Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation Mk X

[Laritaia]

i'm not talking about an Ajax with a 120 or 105mm gun, i mean they're just going to pretend that the normal 40mm armed vehicle is good enough.

"Yeah m8s, the 40mm is totally good enough to knock out T-72s"

This is entirely in keeping with established MoD behavior.

[Imperializt Russia]

i'm not talking about an Ajax with a 120 or 105mm gun, i mean they're just going to pretend that the normal 40mm armed vehicle is good enough.

In around 2005 or whatever, I started forming this loose collection of headcanon that formed the basis of a videogame universe I would like to see come to fruition. It's changed significantly in this time, and much of the military equipment I devised has been dropped for being batshit or implausible.

Among this was a vehicle I honestly intended to bring into NS.
A "light tank destroyer" that was literally a wheeled tank armed with twin 40mm cannons, that actually replaced the British tank inventory.
My defence for this train of logic is that I was twelve.

Here it is next to a comically oversized 40mm mutli-barrel gun, which was intended to be fitted to the turret for anti-aircraft and ground-support use.

[Laritaia]

oh i very much doubt the MoD thinks that it's a "good" idea.

but it's what will happen because they have no other option.

[Imperializt Russia]

oh i very much doubt the MoD thinks that it's a "good" idea.

but it's what will happen because they have no other option.

Which makes them shitheels for not admitting that either they don't want to ask for, or the government won't give them the money, to continue Britain's operation of battle tanks.

It makes them everything I despise about modern British governance.

In order to appear slightly more on topic, I would still like to bring that vehicle into NS. Just as a scout tank or otherwise CV90 alike, or whatever.
I'm debating ditching the twin guns for something like a 57mm or something.
Maybe you can tell where my fascination for twin ATGM tubes came from?

[Dostanuot Loj]

i'm not talking about an Ajax with a 120 or 105mm gun, i mean they're just going to pretend that the normal 40mm armed vehicle is good enough.

Got a source besides just not trusting the UKMoD?

I find it hard to believe since no official chatter about it has happened. The UKMoD has actually gone the other way and is trying to keep the Challenger in service instead of dropping it completely. And, of course, I'm pretty sure 99.9% of the UKMoD is over the age of twelve.

Ajax is a replacement for CVRT, and it is badly needed.
Next will be the Warrior and FV432 (Probably the same vehicle in different versions), using the same technologies developed for Ajax.
Then you will see a Chally replacement.

[Gallia-]

Maybe they should cut funding to the NHS and pensions, let old people die, and start building more tanks.

People would probably be happier with their lives.

[Imperializt Russia]

Maybe they should cut funding to the NHS and pensions, let old people die, and start building more tanks.

People would probably be happier with their lives.

>conservatives
>cutting money for old people
pffftt

[Gallia-]

Maybe they should cut funding to the NHS and pensions, let old people die, and start building more tanks.

People would probably be happier with their lives.

>conservatives
>cutting money for old people
pffftt

What if...British people got off their ass and executed them all.

Just kill them.

I mean Parliament.

Cut out the degenerate morass of deathmocrazy and replace it with youthful vigour...

You could even blame the Russians for the Whitehall Fire...

[Autonomous Eastern Ukraine]

Maybe they should cut funding to the NHS and pensions, let old people die, and start building more tanks.

People would probably be happier with their lives.

But muh welfare state

[The Akasha Colony]

Challenger 2E is better.

Vetronics - equal.
Movement - superior. powerplant equal, better suspension system, better range.
Protection - very superior.
Firepower - nearly equal. Rheinmetall gun has maybe 200-mm extra penetration when firing APDSFS. L30 can still do almost all the same things as the Rheinmetall gun, but carries more rounds and can be hotloaded.

Britain just didn't get CR2E because dumb. The only thing that Leopard has over CR2E is it can shoot a better APDSFS round.

Leopard 2 has a poor track record in use. Challenger 2 has a better record.

Compared to which Leopard 2?

Electronics - Current Leopard 2 variants and proposals (since I guess we're now including demonstrators) are superior to the old CR2E proposal using newer units like SEOSS and Attica GL and having an integrated array of self-protection sensors (like Rheinmetall's SAS) as part of the APS. They're also getting new APUs to power the improved electronics suite.

Movement - The replacement of the old 873 with EuroPowerPack as in CR2E would provide the same improvement in range for Leopard 2, if not greater because Leo 2's current engine is larger than CR2's which would result in a larger freed volume for fuel storage. The suspension is really the only advantage Challenger 2 has but its bump travel is not significantly greater than Leopard 2's so it's a limited advantage.

