled guns? Because I will definitely have one battalion of Rockets, as well as either towed or self propelled guns.

You should have both, actually. SPGs can emplace and displace faster, but towed artillery can be quickly deployed by helicopter to locations that may be inaccessible (or not easily accessible) by road, as well as air-dropped to support airborne operations.

Forgot to mention ^this, yeah. It's a good reason why much of my artillery will be towed.