Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation Mk X

[Laritaia]

having the upper glacis be two separate plates seems to be a bit pointless without a driver's vision port or hull MG in it

The upper glacis is the sloped plate with the MG. Need to distinguish it from the vertical plate somehow, especially with them being different thicknesses.

Looks almost Czech. Neato.

SEPPUKU

my point is that there is no reason to have a separate vertical plate.

[Fordorsia]

The upper glacis is the sloped plate with the MG. Need to distinguish it from the vertical plate somehow, especially with them being different thicknesses.



SEPPUKU

my point is that there is no reason to have a separate vertical plate.

Well I did it because I assumed it would be lighter than having a single slightly thinner sloped plate going from the roof to the transmission housing.

But I just did some thingying to see if I was right, aaand I wasn't. GOinging from the hull roof to the top of the housing, a single plate would need to be 70mm thick to provide the same protection as the vertical 100mm plate. That sloped plate's volume would be 0.114268 meter3 (around 896.8kg). Whereas the 100mm vertical plate is 0.06996 meter3 (549kg). And then the current sloped 50mm plate which is 0.06148 meter3 (around 485.2kg).

So current = 1034.2kg. A single 70mm plate = 896.8kg.

BUT, I still think would be better to keep it how it is. On top of being a major pain in the ass to change it now, it would be a lot harder to access and change the transmission. Right now you unbolt the upper glacis and take it and the housing off the lower glacis. With a single slope you'd need to unbolt it off the hull roof and that would make the piece getting lifted off a whole lot heavier and bulkier. Plus I like how it looks currently :V

[Laritaia]

my point is that there is no reason to have a separate vertical plate.

Well I did it because I assumed it would be lighter than having a single slightly thinner sloped plate going from the roof to the transmission housing.

But I just did some thingying to see if I was right, aaand I wasn't. GOinging from the hull roof to the top of the housing, a single plate would need to be 70mm thick to provide the same protection as the vertical 100mm plate. That sloped plate's volume would be 0.114268 meter3 (around 896.8kg). Whereas the 100mm vertical plate is 0.06996 meter3 (549kg). And then the current sloped 50mm plate which is 0.06148 meter3 (around 485.2kg).

So current = 1034.2kg. A single 70mm plate = 896.8kg.

BUT, I still think would be better to keep it how it is. On top of being a major pain in the ass to change it now, it would be a lot harder to access and change the transmission. Right now you unbolt the upper glacis and take it and the housing off the lower glacis. With a single slope you'd need to unbolt it off the hull roof and that would make the piece getting lifted off a whole lot heavier and bulkier. Plus I like how it looks currently :V

or you could do it how the Sherman does it

[Fordorsia]

lol gross

But no I think the transmission would be too big to take it out just by taking the housing off. I dunno though. The space between the ends of the upper and low glacis when the housing is removed is 52cm.

[Laritaia]

lol gross

But no I think the transmission would be too big to take it out just by taking the housing off. I dunno though. The space between the ends of the upper and low glacis when the housing is removed is 52cm.

the transmission would be attached to the housing

[Fordorsia]

lol gross

But no I think the transmission would be too big to take it out just by taking the housing off. I dunno though. The space between the ends of the upper and low glacis when the housing is removed is 52cm.

the transmission would be attached to the housing

How much stuff is in the top part of the housing? Or are the whole internals as tall as the sprockets are? Could be mine wouldn't have room to come out just with the housing.

Also keep in mind, the inside of the housing is 42cm from edge to edge. No idea if that's large enough for a transmission in a tank this heavy.

[Laritaia]

backside of transmission in it's housing

http://www.theshermantank.com/wp-conten ... 9-7018.jpg

[Fordorsia]

Yeah definitely not enough room if only the housing came off I think, especially with the gearbox.

Not an issue though. Same amount of bolts to come off either way.

[Iltica]

Been thinking about swapping out my clown shoe 700mm wide tracks with something closer to 580mm (ie T-72 sized) and just making the hull longer. Is it worse to be impractically wide or impractically long you think?

If there is a larger equally exported size that could help too. The 635mm tracks on the leopard 2 would work better but I doubt any country that has fielded Leopard 2s would be interested in another 3rd gen MBT. Or is backwards part compatibility not really that useful? (The tracks it would come with are not actually from another tank, they would just fit the same allowing you to substitute if necessary)

[The Akasha Colony]

Been thinking about swapping out my clown shoe 700mm wide tracks with something closer to 580mm (ie T-72 sized) and just making the hull longer. Is it worse to be impractically wide or impractically long you think?

If there is a larger equally exported size that could help too. The 635mm tracks on the leopard 2 would work better but I doubt any country that has fielded Leopard 2s would be interested in another 3rd gen MBT. Or is backwards part compatibility not really that useful? (The tracks it would come with are not actually from another tank, they would just fit the same allowing you to substitute if necessary)

Impractically long vehicles that exceed the rough 2:1 length:width ratio for track length have much greater problems with throwing and breaking tracks while turning than shorter tanks. Wide tracks are primarily a problem for transport depending on the loading gauge but as the Tiger I demonstrated there are ways around this (although having to swap tracks before and after each rail movement is a pain).

I'm not entirely sure why either would be needed though given that very heavy Western tanks have gotten along fine with tracks in the 630 mm range without being impractically long or wide. 700 mm isn't outside the realm of possibility anyway since M60 had 711 mm tracks.