Protection - Leopard 2 has received more modern protection upgrade packages and has even been demonstrated with several different types of hardkill and softkill APS, including MUSS, AMAP-ADS, AWiSS, AVePs, etc. Even the old Leopard 2A4s have a large range of new protection offerings from several companies (Rheinmetall, KNDS, RUAG). The protection on the Challeger 2 was so great that the British only had to add like 15 tonnes of extra armor to it after all.

Firepower - 200 mm is really nothing to scoff at. Leopard 2 also has a wider variety of ammunition and has been demonstrated with an RWS. New Leopards are also receiving the interfaces to use airbursting ammunition, something the British don't seem too interested in adopting. It's also rather odd to hold inferior round storage capacity against the Leopard 2 when it has the same stowage capacity as the Abrams.

Leopard 2 and Abrams have both benefited from ongoing development and a steady stream of improvements to FCS, ammunition, a new gun (in the case of Leopard 2), and armor improvements over the two decades since Challenger 2 came into service, and Challenger 2 wasn't even a match for these vehicles when it entered service (both M1A2 and Leopard 2A5 already had CITVs).

There is no longer much of a case that can be made that Challenger 2 is better than even the Leopard 2A5 models it was contemporaneous with, and it has been left behind by the A6 and A7 because unlike the UK, Germany is still invested in its AFV industry.

(1) Challenger 2 doesn't have a good CITV because the British government doesn't want to pay for one. Private industry put one on and offered it for sale. It's literally not a problem. The observation systems have actually been upgraded since it entered service anyway.

(2) It is in the process of receiving upgraded ammunition, so not sure what that's about.

(3) It has had armour packages developed and is still better protected than Leopard 2. It also will not spurt hydraulic fluid in your face if hit.

1. That's like saying the Leopard 2 doesn't have a 140 mm gun because the Germans didn't want to buy KWS 3. Private industry put new optics on the Challenger 2 and offered it for sale and it didn't sell. Leopard 2 was cheaper but it also had more growth potential and a larger ecosystem of providers.

2. Which is still inferior to both the performance and sheer range of options available to the Rh 120 mm ecosystem. There's a very good reason the British were considering adopting the Rheinmetall gun and not the other way around. The L30 cannot match the muzzle energy of the Rh L/55 or the penetrator length of M829A3/A4. There isn't really anything that can be done about this without a new turret, which Parliament is loathe to fund.

3. The Leopard 2A5 and newer eliminate the gunsight cutout in the original Leopard 2's armor and this was the issue the British had with it. Since then the armor has only gotten substantially better. The Leopard 2s being upgraded for Poland and Chile will also have electric drives. If we're going to play the "no one paid for the change" card to say it's a moot point because it can be done, it should be pointed out that unlike CR2E, which no one bought, there are nations that have actually bought modernized Leopards with electric drives.

For a vehicle (CR2E) that was supposedly superior to Leopard 2, a surprising number of the upgrade proposals for the current Challenger CLEP are basically just the newer Leopard 2 parts tacked on to Challenger. It's almost as if in the ten years since CR2E was taken off the market, newer technologies have been developed and as a platform with more commercial interest, Leopard 2 has benefited more from this than a vehicle that sold fewer than 40 tanks abroad...

[Laritaia]

i'm not talking about an Ajax with a 120 or 105mm gun, i mean they're just going to pretend that the normal 40mm armed vehicle is good enough.

Got a source besides just not trusting the UKMoD?

I find it hard to believe since no official chatter about it has happened. The UKMoD has actually gone the other way and is trying to keep the Challenger in service instead of dropping it completely. And, of course, I'm pretty sure 99.9% of the UKMoD is over the age of twelve.

Ajax is a replacement for CVRT, and it is badly needed.
Next will be the Warrior and FV432 (Probably the same vehicle in different versions), using the same technologies developed for Ajax.
Then you will see a Chally replacement.

Firstly the MoD rarely announces the latest retarded plan before it has to, SOP is to wait till it's too late to do anything about it.

Secondly there is no Warrior replacement.

Thirdly i never said the MoD wants to do it, i'm saying that it will happen regardless. For it not to would require the reversal of at least two decades of budgetary decline and neglect.

and all indications are that things are going to get much worse, not better.

so no, i have no evidence beyond the last 50 years of MoD decisions and monumental fuck ups.



Just remember kids, it's not a cut, it's a "Capability Holiday"

[Gallia-]

Maybe they should cut funding to the NHS and pensions, let old people die, and start building more tanks.

People would probably be happier with their lives.

But muh welfare state

Is unsustainable without positive population growth.

You either thin the greying horde, or go for the root of the problem.

[Imperializt Russia]

Maybe they should cut funding to the NHS and pensions, let old people die, and start building more tanks.

People would probably be happier with their lives.

But muh welfare state

Yeah, pensions aren't traditionally considered in the same terms as "welfare".
So, nah?

[Autonomous Eastern Ukraine]

But muh welfare state

Is unsustainable without positive population growth.

