Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation [NO MECHS] Mark 8

[Rich and Corporations]

They would need new APS munitions and small self guided munitions like that have never really been produced in Russia.

Afganit or whatever it's called should be adequate for conflicts in Russia's near abroad, but the design isn't future proofed at all. Even there though the lack of rear-hemisphere coverage is very questionable in an unconventional/hybrid context.

It's basically an APS designed for the requirements of the 1980s... in 2015.

On the bright side it is still more capable than the US Army's APS which exists only in the land of powerpoint.

don't worry, i'm sure even after ten years of testing, the Armata will have have a road range of fifty kilometers before break downs.

[Husseinarti]

Those are ATGMs.

Jesus fucking Christ it isn't hard to see.

Yes, as they are TOO DAMN BIG.

Its pretty fucking obvious that its still an ATGM launcher no matter how you try to twist it. Sadly enough no, you aren't even partially right in this instance.

I didn't really want to fuck around drawing an exact missile so I used a rectangle of the appropriate size, which gave me this. I took the opportunity to detail the launcher side a bit as well.

edit: current full image

OMG WOW GET THAT MLRS LAUNCHER OFF YOU IFV NOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

[The Kievan People]

don't worry, i'm sure even after ten years of testing, the Armata will have have a road range of fifty kilometers before break downs.

But 50 kilometers is still infinity times farther than the next generation of US AFVs.

[Gallia-]

don't worry, i'm sure even after ten years of testing, the Armata will have have a road range of fifty kilometers before break downs.

But 50 kilometers is still infinity times farther than the next generation of US AFVs.

The next generation of US AFVs was always going to be Abrams though. ):

Just Namer up Abrams and put a Crotale on it for SPSAM. Done for sixty years.

[New Visegrad]

I didn't really want to fuck around drawing an exact missile so I used a rectangle of the appropriate size, which gave me this. I took the opportunity to detail the launcher side a bit as well.

edit: current full image

Image not found.

Without knowing the scale, I can't really comment on the size. It's probably fine, especially since the turret looks like nothing more than a bundle of wires and a cannon.

imgur mirror of full image
I didn't really use a specific scale, but I went on the basis that if TOW is about 1.5m long, and the vehicle is around 6-7m long (BMP-2 used as reference), if I can fit 6+ missile lengths in the length of the vehicle it's about the right size.

edit: now with ammo drum thing and preliminary suspension

edit 2: BLV-S-10 "Hathi"

[Yukonastan]

Image not found.

Without knowing the scale, I can't really comment on the size. It's probably fine, especially since the turret looks like nothing more than a bundle of wires and a cannon.

imgur mirror of full image
I didn't really use a specific scale, but I went on the basis that if TOW is about 1.5m long, and the vehicle is around 6-7m long (BMP-2 used as reference), if I can fit 6+ missile lengths in the length of the vehicle it's about the right size.

edit: now with ammo drum thing and preliminary suspension

edit 2: BLV-S-10 "Hathi"

What's throwing me off wrt the ATGMs is that either you have a miniature turret or a massive missile box.

[The Kievan People]

That ATGM launcher really is huge. 2-4 missiles is more than enough.

[New Visegrad]

imgur mirror of full image
I didn't really use a specific scale, but I went on the basis that if TOW is about 1.5m long, and the vehicle is around 6-7m long (BMP-2 used as reference), if I can fit 6+ missile lengths in the length of the vehicle it's about the right size.

edit: now with ammo drum thing and preliminary suspension

edit 2: BLV-S-10 "Hathi"

What's throwing me off wrt the ATGMs is that either you have a miniature turret or a massive missile box.

That ATGM launcher really is huge. 2-4 missiles is more than enough.

I checked the size of the box. It fits two missiles, with room around them for a solid structure, just like in the Bradley images.
The turret size may be throwing you off slightly as there's not much more to it than the autocannon, a bit of armour, and some sensors, but I did make sure the launchers were scaled properly.

[Yukonastan]

The problem with your turret is that it's TINY for an unmanned turret.

On the Puma, the turret is unmanned and crammed full of sensors and ammo, and it's AT LEAST four times as bulky from what I can see.

[New Visegrad]

The problem with your turret is that it's TINY for an unmanned turret.

On the Puma, the turret is unmanned and crammed full of sensors and ammo, and it's AT LEAST four times as bulky from what I can see.

