NATION

PASSWORD

Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation Mk X

A place to put national factbooks, embassy exchanges, and other information regarding the nations of the world. [In character]

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Kanugues Wed
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 185
Founded: Jan 08, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Kanugues Wed » Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:51 am

I feel like the turret should have a different design if it’s only stopping 30mm. It looks a lot like an Abrams.
Sure, we might look communist, but we are legitimately a democratic country.

User avatar
The Manticoran Empire
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10506
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Anarchy

Postby The Manticoran Empire » Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:23 pm

Image

Is this a good design for a tank?
For: Israel, Palestine, Kurdistan, American Nationalism, American citizens of Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands, and US Virgin Islands receiving a congressional vote and being allowed to vote for president, military, veterans before refugees, guns, pro choice, LGBT marriage, plural marriage, US Constitution, World Peace, Global Unity.

Against: Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Liberalism, Theocracy, Corporatocracy.


By the Blood of our Fathers, By the Blood of our Sons, we fight, we die, we sacrifice for the Good of the Empire.

User avatar
North Arkana
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8867
Founded: Dec 16, 2013
Democratic Socialists

Postby North Arkana » Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:57 pm

The Manticoran Empire wrote:(Image)

Is this a good design for a tank?

It's... An obstacle clearance, and TUSK style kit fitted Abrams. It's already a good design. What are you actually asking about?
"I don't know everything, just the things I know"

User avatar
The Manticoran Empire
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10506
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Anarchy

Postby The Manticoran Empire » Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:01 pm

North Arkana wrote:
The Manticoran Empire wrote:(Image)

Is this a good design for a tank?

It's... An obstacle clearance, and TUSK style kit fitted Abrams. It's already a good design. What are you actually asking about?

Well I'm considering making this my nation's main battle tank set up.
For: Israel, Palestine, Kurdistan, American Nationalism, American citizens of Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands, and US Virgin Islands receiving a congressional vote and being allowed to vote for president, military, veterans before refugees, guns, pro choice, LGBT marriage, plural marriage, US Constitution, World Peace, Global Unity.

Against: Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Liberalism, Theocracy, Corporatocracy.


By the Blood of our Fathers, By the Blood of our Sons, we fight, we die, we sacrifice for the Good of the Empire.

User avatar
North Arkana
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8867
Founded: Dec 16, 2013
Democratic Socialists

Postby North Arkana » Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:03 pm

The Manticoran Empire wrote:
North Arkana wrote:It's... An obstacle clearance, and TUSK style kit fitted Abrams. It's already a good design. What are you actually asking about?

Well I'm considering making this my nation's main battle tank set up.

You don't need to fit out every tank for obstacle clearance, and you don't need to have a TUSK style kit fitted all the time. Especially if you're trying not constantly lose bits and pieces.
"I don't know everything, just the things I know"

User avatar
Dostanuot Loj
Senator
 
Posts: 4027
Founded: Nov 04, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Dostanuot Loj » Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:07 pm

North Arkana wrote:
The Manticoran Empire wrote:(Image)

Is this a good design for a tank?

It's... An obstacle clearance, and TUSK style kit fitted Abrams. It's already a good design. What are you actually asking about?


Track width mine plow is only "obstacle clearance" if you're only obstacles are shallow buried antk-tank mines.
Leopard 1 IRL

Kyiv is my disobedient child. :P

User avatar
Gallia-
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25554
Founded: Oct 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Gallia- » Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:08 pm

The Manticoran Empire wrote:(Image)

Is this a good design for a tank?


No it's trash.

North Arkana wrote:
The Manticoran Empire wrote:(Image)

Is this a good design for a tank?

It's... An obstacle clearance, and TUSK style kit fitted Abrams. It's already a good design. What are you actually asking about?


It's not "like" or the "style" of an Abrams. It's literally a SEP Abrams with a full TUSK kit and the mine clearing blade.

I'm not even sure what he is supposed to be asking TBH.
Last edited by Gallia- on Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
North Arkana
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8867
Founded: Dec 16, 2013
Democratic Socialists

Postby North Arkana » Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:09 pm

Dostanuot Loj wrote:
North Arkana wrote:It's... An obstacle clearance, and TUSK style kit fitted Abrams. It's already a good design. What are you actually asking about?