You either thin the greying horde, or go for the root of the problem.

Bring back the red coats!

[Gallia-]

But muh welfare state

Yeah, pensions aren't traditionally considered in the same terms as "welfare".
So, nah?

Pensions are the cancer that is killing the West.

Is unsustainable without positive population growth.

You either thin the greying horde, or go for the root of the problem.

Bring back the red coats!

The British created the death of Western civilization, though. It goes back three centuries now.

The Dutch are a vastly superior race. They recognize the need.

Create a race that is combination Dutch-German pragmatism, French natalism, and British ability-to-swimism, and you will have the true Aryan Master Race.

aka Oregon.

[Imperializt Russia]

Yeah, pensions aren't traditionally considered in the same terms as "welfare".
So, nah?

Pensions are the cancer that is killing the West.

No, the inability of the pension system to adapt; due to government being unwilling to make it adapt beyond inconsequential increments; is killing the west.

[Gallia-]

Pensions are the cancer that is killing the West.

No, the inability of the pension system to adapt; due to government being unwilling to make it adapt beyond inconsequential increments; is killing the west.

The only way to "adapt" a pension system to the future is to get rid of it, or never have it in the first place. There aren't enough taxpayers in the future to support it.

We're returning to the pre-1900s stagnation era because people stopped getting taller, stopped getting healthier, and stopped getting smarter because we're all as tall/healthy/smart as we can be, so now they've stopped having children. The West isn't poor anymore, it's quite economically developed, and the only way from here is down.

It's the fifth step towards extinction.

[Imperializt Russia]

No, we just need to dynamically change the retirement age. They were implemented to supplement the life of people who could physically no longer work because eugenics isn't okay.

The retirement age stagnated and average lifespans increased dramatically, leading to a spiral of increased pension cost.

[Laritaia]

No, we just need to dynamically change the retirement age. They were implemented to supplement the life of people who could physically no longer work because eugenics isn't okay.

The retirement age stagnated and average lifespans increased dramatically, leading to a spiral of increased pension cost.

increasing the retirement age is shutting young people out of the jobs market, which is eventually going to start rapidly shrinking as more and more jobs are replaced by machines.

[Gallia-]

No, we just need to dynamically change the retirement age. They were implemented to supplement the life of people who could physically no longer work because eugenics isn't okay.

The retirement age stagnated and average lifespans increased dramatically, leading to a spiral of increased pension cost.

Eugenics is great, because the West has been practicing eugenics for centuries and it's worked out just fine. Except we don't call it "eugenics" anymore, we call it "family planning". Anyway, average lifespans increased by 10 years or less cf. retirement age. Hardly "dramatically". The reality is that the "pension" system only works when lifespans are about 70 or less. There you have a education period, work for 30-40 years, and spend 10-15 years in retirement before you die. It breaks down when you increase lifespan further, because past about 10 years you end up needing a big government pension scheme to fund it all, which requires positive taxpayer growth.

Retirement age won't increase, it may decrease though. People won't want to work until they're 70-80 years to pay for their pensions, why would they when they can vote to keep retirement age low and pensions climbing by offloading costs to the government? The better solution is to institute a hard line "no pensions" policy or increase longevity risk by some other means.

We should have a death age, not a retirement age. Kill people at 75 by cutting off their retirement money or sth. Or shooting them.

It's not "eugenics" if they don't contribute to the gene pool anyway, since they're all old.

Maybe make smoking popular again so everyone dies of heart attacks in a big belt between 65-75.

The point is, the root problem isn't old people: it's lack of breeding. There aren't enough workers to pay for the old people, so they'll probably all just die of starvation or something in their council homes that are falling apart because they bankrupted the government.

They won't give a shit about posterity because they're old, anyway.

[Purpelia]

Or we could focus on actually having people have happy lives.

[Gallia-]

Or we could focus on actually having people have happy lives.

Why should lives be happy?

Happiness is zero sum.

No, we just need to dynamically change the retirement age. They were implemented to supplement the life of people who could physically no longer work because eugenics isn't okay.

The retirement age stagnated and average lifespans increased dramatically, leading to a spiral of increased pension cost.

increasing the retirement age is shutting young people out of the jobs market, which is eventually going to start rapidly shrinking as more and more jobs are replaced by machines.

It should be like the TNG episode.

Where all the old people get killed at retirement.

[Purpelia]

Or we could focus on actually having people have happy lives.

Why should lives be happy?

Happiness is zero sum.

Because that is the only thing that matters. Everything else is irrelevant.

[Gallia-]

Why should lives be happy?

Happiness is zero sum.

Because that is the only thing that matters. Everything else is irrelevant.

I'm glad you agree to kill all old people.

[Fordorsia]

DAE remember tanks?