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

[Orussia]

Under the turret basket, no blowoff panels or anything that requires intrusion into the fighting compartment. That is the safest option without having bustle storage.

Under the turret basket sounds awfully hard to access.

EDIT: Vaguely relevant top of page image. Spoilers because .gif

[Gallia-]

Under the turret basket, no blowoff panels or anything that requires intrusion into the fighting compartment. That is the safest option without having bustle storage.

Under the turret basket sounds awfully hard to access.

It works on Challenger so not really.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Under the turret basket, no blowoff panels or anything that requires intrusion into the fighting compartment. That is the safest option without having bustle storage.

Under the turret basket sounds awfully hard to access.

Not really, the ISU-152, and similar tanks had a loading-port between the 2nd and 3rd roadwheel for direct-loading from ground-level.

Being an autoloader, it could be set to 'reloading' and a guy from each side could load the carousels from ground-level as the autoloader cycles through the open slots.

I figure one side would be loading propellants while the other loads shells.

[Purpelia]

Under the turret basket, no blowoff panels or anything that requires intrusion into the fighting compartment. That is the safest option without having bustle storage.

Under the turret basket sounds awfully hard to access.

EDIT: Vaguely relevant top of page image. Spoilers because .gif

No way! No way you are telling me that the whole ramrod packs up in so tight a space! If that be so than... how?

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Under the turret basket sounds awfully hard to access.

EDIT: Vaguely relevant top of page image. Spoilers because .gif

No way! No way you are telling me that the whole ramrod packs up in so tight a space! If that be so than... how?

It's a chain.

[Purpelia]

No way! No way you are telling me that the whole ramrod packs up in so tight a space! If that be so than... how?

It's a chain.

Explain.

[Orussia]

Under the turret basket sounds awfully hard to access.

EDIT: Vaguely relevant top of page image. Spoilers because .gif

No way! No way you are telling me that the whole ramrod packs up in so tight a space! If that be so than... how?

It telescopes...?

[Purpelia]

No way! No way you are telling me that the whole ramrod packs up in so tight a space! If that be so than... how?

It telescopes...?

I do not think you can get a telescoping system that folds up that much. I mean I think. Hydraulics were newer my field of choice.

[Lydenburg]

While we're on the topic of turret storage, how plausible is with simply making do with one ammo rack behind the loader?

[Gallia-]

Chieftain had an ammo rack behind the loader.

It held four rounds.

[Novorden]

No way! No way you are telling me that the whole ramrod packs up in so tight a space! If that be so than... how?

It's a chain.

It's hard to see, but it's a chain that only bends one way

While we're on the topic of turret storage, how plausible is with simply making do with one ammo rack behind the loader?

Like this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EISdt3qyiY4

[Purpelia]

While we're on the topic of turret storage, how plausible is with simply making do with one ammo rack behind the loader?

Isn't that what every single tank with a manual loader did since like forever?

[Orussia]

It's a chain.

It's hard to see, but it's a chain that only bends one way

Yeah, after doing some fast perusing of Google, the T-72's loader is mechanical, not hydraulic. Although it being a chain is kinda odd.
Type 90 has best autoloader.

[Lydenburg]

While we're on the topic of turret storage, how plausible is with simply making do with one ammo rack behind the loader?

Isn't that what every single tank with a manual loader did since like forever?

Quite so. But what I meant was keeping say, half the shells in the total tank behind the loader. Divvy it up so that half are behind the loader and the other half at the bottom of the turret basket. Plausible?

Chieftain had an ammo rack behind the loader.

It held four rounds.

Possible to cram more in there?

Like this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EISdt3qyiY4

Precisely.

[Gallia-]

If it were possible to put more rounds in the loader rack, I imagine the British would not have found it necessary to line the turret ring with ammunition.

[Lydenburg]

If it were possible to put more rounds in the loader rack, I imagine the British would not have found it necessary to line the turret ring with ammunition.

Larger turret.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

It's a chain.

