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

[Radicchio]

VS

Could the AML-90 take the early (1960s) T-55 from the side or rear?

[The Kievan People]

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

That is nice.

Even if the tracks should be better tensioned.

[Rich and Corporations]

First, wait for new leadership.

That only happens if the US loses a major war.

Abrams

Fourth crewman is somewhat important. Well, if you use electronics to detect aircraft, and keep a few bradleys of mechanics to follow the tanks it wouldn't matter.

Bradley

5. Reduce passengers by one.

Stryker

Not enough power and engine.

Paladin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artillery_Gun_Module

[Schwere Panzer Abieltung 502]

VS

([url=http://s17.postimg.org/prsnhpzdn/aml90_001.jpg]Image)[/url]

([url=http://s17.postimg.org/9utvl06zf/t55.jpg]Image)[/url]

Could the AML-90 take the early (1960s) T-55 from the side or rear?

Probably, but the T-55 has a lot more armor. If the T-55 hits the AML first, the AML is toast, but its not guaranteed a kill vice versa.

[Wikipedia and Universe]

How does the new Russian T-14 Armata compare overall to current Western designs? Is it better than the M1A2? Where does it fall in relation to the latest Leopard 2? What about the K2 Black Panther?

[Padnak]

How does the new Russian T-14 Armata compare overall to current Western designs? Is it better than the M1A2? Where does it fall in relation to the latest Leopard 2? What about the K2 Black Panther?

No real information is available about the specifics of the T-14, but its probably comparable to the Abrams

[Imperial Cirasthayi]

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

That is nice.

Even if the tracks should be better tensioned.

Can't see the tracks through the skirts so I don't care :D

BLV-S-10 Hathi IFV
Armed with an autocannon and four ATGMs on an unmanned turret, the Hathi IFV is capable of transporting and defending infantry on the front lines of a modern conflict. It is the standard IFV of the Imperial Cirasthayi military.

How does the new Russian T-14 Armata compare overall to current Western designs? Is it better than the M1A2? Where does it fall in relation to the latest Leopard 2? What about the K2 Black Panther?

We don't know enough about the Armata to really compare it. The Russians aren't too big on letting foreigners know the exact specs of their latest tank.
There's not much known about the actual capabilities of the K2, either. Both the T-14 and the K2 have a lot of PR and very little specific public information.

[Stahn]

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

Very nice.

[Rhoderberg]

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.

>5xx error

: ^ (

BLV-S-10 Hathi IFV

Very nice.

[Korva]

VS

([url=http://s17.postimg.org/prsnhpzdn/aml90_001.jpg]Image)[/url]

([url=http://s17.postimg.org/9utvl06zf/t55.jpg]Image)[/url]

Could the AML-90 take the early (1960s) T-55 from the side or rear?

yes

90mm HEAT can defeat twice the thickness of the T-55 side armor

[Krazakistan]

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.

why was this not a thing?

[Purpelia]

I have been contemplating a concept lately and I need to know what you think of it. Basically, what I have in mind is a stealth light tank. The vehicle would in theory be used for scouting, raiding and generally being fast, light and sneaky. It would be armed with a light 40mm or so autocanon. In practice, the vehicle would only ever be a proof of concept, sort of like the Su-47 and not actually used or deployed.

As far as the implementation goes, the vehicle would use the latest and greatest in fancy stealth tech. So you'd have radar absorbing paint, stealth shaping, a disappearing gun, thermally isolated covers etc. The engine air intake would no longer be a large fan but a set of stealth shaped pipes and the running gear would be cooled by forced air to make it less of a heat source.

[Tule]

How does the new Russian T-14 Armata compare overall to current Western designs? Is it better than the M1A2? Where does it fall in relation to the latest Leopard 2? What about the K2 Black Panther?

Given the info available it seems conceptually similar to the T-72. It seems to have far greater survivability compared to the T-72 family however.

I doubt that it has the same level of accuracy as western tanks though, and the unmanned turret combined with the lack of a fourth crewman will probably make it much harder to repair in the field.

Overall I definitely think it's competitive, though not comparable, with western tanks.

[The Kievan People]

How does the new Russian T-14 Armata compare overall to current Western designs? Is it better than the M1A2? Where does it fall in relation to the latest Leopard 2? What about the K2 Black Panther?

It is probably the best protected tank in the world and (assuming what has been said about it's armament is true) the best armed. It isn't clear how far along the development of new ammunition for the new gun is, but it likely outclasses or will outclass all other tanks in terms of penetration and effective frontal armor thickness. The complete segregation of the crew will also provide a very high level of protection for the crew post-penetration, unlike legacy Soviet tank designs. In this respect it is probably on par or superior the western tanks with the best crew protection (M1 and Merkava) and clearly superior to all other tanks.

That said it is has an exceptionally large number of new components and an untested layout, in contrast to contemporary new-build tanks like the K2 or Altay which are basically cobbled together from COTS components and are utterly conventional in design, and will probably experience many teething issues over the next few years.

