Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation Mk X

[Gallia-]

M151 and Wiesel, Humvees don't fit in helicopters

>mutt
>not rst-v



it even has a theme song: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/653 ... 22song.mid

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

M151 and Wiesel, Humvees don't fit in helicopters

I think Humvees fit in both Chinooks and CH-53's (I guess especially if he uses the new CH-53K variant which has a widened hull and ramp (?) )

although yes a Wiesel / M151 / Land Rover Wolf / G Wagen are probably preferable because of weight and/or height and/or width and/or length depending on each one

[Imperializt Russia]

the CTA 40 really isn't suitable for use as a coaxial weapon due to how it feeds.

Could its feed system not be persuaded to wrap around the turret perimeter?

Can wheeled tank destroyers and AFVs carry ERA? Or is their armour too light for it?

I ask because I thought of the idea of using just those vehicles as the main combat vehicle instead of super expensive and fuel hungry MBTs that are for most countries, low in number. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to arm them with modern 120mm guns, even if they needed to be widened slightly if a larger turret was needed. After all the Centauro managed to fit a 120mm gun, and if an example of a vehicle really couldn't fit one, ATGMs are a thing.

There's MBT-grade ERA, and then there's lighter classes of ERA. You're not going to mount Kaktus on a Centauro, I bet.

Remember that strictly speaking, ERA only reduces the effectiveness of a penetrating projectile. Obviously, some high-end MBT-class ERAs will reduce this effectiveness so much as to prevent penetration completely, by various means.
You're not going to deflect M829A3 with the kind of ERA you'd fit to Centauro, but Kaktus - if it detonates, of course - might help a T-72/80/90 withstand such a projectile.

Wheeled tank destroyers are not a replacement for tanks. It can't do half the jobs of a tank - just the tank killing bit. This would leave a significant gap in your capabilities.

[Dostanuot Loj]

erm, can I phone a friend?

No.

It's just a recon vehicle/IFV without the I

So it's not a BMPT?

But if the BMPT is meant to handle pretty much any ground target it comes up against, I guess it does fill the same role

The BMPT is not "meant to handle pretty much any ground target it comes up against", it is meant to provide a firepower augment to a tank unit for a wider array of options. It is in the same guise as British issuance of a single 17lbr tank to a troop, or Japanese use of "gun tanks" with HE throwing guns. It is there to provide a wider array of options to these tank units based on combat experience in Afghanistan and Chechnya, for example.

In this regard, rapid volume of fire from the 30mm guns is something seen as beneficial. For a recce vehicle? There is no point.

[New Vihenia]

Vroom

i see a T-95

[Allanea]

The BMPT is also a terrible reject vehicle which literally nobody uses in numbers and of which only six were ever sold to a user.

[Laritaia]

the CTA 40 really isn't suitable for use as a coaxial weapon due to how it feeds.

Could its feed system not be persuaded to wrap around the turret perimeter?

No

it uses push through feeding, if you set it up to feed from the left and mounted the gun alongside the maingun of a tank the spent cartridges would have nowhere to go.

[Schwere Panzer Abteilung 502]

Can wheeled tank destroyers and AFVs carry ERA? Or is their armour too light for it?

I ask because I thought of the idea of using just those vehicles as the main combat vehicle instead of super expensive and fuel hungry MBTs that are for most countries, low in number. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to arm them with modern 120mm guns, even if they needed to be widened slightly if a larger turret was needed. After all the Centauro managed to fit a 120mm gun, and if an example of a vehicle really couldn't fit one, ATGMs are a thing.

ERA only works once.

Plus, heavily armored MBTs are still useful. They tend to last longer in combat. In Task Force 1-64's of 2nd Brigade, 3ID's 'thunder run' to attack Baghdad, the convoy came under constant and heavy fire from RPGs and recoilless rifles for several hours as they pushed towards the objective. One tank was lost due to repeated engine fires, but overall most of the tanks took heavy fire and kept on going, because the Abrams has some of the best armor in the world even without the ERA included in the TUSK kits and SEP upgrades. A convoy of Strykers, heavily armed they may be, would have taken much heavier casualties because the Stryker has only cardboard and prayers for armor.

Here's a thought I just had: Could hardkill APS be overwhelmed by enemy rocket teams firing multiple rockets at once? It would require more time to figure out and get the supplies, but groups like ISIS are nothing if not resourceful and genius at finding low-cost solutions to problems.

[Allanea]

ERA only works once if you impact in that specific spot twice somehow.

There are recorded instances of T-72s equipped with modern ERA eating dozens of RPG rockets in a fight and driving away.

[The Akasha Colony]

Here's a thought I just had: Could hardkill APS be overwhelmed by enemy rocket teams firing multiple rockets at once? It would require more time to figure out and get the supplies, but groups like ISIS are nothing if not resourceful and genius at finding low-cost solutions to problems.

It depends on the APS, its method of detection, and its method of interception.