That's the Puma turret. I'm working from the Pandur II turret as recommended in this very thread, which appears to be a lot less bulky - much more akin to an RWS than a proper turret.

[Yukonastan]

The problem with your turret is that it's TINY for an unmanned turret.

On the Puma, the turret is unmanned and crammed full of sensors and ammo, and it's AT LEAST four times as bulky from what I can see.

That's the Puma turret. I'm working from the Pandur II turret as recommended in this very thread, which appears to be a lot less bulky - much more akin to an RWS than a proper turret.

Meh, they appear to be similar in size. It's just that the Pandur slaps all its systems to the outside of a framework, whereas the Puma has 'em all under armour.

[Gallia-]

What's throwing me off wrt the ATGMs is that either you have a miniature turret or a massive missile box.

That ATGM launcher really is huge. 2-4 missiles is more than enough.

I checked the size of the box. It fits two missiles, with room around them for a solid structure, just like in the Bradley images.
The turret size may be throwing you off slightly as there's not much more to it than the autocannon, a bit of armour, and some sensors, but I did make sure the launchers were scaled properly.

The Bradley launcher isn't really a solid structure tbf, there's not a lot of space besides the TOW tubes:

[New Visegrad]

I checked the size of the box. It fits two missiles, with room around them for a solid structure, just like in the Bradley images.
The turret size may be throwing you off slightly as there's not much more to it than the autocannon, a bit of armour, and some sensors, but I did make sure the launchers were scaled properly.

The Bradley launcher isn't really a solid structure tbf, there's not a lot of space besides the TOW tubes:

Then perhaps I could slim it down a little more, or maybe it has more armour than the Bradley launcher.
In any case, I don't know where people are getting the idea that I have huge numbers of tubes per box. I mean, you can see the exhaust vents on the side of the launcher for fuck's sake. Two tubes. Unless people are under the impression that I have a square-section launcher with a second pair of tubes alongside the first.

edit: update

[Gawdzendia]

The Bradley launcher isn't really a solid structure tbf, there's not a lot of space besides the TOW tubes:

Then perhaps I could slim it down a little more, or maybe it has more armour than the Bradley launcher.
In any case, I don't know where people are getting the idea that I have huge numbers of tubes per box. I mean, you can see the exhaust vents on the side of the launcher for fuck's sake. Two tubes. Unless people are under the impression that I have a square-section launcher with a second pair of tubes alongside the first.

edit: update

I think it looks fine.
Then again, Gawdzendia.

[Yukonastan]

The Bradley launcher isn't really a solid structure tbf, there's not a lot of space besides the TOW tubes:

Then perhaps I could slim it down a little more, or maybe it has more armour than the Bradley launcher.
In any case, I don't know where people are getting the idea that I have huge numbers of tubes per box. I mean, you can see the exhaust vents on the side of the launcher for fuck's sake. Two tubes. Unless people are under the impression that I have a square-section launcher with a second pair of tubes alongside the first.

edit: update

What's throwing me off is the turret itself, combined with the autocannon's bore. From what I'm guessing it's a 30mm-ish piece, and that means the barrel's diameter is 45-50-ish mm. The way you've rendered your missiles, they're like 20cm in dia.

[Iltica]

Where would the ammo go? I'm guessing it wouldn't be in the bustle with that kind of design.

That's a good point. If I stick with the oscillating bullpup turret, the ammo would have to be either mounted in the sides of the turret or in the hull. The former makes the racks very easy to hit, the latter would overcomplicate the loading system. I guess I could put the ammo in the hull and have it hand loaded but that may be inadequate to support the burstfire gun's ammo consumption.
What really worries me is that with the breach at the far back of the turret, it doesn't have much room to slide backwards in recoil. I read that many oscillating turrets just absorb the recoil by hinging upwards, but for the burstfire to work effectively it has to hit the same area with most of the rounds so muzzle climb must be avoided at all cost.

Looks like I have to decide between a conventional turret layout with the burstfire (maybe not even oscillating) or the OBT with a much larger conventional gun. Which do you guys think is smarter?
Does the burstfire even sound like it would be effective against modern MBT armor?

[New Visegrad]

Hathi status update
I really didn't want to draw tracks so instead I coloured everything above that. No markings yet though, those will come once everything else is in place, since I might add skirts and if I do some of the markings will go on there.
Debating adding some junk/boxes in the side rack to make it clearer what it is.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

vab 6x6 vs fuchs vs pasi

[Elan Valleys]

VAB.