Track width mine plow is only "obstacle clearance" if you're only obstacles are shallow buried antk-tank mines.

Between the M908 and the AMP, you already have not inconsequential level of obstacle clearance abilities present just be shooting things with the right ammunition.
"I don't know everything, just the things I know"

User avatar
Gallia-
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25554
Founded: Oct 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Gallia- » Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:11 pm

North Arkana wrote:Between the M908 and the AMP, you already have inconsequential level of obstacle clearance abilities


FTFY.

An actual anti-armor obstacle is a large crater, steep cliff, or some sort of abatis or other I-beam obstacle.

Which cannot be defeated by something designed to blow up concrete pillboxes and knock holes in walls.
Last edited by Gallia- on Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Dostanuot Loj
Senator
 
Posts: 4027
Founded: Nov 04, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Dostanuot Loj » Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:14 pm

North Arkana wrote:
Dostanuot Loj wrote:
Track width mine plow is only "obstacle clearance" if you're only obstacles are shallow buried antk-tank mines.

Between the M908 and the AMP, you already have not inconsequential level of obstacle clearance abilities present just be shooting things with the right ammunition.


Not obstacle clearance.

You need a proper dozer.
Image

Creating rubble is not the same thing.
Leopard 1 IRL

Kyiv is my disobedient child. :P

User avatar
North Arkana
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8867
Founded: Dec 16, 2013
Democratic Socialists

Postby North Arkana » Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:21 pm

Dostanuot Loj wrote:
North Arkana wrote:Between the M908 and the AMP, you already have not inconsequential level of obstacle clearance abilities present just be shooting things with the right ammunition.


Not obstacle clearance.

You need a proper dozer.
Image

Creating rubble is not the same thing.

M908 HE-OR-T seems to have some merit to it though.

You tell it's authentic because of the cheesy Army PowerPoint presentation. :p

Image
Image
"I don't know everything, just the things I know"


User avatar
Dostanuot Loj
Senator
 
Posts: 4027
Founded: Nov 04, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Dostanuot Loj » Sat Mar 17, 2018 5:02 pm

Obstacle reduction is not obstacle clearance.

Failed at Tier 1 combat engineering.

An obstacle reduced, is still an obstacle.
Leopard 1 IRL

Kyiv is my disobedient child. :P

User avatar
Dayganistan
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1620
Founded: May 02, 2016
Father Knows Best State

Postby Dayganistan » Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:08 pm

So I'm looking for a vehicle for a gendarmerie of sorts, although maybe it's more similar to Brazilian military police units like BOPE. They'd be intended to patrol and pacify hostile areas in the event of uncontrollable crime, an insurgency, or an uprising against the government, and also potentially be employed as SWAT teams. Ideally, their vehicle should be able to carry at least 8 men and have the possibility of being armed with a machine gun or automatic grenade launcher (or maybe even an autocannon if that wouldn't be too excessive), as well as being resistant to mine and IED threats. Since I'm not really concerned about them maintaining the appearance of a civilian police force, should I just go full out and give them a wheeled APC of sorts or stick with something more in line with an MRAP?
Last edited by Dayganistan on Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Republic of Dayganistan | جمهوری دهقانستان

A secular, Tajik dominated state in Central Asia which has experienced 40 years of democratic backsliding. NS stats are NOT used.

User avatar
United Mercenary Firms
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 420
Founded: Nov 22, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby United Mercenary Firms » Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:21 pm

Dayganistan wrote:So I'm looking for a vehicle for a gendarmerie of sorts, although maybe it's more similar to Brazilian military police units like BOPE. They'd be intended to patrol and pacify hostile areas in the event of uncontrollable crime, an insurgency, or an uprising against the government, and also potentially be employed as SWAT teams. Ideally, their vehicle should be able to carry at least 8 men and have the possibility of being armed with a machine gun or automatic grenade launcher (or maybe even an autocannon if that wouldn't be too excessive), as well as being resistant to mine and IED threats. Since I'm not really concerned about them maintaining the appearance of a civilian police force, should I just go full out and give them a wheeled APC of sorts or stick with something more in line with an MRAP?


OK, so your specifications are:

1) must carry 8 passengers
2) must be capable of being armed with anything up to an autocannon as needed
3) must be mine and IED resistant

That last requirement means you absolutely need an MRAP. Most wheeled APCs in service today were not built to withstand IED explosions.