Backwards compatibility generally doesn't seem to be a particularly high priority. If you're going through all of the effort to design a new tank rather than just modernize an old one, you'd want to design whatever tracks would be best suited to the vehicle, rather than potentially hamstring the design just to reuse some track stockpiles. Tracks are just steel blocks with rubber pads, so they're pretty cheap and you can liquidate your track stockpiles in the meantime while the old tanks are being phased out. The Leopard 2 does not share tracks with the Leopard 1 (635 vs 548 mm), and the Chieftain did not inherit the tracks of the Centurion (610 vs 660 mm). Abrams switched to 640 mm tracks from M60's 711 mm tracks.

The most widely exported track sizes outside of the Soviet ones are probably the 635-640 mm tracks used by the Leopard 2 and Abrams.

[Iltica]

Guess it's more an issue of handling then, right now the overall width is very close to a T-64/72/80/90 at 3.77 meters or so but the actual hull body is only 2.15 wide. Idk what sort of problems this could cause but it looks really silly. The proposed lengthening and narrowing puts it at about the same length and width as a Leo2 or type 99. It might make the steering worse but I've never heard any complaints about those two's steering.

The reason for the backwards compatible size is not because of a likely shortage here but one in a nation that it is exported to. The most likely customers are probably those looking to upgrade from 2nd generation MBTs like the T-72, M60, and Leopard 1. Anyone still operating 1st gen probably can't afford this, and anyone who already has 3rd gen probably isn't in the market for another. Matching the 635mm tracks will likely have an advantage in performance but won't have the attraction for logistics since this implies they already have one of those 2 tanks and wouldn't be interested. Them being an M60 operator on the other hand, is reasonably likely but would favor sticking to the current proportions.

[The Akasha Colony]

The reason for the backwards compatible size is not because of a likely shortage here but one in a nation that it is exported to. The most likely customers are probably those looking to upgrade from 2nd generation MBTs like the T-72, M60, and Leopard 1. Anyone still operating 1st gen probably can't afford this, and anyone who already has 3rd gen probably isn't in the market for another. Matching the 635mm tracks will likely have an advantage in performance but won't have the attraction for logistics since this implies they already have one of those 2 tanks and wouldn't be interested. Them being an M60 operator on the other hand, is reasonably likely but would favor sticking to the current proportions.

I don't know of any nations that would get hung up on replacing their tank fleet solely due to the state of their track stockpiles. If they are so concerned about the cost of the tracks, they would not be interested in buying any reasonably modern 3rd generation tanks anyway and might look at investing in some second-hand Toyota Hilluxes instead, which is probably more in their price range.

A logistics chain isn't some kind of immutable force. Tracks are being consumed all the time and a nation looking to buy new tanks will obviously not receive them immediately, so they can just burn through their stockpiles while their new tanks are delivered and put into service. They'll be stocking up on a huge array of other new parts so why do the track links in particular stand out?

It furthermore seems even stranger to make compromises in the design of your tank based on the possible motivations of potential foreign buyers. It'd be one thing if some importer were offering to buy like 10,000 tanks but only if they kept the same tracks (for some odd reason), but I can say with reasonable confidence that any rational nation looking to buy new tanks will not care about track width. It hasn't stopped the Leopard 2 from being widely adopted by countries that once operated the Leopard 1 or even older tanks, nor did it stop nations from buying Abrams when they previously operated Patton-series tanks with incompatible tracks.

[Laritaia]

changing from one track type to another tends to require at minimum a change in final drive sprocket as well

[Chinevion]

War thunder germans might be getting the KPZ 70

[Fordorsia]

Impractically long vehicles that exceed the rough 2:1 length:width ratio for track length have much greater problems with throwing and breaking tracks while turning than shorter tanks.

What's that ratio exactly? Is it the length of the contact area of both or one tracks, and the width of one or both tracks?

Either way the contact area on each of my tracks is 3.92m x 71cm. Not sure if that's any good. Not that mine is at all long, but the tracks and tank are pretty wide.

War thunder germans might be getting the KPZ 70

Even more Cold War vehicles is exactly what the game needs...

[Gallan Systems]

MBT-70 in WT pls.

Then F-8 and F-4.

[Fordorsia]

gib bolo

[Gallan Systems]

You're just upset UK has nothing to offer past Vampire.

[Fordorsia]

muh cancer Hunter

[Laritaia]

You're just upset UK has nothing to offer past Vampire.

Lightning

[Gallan Systems]

muh cancer Hunter

Wow what won't they add?

e: Besides balanced Russian planes.

You're just upset UK has nothing to offer past Vampire.

Lightning

Where would it go?

There's no English Electric fighter line.

It could be a Premium I guess.

FAA gets Phantoms.

[Fordorsia]

muh cancer Hunter

Wow what won't they add?

A separate BR for Cold War vehicles : (

[Gallan Systems]

Wow what won't they add?

A separate BR for Cold War vehicles : (

Sucks to suck.

Play a good faction like USA or England instead of Grrmans.

[Fordorsia]

A separate BR for Cold War vehicles : (

Sucks to suck.

Play a good faction like USA or England instead of Grrmans.

Actually I paid some shekels to skip the Sturer Emil's research, but that thing is so bad I cursed Gaijin and went to focusing the muh yankies. muuh M6 and Jumboooo

[Laritaia]

Play a good faction like USA or England instead of Grrmans.

they balanced the British side out by making all of it's tanks pre centurion terribad