No real reason.

[Radicchio]

But 50 kilometers is still infinity times farther than the next generation of US AFVs.

The next generation of US AFVs was always going to be Abrams though. ):

Just Namer up Abrams and put a Crotale on it for SPSAM. Done for sixty years.

I can detect the sarcasm but honestly, this does not sound like the worst idea...

[Cerma]

But 50 kilometers is still infinity times farther than the next generation of US AFVs.

The next generation of US AFVs was always going to be Abrams though. ):

Just Namer up Abrams and put a Crotale on it for SPSAM. Done for sixty years.

This brings up a an interesting question for me. As it seems, the M1 has gotten to be quite the punching bag when it comes to modern armored tanks.

So, here's a question I have for anyone's opinion,

What do you think the US should do for the future of their AFVs?
And
What do you think the US is going to do for the future of their AFVs?

[Gallia-]

The next generation of US AFVs was always going to be Abrams though. ):

Just Namer up Abrams and put a Crotale on it for SPSAM. Done for sixty years.

I can detect the sarcasm but honestly, this does not sound like the worst idea...

I wasn't lying or anything.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/653 ... model1.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/653 ... 55120a.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/653 ... exphp2.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/653 ... rizzly.gif
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/653 ... Firing.jpg

I mean it might be a stretch to call Block III's common heavy chassis an "Abrams" when the Army decided that they eventually wanted an entirely new tank which would have resembled Crusader more than anything else, but it probably would have still been called "Abrams" at least.

The next generation of US AFVs was always going to be Abrams though. ):

Just Namer up Abrams and put a Crotale on it for SPSAM. Done for sixty years.

This brings up a an interesting question for me. As it seems, the M1 has gotten to be quite the punching bag when it comes to modern armored tanks.

So, here's a question I have for anyone's opinion,

What do you think the US should do for the future of their AFVs?
And
What do you think the US is going to do for the future of their AFVs?

1) Resurrect ASM and beat life into the arrhythmic heart of Block III/XM2001/FIFV/Wolverine/Liberty/Grizzly. All ABCTs transition to Abrams Army: The most mechanized freedom force ever assembled.

2) A new coat of paint, replace HEAT/Canister/HE-OR with AMP, and maybe replace copper cabling with fiber optics or something. The last one is pushing it.

[The Kievan People]

This brings up a an interesting question for me. As it seems, the M1 has gotten to be quite the punching bag when it comes to modern armored tanks.

TBF only among hipsters and edgy teens. But this is ns so you may get that impression.

What do you think the US should do for the future of their AFVs?

Near term?

First of all, Trophy and 3rd Generation FLIRS should be on every AFV. No exceptions.

Abrams
1. Re-engine with the LV100-5.
2. Install an autoloader and eliminate the fourth man.
3. Replace the M256 with the XM360.
4. Bring back the MRM-KE.
5. Install whatever network radio the US Army settles on.
6. Add enough armor to the turret roof to deal with bomblets & EFPs.

Bradley
1. Eliminate the manned turret and install a remote turret. Now it can replace the M113 too.
2. Install the 40mm CTA cannon ideally or a 30mm bushmaster.
3. Replace the TOW with the CKEM.
4. New radio.

Stryker
1. Install the same remote turret as the Bradley.
2. CKEM, and use the opportunity to eliminate the TOW carriers from OOB.
3. Investigate the possibility of replacing the MGS 105mm with a low-recoil 120mm gun to achieve commonality with the Abrams.
4. New radio.
5. If they pan out, make over-wheel band tracks available for superior off-roading.

Paladin
1. Replace with Pzh 2000, G6, Archer or anything really.
2. Alternatively slap a new turret on the recently purchased new bodies and call it an upgrade.

General/other:
1. Adopt the Spike-NLOS.
2. Develop new conventional rockets for the MLRS to complement the GMLRS.
3. Stick with the common smart submunition.

What do you think the US is going to do for the future of their AFVs?

First, wait for new leadership.

[Husseinarti]

Here is how we revamp the US Army:

Resurrect Patton.

[New Visegrad]

Hathi update
Skirts coming next so take in that glorious suspension and realistic track physics while you can.