Plenty of MRAPs carry turrets and autocannon. RG-34, Lazar, etc.
Private Military Contractors are not heroes; we are businessmen. I am one -- and I do it for the money - nothing else. The only loyalty I have is to those fellow contractors whom I serve with and work for and I do not work for any other country but my own. That's it. Do we do risky heroic stuff daily? You bet! But if the paycheck stopped I would move on. Soldiers are the heroes. I was one and they sent me where they wanted and when for chicken feed. Now I get to choose.
--Best Comment ever.

User avatar
Taihei Tengoku
Senator
 
Posts: 4851
Founded: Dec 15, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Taihei Tengoku » Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:28 pm

Dayganistan wrote:So I'm looking for a vehicle for a gendarmerie of sorts, although maybe it's more similar to Brazilian military police units like BOPE. They'd be intended to patrol and pacify hostile areas in the event of uncontrollable crime, an insurgency, or an uprising against the government, and also potentially be employed as SWAT teams. Ideally, their vehicle should be able to carry at least 8 men and have the possibility of being armed with a machine gun or automatic grenade launcher (or maybe even an autocannon if that wouldn't be too excessive), as well as being resistant to mine and IED threats. Since I'm not really concerned about them maintaining the appearance of a civilian police force, should I just go full out and give them a wheeled APC of sorts or stick with something more in line with an MRAP?

You need a koevoet man
REST IN POWER
Franberry - HMS Barham - North Point - Questers - Tyrandis - Rosbaningrad - Sharfghotten
UNJUSTLY DELETED
OUR DAY WILL COME

User avatar
The Akasha Colony
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14159
Founded: Apr 25, 2010
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Akasha Colony » Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:36 pm

The Manticoran Empire wrote:(Image)

Is this a good design for a tank?


As others have mentioned, it's just an Abrams with TUSK II and mine plow.

You wouldn't necessarily want to make all of that kit standard since the mine plow adds a lot of weight and makes the vehicle larger. You only need a handful of vehicles to clear a path, and you would need even fewer if you had dedicated breaching vehicles like Grizzly or M1 ABV in sufficient quantities. The gun shields for the commander and loader just make the tank really tall so they're not great if you're trying to use cover. Which is why newer M1 variants just give the commander an RWS instead (which is also tall, but can fold down to reduce the tank's profile).

The rest of the gear is largely superfluous. The extra M2 doesn't really hurt, but it's mostly an anti-sniper gun and as far as I've seen, most M1s with TUSK installed don't even bother mounting it. AFAIK, ARAT is mostly anti-HEAT and so is of limited use against APFSDS (which was not a problem since insurgents don't usually carry man-portable M68s or M256s). It also makes the tank heavier, of course.

The track retaining ring though should be removed because it is no longer necessary and by at least some accounts, actively detrimental to the vehicle now because it can make detracking incidents worse.

Once you've done all that, you're left with just an M1A2 SEP Abrams. The TUSK modifications that were more generally useful outside of urban combat were either already rolled out or rolled into the SEP v3 program to be made standard, and the ones geared more exclusively toward urban combat were removed.

North Arkana wrote:M908 HE-OR-T seems to have some merit to it though.

You tell it's authentic because of the cheesy Army PowerPoint presentation. :p



M908 can reduce obstacles but not clear them. That's why it's called an "obstacle reduction" round, not an "obstacle clearance" round. The pile or resulting rubble still needs to be pushed aside or it will remain a mobility obstacle. That's why vehicles like M728 still had dozer blades even though they carried dedicated HE throwers for obstacle reduction.

Image
A colony of the New Free Planets Alliance.
The primary MT nation of this account is the Republic of Carthage.
New Free Planets Alliance (FT)
New Terran Republic (FT)
Republic of Carthage (MT)
World Economic Union (MT)
Kaiserreich Europa Zentral (PT/MT)
Five Republics of Hanalua (FanT)
National Links: Factbook Entry | Embassy Program
Storefronts: Carthaginian Naval Export Authority [MT, Navy]

User avatar
The Manticoran Empire
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10506
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Anarchy

Postby The Manticoran Empire » Sat Mar 17, 2018 8:23 pm

The Akasha Colony wrote:
The Manticoran Empire wrote:(Image)

Is this a good design for a tank?