But the Russians at least seem to believe this is true given that the RPG-30 is specifically designed to defeat hardkill APS by using a small precursor rocket to trip the APS before the larger main rocket follows. This wouldn't necessarily be effective against all APS though, because again it depends how the specific APS in question operates.

[Laritaia]

Here's a thought I just had: Could hardkill APS be overwhelmed by enemy rocket teams firing multiple rockets at once?

not even all at the same time, the only operational Hardkill APS has a magazine capacity of iirc 8 rounds, and only two of those can be deployed at a time and only at targets that are coming from opposite sides of the vehicle.

APS is far from the magic force field that some people seem to think it is.

[Padnak]

The BMPT is also a terrible reject vehicle which literally nobody uses in numbers and of which only six were ever sold to a user.

What about the BTR-T?

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Here's a thought I just had: Could hardkill APS be overwhelmed by enemy rocket teams firing multiple rockets at once? It would require more time to figure out and get the supplies, but groups like ISIS are nothing if not resourceful and genius at finding low-cost solutions to problems.

It depends on the APS, its method of detection, and its method of interception.

But the Russians at least seem to believe this is true given that the RPG-30 is specifically designed to defeat hardkill APS by using a small precursor rocket to trip the APS before the larger main rocket follows. This wouldn't necessarily be effective against all APS though, because again it depends how the specific APS in question operates.

There's probably a tandem or triplex-RPG with an EMP precursor in R&D by now.

Otherwise, ERA and hardkill APS can allow a tank to negate 3 RPGs pretty handily, and softkill can raise the difficulty by quite a bit more.

[Austrasien]

Here's a thought I just had: Could hardkill APS be overwhelmed by enemy rocket teams firing multiple rockets at once? It would require more time to figure out and get the supplies, but groups like ISIS are nothing if not resourceful and genius at finding low-cost solutions to problems.

Rocket teams have other issues. Protecting a tanks sides from something like the RPG-30 is not impractical, especially with a combination of modern ERA and special armour. The Merkava 4 (whose Trophy the RPG-30 was made to defeat) for example could probably take a hit to either the side of the turret or the sponsons. Only a hit below the sponsons is likely to penetrate, which is not an easy target.

Modern tanks losses have disproportionately been to ATGMs, not RPGs.

[Allanea]

The BMPT is also a terrible reject vehicle which literally nobody uses in numbers and of which only six were ever sold to a user.

What about the BTR-T?

The vehicle was not fielded due to its shortcomings, including low levels of protection compared to modern tanks, badly implemented infantry dismounting and seating as well financial and industrial problems experienced by the developing bureau, OKBTM.

[Austrasien]

You may have seen this.

You may not have realized that is a bare, aluminum(!) Abrams turret on top.

[Laritaia]

(Image)

You may have seen this.

You may not have realized that is a bare, aluminum(!) Abrams turret on top.

well it's actually plywood, but close enough

[Gallia-]

(Image)

You may have seen this.

You may not have realized that is a bare, aluminum(!) Abrams turret on top.

M1A1ABN (Airborne Variant): Air-droppable M1A1 designed for the 82nd Airborne Division's 73rd Cavalry Regiment.

[Laritaia]

i very much doubt it would ever be drop rated

[Gallia-]

Five "quid" says the US Army will throw MPF out of a C-17 before 2031.

[Laritaia]

Five "quid" says the US Army will throw MPF out of a C-17 before 2031.

i have no idea where a colonial such as yourself would find that sort of money.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

(Image)

You may have seen this.

You may not have realized that is a bare, aluminum(!) Abrams turret on top.

M1A1ABN (Airborne Variant): Air-droppable M1A1 designed for the 82nd Airborne Division's 73rd Cavalry Regiment.

So pretty much a 21st century Stingray to do what the Stryker MGS does, but in a bigger caliber.

Because we've already found out that a tank has better mobility for its mass and a simpler drivetrain than any 8x8.

And being an air-deployed armored band-aid for scratches in a defensive-line, long-range tactical mobility found in wheeled vehicles is moot.
-Provided we can keep mass to less than half an Abrams, or around that of a Bradley, it'll be fine.

The light tank will be also cheaper to use for training tankers to drive Abrams on. Since it's light enough for a deisel from our automotive industry to propel around (one other reasn why we used a hastily converted aero-grade gas-turbine on the 'brams was the inability to find a suitable tank-deisel, just like the M4A1)

[Austrasien]

well it's actually plywood, but close enough

No, it's real. There would be absolutely no reason to stick a real gunners sight (pay attention the fact one window is opaque and reflective, the other has a purplish tint) and a real back up sight (the reflection from the lens can be seen in this picture) and real vision blocks in a wooden turret.

[Aldina]

Would the design of the Tiger I's infamous 88mm gun be conducive to canister shot?

[Laritaia]

Would the design of the Tiger I's infamous 88mm gun be conducive to canister shot?

no, but it could be done