It's hard to see, but it's a chain that only bends one way

Like a tape-measure, being used as a ram-rod.

Usually built so that the chain's own mass keeps it from buckling.

I know this because USS Wisconsin uses the same rammer.

It's hard to see, but it's a chain that only bends one way

Yeah, after doing some fast perusing of Google, the T-72's loader is mechanical, not hydraulic. Although it being a chain is kinda odd.
Type 90 has best autoloader.

It's not odd at all. It's even what allows the gun to be power-rammed while at elevation.

[Purpelia]

It's hard to see, but it's a chain that only bends one way

Like a tape-measure, being used as a ram-rod.

Usually built so that the chain's own mass keeps it from buckling.

Thanks. All I needed to know.

[Chebucto Provinces]

If it were possible to put more rounds in the loader rack, I imagine the British would not have found it necessary to line the turret ring with ammunition.

It's limited not due to space, but due to priorities. The Brits only put four ready rounds in there because they could. The bustle was actually for the radios and NBC kit, and the rounds were an after thought.

Many other tanks have much higher numbers of rounds in the bustle. Tanks like AMX-30 fill the bustle with rounds.

[Gallia-]

If it were possible to put more rounds in the loader rack, I imagine the British would not have found it necessary to line the turret ring with ammunition.

It's limited not due to space, but due to priorities. The Brits only put four ready rounds in there because they could. The bustle was actually for the radios and NBC kit, and the rounds were an after thought.

Many other tanks have much higher numbers of rounds in the bustle. Tanks like AMX-30 fill the bustle with rounds.

It seems like the assumption was that the bustle is most vulnerable to attack, so put radios there. Put the powder charges under the turret, and the projectiles EVERYWHERE. Since you're using a lot of fairly inert projectiles it's safe.

That way the combustibles are most protected from direct attack even on the flanks, and a penetration of the fighting compartment doesn't necessarily mean you die horribly, unless it hits the loader rack where complete rounds are or something. That rack was wet though iirc, so even that might not be too terrible?

Storing rounds outside a large bulkhead protected turret bustle is kinda lol tbh. Hull storage isn't hugely necessary if you can just separate the crew and ammunition in the bustle like on M1 you'll still have at least 34-36 rounds which is fine for pretty much anything. If it's smaller than 120mm you start hitting 40+ with turret alone. Volume of hull eaten up by ammunition can instead be used for radios or other more important things.

[Chebucto Provinces]

The radios being in the turret bustle is actually to do with the ability of the TC to operate them. They are there for easy access to the TC. This is pretty universal in modern tanks, with some more compact radios being available to some nations. Or simy being used by them. When we updated radios in the mid 1990s on the old C1s we easily cut the space used in half, and the radios we were using before were not old by military standards, top of the line in the late 1970s.

Historically the turret bustle tends to be what the TC and loader need to access. Radios were bulky, hydraulics and backups and NBC systems were also bulky. Then things began to shrink. Abrams moved radios around inside that huge turret to make all-bustle stowage work, but others didn't.

[The Kievan People]

I do not think you can get a telescoping system that folds up that much. I mean I think. Hydraulics were newer my field of choice.

The rammer is a chain. It coils up when it retracts.

[The Kievan People]

Make the bustle longer. Make the rounds longer and thinner. Triple stack them in the bustle with a tray autoloader.

Problems = Solved.

Then you can fill the hull with fuel tanks for #winning.

Edit: I am too lazy too measure but those 125mm shells look oversized.

[Rich and Corporations]

https://www.meggittdefense.com/index.ph ... iew&id=363

Rather, the bustle is isolated from the crew by a solid armor bulkhead, penetrated only by a small blast port less than one tenth the size of the doors. This trade-off reduces the weight of the weapon station by over four hundred pounds while retaining the same number of rounds.

That bulkhead as it currently is very heavy. Apparently over four hundred pounds.

[The Kievan People]

That is intentional, actually. The Abrams heavy bustle offsets the weight of the armor and gun keeping the turret well balanced despite it's huge size.