As others have mentioned, it's just an Abrams with TUSK II and mine plow.

You wouldn't necessarily want to make all of that kit standard since the mine plow adds a lot of weight and makes the vehicle larger. You only need a handful of vehicles to clear a path, and you would need even fewer if you had dedicated breaching vehicles like Grizzly or M1 ABV in sufficient quantities. The gun shields for the commander and loader just make the tank really tall so they're not great if you're trying to use cover. Which is why newer M1 variants just give the commander an RWS instead (which is also tall, but can fold down to reduce the tank's profile).

The rest of the gear is largely superfluous. The extra M2 doesn't really hurt, but it's mostly an anti-sniper gun and as far as I've seen, most M1s with TUSK installed don't even bother mounting it. AFAIK, ARAT is mostly anti-HEAT and so is of limited use against APFSDS (which was not a problem since insurgents don't usually carry man-portable M68s or M256s). It also makes the tank heavier, of course.

The track retaining ring though should be removed because it is no longer necessary and by at least some accounts, actively detrimental to the vehicle now because it can make detracking incidents worse.

Once you've done all that, you're left with just an M1A2 SEP Abrams. The TUSK modifications that were more generally useful outside of urban combat were either already rolled out or rolled into the SEP v3 program to be made standard, and the ones geared more exclusively toward urban combat were removed.

I was thinking that one tank in the platoon (most likely platoon leader's tank) will carry the mine plow but all 4 tanks in the platoon will have two M2s in RWS operated by the commander and loader (my nation's M1A3 has an autoloader but we kept the fourth crewmember) and a third M2 over the main gun to be operated by the gunner if needed.
For: Israel, Palestine, Kurdistan, American Nationalism, American citizens of Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands, and US Virgin Islands receiving a congressional vote and being allowed to vote for president, military, veterans before refugees, guns, pro choice, LGBT marriage, plural marriage, US Constitution, World Peace, Global Unity.

Against: Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Liberalism, Theocracy, Corporatocracy.


By the Blood of our Fathers, By the Blood of our Sons, we fight, we die, we sacrifice for the Good of the Empire.

User avatar
Laritaia
Senator
 
Posts: 3958
Founded: Jan 22, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Laritaia » Sat Mar 17, 2018 8:24 pm

The Manticoran Empire wrote:I was thinking that one tank in the platoon (most likely platoon leader's tank) will carry the mine plow


this is the normal procedure yes

User avatar
The Manticoran Empire
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10506
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Anarchy

Postby The Manticoran Empire » Sat Mar 17, 2018 8:44 pm

Laritaia wrote:
The Manticoran Empire wrote:I was thinking that one tank in the platoon (most likely platoon leader's tank) will carry the mine plow


this is the normal procedure yes

I'm a 91B. I'm no tanker so I don't know what the procedures for tank units are. I fix trucks.
For: Israel, Palestine, Kurdistan, American Nationalism, American citizens of Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands, and US Virgin Islands receiving a congressional vote and being allowed to vote for president, military, veterans before refugees, guns, pro choice, LGBT marriage, plural marriage, US Constitution, World Peace, Global Unity.

Against: Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Liberalism, Theocracy, Corporatocracy.


By the Blood of our Fathers, By the Blood of our Sons, we fight, we die, we sacrifice for the Good of the Empire.

User avatar
The Akasha Colony
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14159
Founded: Apr 25, 2010
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Akasha Colony » Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:17 pm

The Manticoran Empire wrote:I was thinking that one tank in the platoon (most likely platoon leader's tank) will carry the mine plow but all 4 tanks in the platoon will have two M2s in RWS operated by the commander and loader (my nation's M1A3 has an autoloader but we kept the fourth crewmember) and a third M2 over the main gun to be operated by the gunner if needed.


That's an unnecessary number of M2s.

