Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation Mk X

[ButtasticWaffles]

spimspam

High speed and mobility in urban areas at that size and weight? Doubt it.

pls no

What are you talking about?

[Fordorsia]

All British things are ugly.

Then how do yo explain me?

High speed and mobility in urban areas at that size and weight? Doubt it.

pls no

What are you talking about?

The main focus was to make a tank that was capable of high speeds on cross country areas and urban areas

A tank that size weighing nearly 70 tonnes isn't going to be suited to urban areas.

[Gallan Systems]

All British things are ugly.

Then how do yo explain me?

As an excellent demonstration of the principle.

[Fordorsia]

Hey now : D

[The Akasha Colony]

A tank that size weighing nearly 70 tonnes isn't going to be suited to urban areas.

As usual it depends on weight distribution but in general, tanks with urban combat packages have tended to get heavier rather than lighter. Urban areas tend to reduce the problem of sinking into soft ground which is why heavy vehicles with extreme ground pressure like MRAPs are useful for urban operations but much less useful elsewhere.

The real issue is that it's a generic description that he posted for an entirely different tank a few months ago, then re-posted with a new name and using Leopard 2 art. And one of the older Leopards at that. Any "Leopard 3" would be more likely to resemble the 2A5 and later variants like 2A7 with the new turret, rather than the old 2A4 which is what the Leopard 2 Revolution concept was based on.

[Gallan Systems]

Hey now : D

You walked into it.

[Fordorsia]

A tank that size weighing nearly 70 tonnes isn't going to be suited to urban areas.

As usual it depends on weight distribution but in general, tanks with urban combat packages have tended to get heavier rather than lighter. Urban areas tend to reduce the problem of sinking into soft ground which is why heavy vehicles with extreme ground pressure like MRAPs are useful for urban operations but much less useful elsewhere.

The real issue is that it's a generic description that he posted for an entirely different tank a few months ago, then re-posted with a new name and using Leopard 2 art. And one of the older Leopards at that. Any "Leopard 3" would be more likely to resemble the 2A5 and later variants like 2A7 with the new turret, rather than the old 2A4 which is what the Leopard 2 Revolution concept was based on.

Are urban combat packages basically just more armour?

[The Akasha Colony]

As usual it depends on weight distribution but in general, tanks with urban combat packages have tended to get heavier rather than lighter. Urban areas tend to reduce the problem of sinking into soft ground which is why heavy vehicles with extreme ground pressure like MRAPs are useful for urban operations but much less useful elsewhere.

The real issue is that it's a generic description that he posted for an entirely different tank a few months ago, then re-posted with a new name and using Leopard 2 art. And one of the older Leopards at that. Any "Leopard 3" would be more likely to resemble the 2A5 and later variants like 2A7 with the new turret, rather than the old 2A4 which is what the Leopard 2 Revolution concept was based on.

Are urban combat packages basically just more armour?

More armor especially on the roof/sides/rear, better protection for weapons stations (including remote weapon stations in some cases), better sensors if possible, and both the M1 Abrams TUSK and the Merkava include a mount for an external coaxial M2 HMG to give the gunner the ability to engage distant targets like snipers that may be beyond the range of his coaxial MG (or too heavily entrenched) but which would be problematic to engage with the main gun in an urban setting where collateral damage is a concern.

They basically allow a tank to more easily fight totally buttoned up, since a commander or loader sitting in the open hatch manning a pintle MG is a greater vulnerability in close-quarters than it is in the field.

[Fordorsia]

Are urban combat packages basically just more armour?

More armor especially on the roof/sides/rear, better protection for weapons stations (including remote weapon stations in some cases), better sensors if possible, and both the M1 Abrams TUSK and the Merkava include a mount for an external coaxial M2 HMG to give the gunner the ability to engage distant targets like snipers that may be beyond the range of his coaxial MG (or too heavily entrenched) but which would be problematic to engage with the main gun in an urban setting where collateral damage is a concern.

They basically allow a tank to more easily fight totally buttoned up, since a commander or loader sitting in the open hatch manning a pintle MG is a greater vulnerability in close-quarters than it is in the field.

Neato.

Has this only became a thing in a past couple decades from experience in close quarters in the Middle East? Or just a general upgrade for any enemy in an urban setting?

[The Akasha Colony]

Neato.