Fire control is something to watch. Russian/Soviet tanks historically lagged in this areas but a very big investment was made into developing a new generation FCS for the Object 195 aka T-95. It remains to be seen how successful the Russian defense industry has been. Russia has also struggled with certain subsystems like FLIRs because they lack a modern semiconductor industry to produce infrared detectors and have had to import French FLIRs to compensate. How this challenge was overcome on the T-14 remains to be seen.

The engine is another point of interest, it is a brand new diesel X-engine that reportedly has the potential to produce far more than 1500hp. How reliable it will be in service and whether or not the Russian Army will take advantage of its advertised potential remains to be seen.

In all likelihood though the T-14 we see today is the conceptual equivalent of an X-plane. There will likely be numerous revisions to the design as it enters mass production over the next few years, which could be major or minor. Quite a few observers have noted it seems to lack a coaxial MG, which is a serious omission if true and will likely be modified at some point in the future.

Oh, and there is probably no 30mm cannon and never will be. The "gap" that a lot of people have claimed could be used for it is very likely were the stub ejector hatch is located.

[Cerma]

*Edited out*

[Gallan Systems]

The US Army cancels things because they are 1) FCS 2) XM29.

[The Kievan People]

It just seems that the army has a re-occurring habit of accepting projects, maintaining them for an amount of years, and then dropping them. After a couple billion dollars later, the only reward they get is research that they can archive just in case we need it.

You are right. Thing is, everyone knows this. But it keep happening.

Basically the US Army has become the Indian Army.

But the US military's real problems began in the 90's when they began listening to economists (rarely a good idea) and business schools (never a good idea) and gutted their arsenals and laboratories too outsource as much of this work as possible to industry. What they failed to grasp was that having in-house technical expertise didn't just let them make weapons, it helped the military bridge the gap between operational needs and technical possibilities and it allowed them to engage industry on an equal basis as opposed to being passive consumers of the industry's products. It also failed to streamline the process as the military basically substituted independent expertise with red tape to keep it's contractors in line and eventually created a small army of "acquisition experts" to manage the process.

Thus neither the people making the decisions on procurement or the people responsible for managing the process in the US military have a strong grasp of how the things they are buying work, let alone how they might translate operational needs into technical solutions, independent of the industry which supplies the things they buy. And industry, naturally, has ever incentive to promise the sun and the moon if they can get away with it. Which they, because most of the major contractors have become far too big to fail no matter how many times they overpromise, underperform or fail to deliver.

And Americans are generally unable to comprehend this because government = bad!, private = good! And if things are going wrong it is because the stick in the mud bureaucrats have not yet mastered the latest execuspeak.

The US army has it exceptionally bad, though more because while the navy and air force treat ships and planes as their raison d'etre and defend their programs to the death, Army leaders are more willing to sacrifice troubled programs when the (budget) going gets rough. And US military acquisition being the way it is the troubled programs are nearly all of them. And US finances being the way they are its never good going. And the one time they did go "all in" on a major acquisition program it was the FCS... which was so messed up it got whacked anyways.

TL;DR clusterfuck

[Gallan Systems]

Don't know you companies work on Profit Motive, meaning they're totally immune to bureaucratic bloat! Just look at LCS. O:

[New Vihenia]

Oh, and there is probably no 30mm cannon and never will be. The "gap" that a lot of people have claimed could be used for it is very likely were the stub ejector hatch is located.

Well, some said the stub ejector door is located righte below the bustle.

[Dostanuot Loj]

All this talk of Armata has got me thinking.

So I've been working on something special.

[Gallan Systems]

Here is how we revamp the US Army:

Resurrect Patton Dempsey DePuy.

[Iltica]

Sorry to keep prodding but I'm really stuck here. My whole turret design hinges on whether the RDF/LT's 76mm burstfire system could actually kill modern MBTs, but I can't find much about it's efficacy. Does anyone know whether this sort of weapon would really work?

[Gallan Systems]

Sorry to keep prodding but I'm really stuck here. My whole turret design hinges on whether the RDF/LT's 76mm burstfire system could actually kill modern MBTs, but I can't find much about it's efficacy. Does anyone know whether this sort of weapon would really work?

It wouldn't.

It was never intended to kill tanks anyway. It was supposed to kill bunkers and other things that aren't really well armoured. It was really a modern assault gun, like Expeditionary Tank/Sheridan/AGS/Stryker.

[Rich and Corporations]

All this talk of Armata has got me thinking.

So I've been working on something special.

stryker does that

[Questers]

Oh, and there is probably no 30mm cannon and never will be. The "gap" that a lot of people have claimed could be used for it is very likely were the stub ejector hatch is located.

Well, some said the stub ejector door is located righte below the bustle.

Doesn't seem like a good place to put it. Seems to me like a stub could get jammed between the bustle and the chassis roof (maybe not, though.)

I think the T-72 stub ejector was the cutest ever. The tank did a poop when it ejected :3