Under what circumstances do you ever expect your crews will need to fire 3 HMGs simultaneously?
A colony of the New Free Planets Alliance.
The primary MT nation of this account is the Republic of Carthage.
New Free Planets Alliance (FT)
New Terran Republic (FT)
Republic of Carthage (MT)
World Economic Union (MT)
Kaiserreich Europa Zentral (PT/MT)
Five Republics of Hanalua (FanT)
National Links: Factbook Entry | Embassy Program
Storefronts: Carthaginian Naval Export Authority [MT, Navy]

User avatar
Kanugues Wed
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 185
Founded: Jan 08, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Kanugues Wed » Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:22 pm

The Akasha Colony wrote:
The Manticoran Empire wrote:I was thinking that one tank in the platoon (most likely platoon leader's tank) will carry the mine plow but all 4 tanks in the platoon will have two M2s in RWS operated by the commander and loader (my nation's M1A3 has an autoloader but we kept the fourth crewmember) and a third M2 over the main gun to be operated by the gunner if needed.


That's an unnecessary number of M2s.

Under what circumstances do you ever expect your crews will need to fire 3 HMGs simultaneously?


Quick someone post the Vietnam war M60 with 10 M2s and an above barrel minigun.
Sure, we might look communist, but we are legitimately a democratic country.

User avatar
The Manticoran Empire
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10506
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Anarchy

Postby The Manticoran Empire » Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:27 pm

The Akasha Colony wrote:
The Manticoran Empire wrote:I was thinking that one tank in the platoon (most likely platoon leader's tank) will carry the mine plow but all 4 tanks in the platoon will have two M2s in RWS operated by the commander and loader (my nation's M1A3 has an autoloader but we kept the fourth crewmember) and a third M2 over the main gun to be operated by the gunner if needed.


That's an unnecessary number of M2s.

Under what circumstances do you ever expect your crews will need to fire 3 HMGs simultaneously?

When I'm at war with North Korea or China and the tanks are being swarmed by infantry armed with grenades.
For: Israel, Palestine, Kurdistan, American Nationalism, American citizens of Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands, and US Virgin Islands receiving a congressional vote and being allowed to vote for president, military, veterans before refugees, guns, pro choice, LGBT marriage, plural marriage, US Constitution, World Peace, Global Unity.

Against: Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Liberalism, Theocracy, Corporatocracy.


By the Blood of our Fathers, By the Blood of our Sons, we fight, we die, we sacrifice for the Good of the Empire.

User avatar
Taihei Tengoku
Senator
 
Posts: 4851
Founded: Dec 15, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Taihei Tengoku » Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:39 pm

Manpower is too valuable in the red dwarf stage of human civilization to swarm over tanks.
REST IN POWER
Franberry - HMS Barham - North Point - Questers - Tyrandis - Rosbaningrad - Sharfghotten
UNJUSTLY DELETED
OUR DAY WILL COME

User avatar
The Akasha Colony
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14159
Founded: Apr 25, 2010
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Akasha Colony » Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:44 pm

The Manticoran Empire wrote:When I'm at war with North Korea or China and the tanks are being swarmed by infantry armed with grenades.


What? This isn't 1950. Not even the North Koreans would do that.

And even if it were, for that role the switch to M2s does nothing since the higher rate of fire and much larger total ammunition load from a medium machine gun would be more useful than the additional penetration of a heavy machine gun. A GPMG would also need to be reloaded less often than an HMG, which is a dangerous process since it can't be done under armor. Which means the gunner definitely doesn't need an extra gun because he's already got a coaxial M240.

The extra M2 in TUSK is there for very specific uses, namely it allows the gunner to take advantage of his optics suite and stabilizer to engage targets beyond the range of his coaxial weapon but without using the main cannon, which usually creates collateral damage risks in an urban peacekeeping environment. But now that the commander gets an RWS in SEP v3 it isn't necessary for this purpose because the commander now gets an optics suite and can engage targets at range while still under armor.
A colony of the New Free Planets Alliance.
The primary MT nation of this account is the Republic of Carthage.
New Free Planets Alliance (FT)
New Terran Republic (FT)
Republic of Carthage (MT)
World Economic Union (MT)
Kaiserreich Europa Zentral (PT/MT)
Five Republics of Hanalua (FanT)
National Links: Factbook Entry | Embassy Program
Storefronts: Carthaginian Naval Export Authority [MT, Navy]

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Factbooks and National Information

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Afthevilii, Baharan, Prime City, The Bozo Nations

Advertisement

Remove ads