Has this only became a thing in a past couple decades from experience in close quarters in the Middle East? Or just a general upgrade for any enemy in an urban setting?

These kits have a tendency to appear when needed and disappear when not, depending on the length of the conflict involved. But it's often a mixed outcome since some upgrades just get worked into the baseline capabilities of future vehicles.

The Israelis have generally strongly emphasized many of these characteristics and thus haven't needed to use urban combat kits because vehicles like Merkava have generally incorporated all-around protection and such. US crews initially improvised kits in Vietnam and then the Army started rolling some out more widely (like the ACAV kit for the M113) and then retired them afterward. Similar things happened in WWII as US crews salvaged armor wherever they could find it to up-armor their vehicles in the field after AGF insisted no additional armor was necessary, until the Jumbo and later the M26 was finally approved. The US and Britain both brought back urban kits for the Middle East and Germany designed a number of upgrade kits for the Leopard 2. Current kits are more involved because they involve fancy things like RWS and extra thermal viewers and ERA, but they're fundamentally the same as previously, the technology's just gotten better.

The full TUSK has generally been retired now that the US has brought its tanks home from Iraq, but several of the improvements such as the RWS and sensors are intended to be standardized on upcoming upgrades. The problem is that these kits tend to significantly increase the vehicle's weight, which reduces performance off road. This is fine in a city where there are roads everywhere and generally vehicles are not expected to need to move very quickly, but it degrades field performance. So applique kits are generally removed when not needed until the next round of deep modernization, when it is possible to re-tune the suspension and powerplant to offset the weight increase. Germany is hoping to do this with its current round of Leopard 2 modernizations to upgrade to the new A7V standard, but significantly overhauling the suspension and powerpack is expensive and it remains to be seen if they'll pony up the cash.

The original RWS and gun shields for the commander and loader in TUSK were also very tall and increased the tank's silhouette significantly. Again, not so much of an issue in occupation operations in Iraq, but undesirable in a high-intensity conflict where being spotted means getting hit by serious ATGMs and possibly APFSDS rather than just some sporadic MG fire and a few old RPGs. Which is why the new RWS is supposed to be capable of folding down to reduce the tank's profile.

[Sevvania]

and I feel like you've got too many periscopes/viewports.

NEVER

ENOUGH

Honestly I'm just always paranoid about visibility. Especially with close defense turrets like them, they're really the eyes of the Commander, who is also the 60mm gunner.

Having more eyes for the commander probably won't help much if they're barely able to communicate with one another, which was the case with similar interwar landships like the T35. Also seems like they'd add more points of vulnerability.

[Fordorsia]

NEVER

ENOUGH

Honestly I'm just always paranoid about visibility. Especially with close defense turrets like them, they're really the eyes of the Commander, who is also the 60mm gunner.

Having more eyes for the commander probably won't help much if they're barely able to communicate with one another, which was the case with similar interwar landships like the T35. Also seems like they'd add more points of vulnerability.

How early did crew intercoms come into use? My plan was to have the driver in touch with the commander via a headset. The driver could relay any necessary commands to the front gunners since the space between them all is open, and either the loader or commander himself could give any orders to the rear gunners (by having to bend down right into the turret basket) since the space between them is open as well.

Not exactly ideal but that's the nature of a multi turret landship.

[Purpelia]

Having more eyes for the commander probably won't help much if they're barely able to communicate with one another, which was the case with similar interwar landships like the T35. Also seems like they'd add more points of vulnerability.

How early did crew intercoms come into use? My plan was to have the driver in touch with the commander via a headset. The driver could relay any necessary commands to the front gunners since the space between them all is open, and either the loader or commander himself could give any orders to the rear gunners (by having to bend down right into the turret basket) since the space between them is open as well.

Not exactly ideal but that's the nature of a multi turret landship.

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

[Fordorsia]

How early did crew intercoms come into use? My plan was to have the driver in touch with the commander via a headset. The driver could relay any necessary commands to the front gunners since the space between them all is open, and either the loader or commander himself could give any orders to the rear gunners (by having to bend down right into the turret basket) since the space between them is open as well.

Not exactly ideal but that's the nature of a multi turret landship.

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

Do I look like a barbarian?

[Purpelia]

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

Do I look like a barbarian?

That's a trick question, right?

[Fordorsia]

Well my family does descend from one of the oldest Scottish clans I suppose


It had to be done. Don't blame me, blame the empty space in the front hull.



750 rounds in 6 drums for each turret MG, and I think 500 per gun for the hull guns would be "sensible". 60mm main gun has 50-60 rounds, pintle guns have 250 rounds in two drums each and I guess the coax would have a couple thousand. And don't forget the pistol port on each side of the turret. Very crucial.

I feel like, with the fire rate of the MG 15, that 750 rounds isn't really enough, especially since 8 of the total drums are outside the turrets. How much ammo should each turret MG have?

[Hurtful Thoughts]

It wouldn't, if Hurty's figures for bearing diameter are accurate.

You'd need to rebuild the hull. In which case it's T-34 in name only.

Only rebuilt up to T-34/85's ring-diameter, really.

Unless that figure was inaccurate

I mean, the numbers say it should be possible to mount an FL-12 /w/ 90mm cannon on a Valentine.

[Fordorsia]

Managed to get it up to 960 rounds in 8 drums for each turret MG. Should be good enough.

Probably a better way to have asked if the ammo count was good enough is if there's any kind of average ammo expenditure for MGs in tanks per engagement.

[Husseinarti]

Managed to get it up to 960 rounds in 8 drums for each turret MG. Should be good enough.

Probably a better way to have asked if the ammo count was good enough is if there's any kind of average ammo expenditure for MGs in tanks per engagement.

Well, the vision ports awfully modern, considering standard practice at this time was just to hole vision slits in the turret.

[Fordorsia]

Managed to get it up to 960 rounds in 8 drums for each turret MG. Should be good enough.

Probably a better way to have asked if the ammo count was good enough is if there's any kind of average ammo expenditure for MGs in tanks per engagement.

Well, the vision ports awfully modern, considering standard practice at this time was just to hole vision slits in the turret.

I know better than those interwar neanderthals.

[Tharaka]

NEVER

ENOUGHii

Honestly I'm just always paranoid about visibility. Especially with close defense turrets like them, they're really the eyes of the Commander, who is also the 60mm gunner.

Having more eyes for the commander probably won't help much if they're barely able to communicate with one another, which was the case with similar interwar landships like the T35. Also seems like they'd add more points of vulnerability.

How early did crew intercoms come into use? My plan was to have the driver in touch with the commander via a headset. The driver could relay any necessary commands to the front gunners since the space between them all is open, and either the loader or commander himself could give any orders to the rear gunners (by having to bend down right into the turret basket) since the space between them is open as well.

Not exactly ideal but that's the nature of a multi turret landship.[/quote]

Intercoms came about very early actually. The German Heavy K tank was outfitted with communications equipment similar to that found on their U-boats. So that means they had it in the end of the 1918. The U.S.A. also used a system called Intratank Telephones on their Mark VIII tanks. The transmitter is a small button shaped device held against the the larynx by mean of a elastic band fastened around the throat. The receivers where in a headphone like mount. The transmitter receives the vibrations from the larynx directly and translates it into words and sent. The commander had a circuit box. There was one circuit for each station. All he had to do was close the circuit to the person he wished to talk to. Much less order relaying involved.

Hope it helps.

[Fordorsia]

Helps a lot. Fordorsia isn't exactly a poverty stricken land so now the TC, loader or driver doesn't need to hit a gunner to get his attention.

[Chinevion]

early wit of a scout tank with a 90mm auto loading rifled gun. Crew of three all in front like the t-14
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/228910428472737792/294458268028370945/0PB5eHp.png
any tutorials on drawing with gimp? could not find any so using paint for now

[ButtasticWaffles]

All British things are ugly.

Then how do yo explain me?

What are you talking about?

The main focus was to make a tank that was capable of high speeds on cross country areas and urban areas

A tank that size weighing nearly 70 tonnes isn't going to be suited to urban areas.

If a tank that was about 70 tonnes wasn't suited to urban areas then why is the US deploying m1a2 abrahams in urban areas and the UK deploying Challenger 2's in urban areas.Of course it could be deployed there

[Gallia-]

Then how do yo explain me?





A tank that size weighing nearly 70 tonnes isn't going to be suited to urban areas.

If a tank that was about 70 tonnes wasn't suited to urban areas then why is the US deploying m1a2 abrahams in urban areas and the UK deploying Challenger 2's in urban areas.Of course it could be deployed there

Ford doesn't know anything about tanks, just don't listen to him.