NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Vol. 11.0

[New Vihenia]

Hot damn. Where did you get the data to right-size all those parts?

Nah it's not really correct. The only thing being known and calculated is the entire shell dimension.

So nobody has any comments on my crew layout?

We need imageries. Words alone is not sufficient.

[Purpelia]

Hot damn. Where did you get the data to right-size all those parts?

Nah it's not really correct. The only thing being known and calculated is the entire shell dimension.

So nobody has any comments on my crew layout?

We need imageries. Words alone is not sufficient.

I don't have access to an image upload site right now. But basically imagine your standard drivers compartment on a modern tank. Only it's as wide as the tank and there are 3 people sitting in it side by side. And instead of periscopes WW2 style they have a bunch of monitors hanging at eye level in front of them forming like a wall of monitors. Possibly a couple of ones on the sides of the hull too. And like all the monitors are touch sensitive and there are like 2 rows of them. So like it's like sitting inside a giant slot machine basically. And each guy has a big joypad with lots of buttons hanging from the wall in front of him. And like 2 pedals at his feet.

And you use the controls differently based on your current role. So like if you are the tank commander the monitors show you the various cameras around the tank are seeing, including the one on the RWS and gunners sights. And like various command stuff too. If you are the gunner they instead show the primary sight, night vision etc. other such fun stuff to let you spot and shoot more easily. And if you are the driver you get the feed from a bunch of cameras all around the tank hull showing you stuff all round you. And like parking sensors and stuff. Also the dashboard is on one of them. But either way it's the same bunch of tablet sized monitors hanging in front of you at various angles and positions.

It's a lot like a jet fighter cockpit, only the monitors also extend up and in front of your face where the canopy would be.

[North Arkana]

So the sort of supposed layout of the T-14?

[Purpelia]

So the sort of supposed layout of the T-14?

My contribution is the idea of having all the internals replaced by fighter jet style programmable touch screens and dispensing with nobs, buttons, control panels, levers and other traditional means of manipulation in favor of these for what can best be described as a clutter free workspace. Like, there is literally nothing in one of these for you to bang your head on whilst driving around on rough ground.

[Taihei Tengoku]

Currently writing a thing and due to contradictory and absent information online, I would like to ask: how does the ZTZ-99A tank, since it is now being produced in substantial numbers by the Chinese, compare to modernized Russian tanks like the T-72B3M, and its most likely opponents (K1, K2, M60A3) in terms of protection, fire control capabilities, and, most importantly, unit cost? Thanks in advance. I'm not asking about firepower because I'm pretty familiar with the issues of the 125mm gun with the carousel autoloader vis-a-vis the 120mm found on the k1a1 and k2. I think I have a fairly good idea about protection and FCS, but I can't find shit about unit cost.

All "new" tanks basically cost the same, because T-whatevers and ZTZ-whatevers are priced in rubles and yuan and use very few imported components priced in dollars. Adjusted for price levels they're just as pricey to the Russians and Chinese as a new M1A2C or K2. The outlier is Armata, which costs >50% more because of everything the Russians put into it.

So the sort of supposed layout of the T-14?

My contribution is the idea of having all the internals replaced by fighter jet style programmable touch screens and dispensing with nobs, buttons, control panels, levers and other traditional means of manipulation in favor of these for what can best be described as a clutter free workspace. Like, there is literally nothing in one of these for you to bang your head on whilst driving around on rough ground.

Knobs and buttons are good even on glass cockpits, as they don't react unless you specifically touch them. Butterfingering a touchscreen, on the other hand...

[Gallia-]

all knobs all the time

peak tanku

dumbla is nothing but knobs, buttons, and switches

[Theodosiya]

Keep knobs, buttons, switches and manual gauge. But provide LCD touchscreen too for backup. And vice versa. Problem solved.

[Gallia-]

too expensive dumbla just uses big screens and sometimes periscopes for viewing with knobs and switches and buttons like normal people

touchscreens bad

pretty but also bad

[Purpelia]

Well there is also the chunky console controller for the major stuff like firing, turning the turret etc. The screens are only to be touched for stuff like fiddling with the zoom level, track tension etc. Stuff that you shouldn't have to do too often.

Also, something I'd like to pitch for you for a hypotetical WW2 that lasts until 1950: In a word: IS-2 with the D-10 gun from the T-55.

[Taihei Tengoku]

Also, something I'd like to pitch for you for a hypotetical WW2 that lasts until 1950: In a word: IS-2 with the D-10 gun from the T-55.

Worse than the T-55 with the D-10 gun from the T-55

[Theodosiya]

Why have regular screen when you can make it touchscreen too? It's a nice addition, without having to risk losing memory training from manual knobs by making it all touchscreens.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Currently writing a thing and due to contradictory and absent information online, I would like to ask: how does the ZTZ-99A tank, since it is now being produced in substantial numbers by the Chinese, compare to modernized Russian tanks like the T-72B3M, and its most likely opponents (K1, K2, M60A3) in terms of protection, fire control capabilities, and, most importantly, unit cost? Thanks in advance. I'm not asking about firepower because I'm pretty familiar with the issues of the 125mm gun with the carousel autoloader vis-a-vis the 120mm found on the k1a1 and k2. I think I have a fairly good idea about protection and FCS, but I can't find shit about unit cost.

All "new" tanks basically cost the same, because T-whatevers and ZTZ-whatevers are priced in rubles and yuan and use very few imported components priced in dollars. Adjusted for price levels they're just as pricey to the Russians and Chinese as a new M1A2C or K2. The outlier is Armata, which costs >50% more because of everything the Russians put into it.

Thanks! I didn't know how that worked, and that was the thing I was having the biggest issue finding.

[Purpelia]

Also, something I'd like to pitch for you for a hypotetical WW2 that lasts until 1950: In a word: IS-2 with the D-10 gun from the T-55.

Worse than the T-55 with the D-10 gun from the T-55

Obviously. But the T-55 won't come in for another 2-3 years.

You see, the reason I am asking is because the gun was ready and being fielded as early as 1944 and from what I've read was seriously considered as a potential main weapon upgrade for IS-2. So an IS-2 DT-10 is a perfectly plausible heavy tank for 1944 or so. This makes it an obvious alt history option to consider.

On a related note does anyone else have trouble loading the forgotten weapons website?

[The Akasha Colony]

Keep knobs, buttons, switches and manual gauge. But provide LCD touchscreen too for backup. And vice versa. Problem solved.

Why have regular screen when you can make it touchscreen too? It's a nice addition, without having to risk losing memory training from manual knobs by making it all touchscreens.

This duplicates your controls for no particular reason. If your soldiers aren't smart enough to remember what each knob does, they're probably not going to remember which exact sub-menu they need to reach to find a particular function on a touchscreen.

[Gallia-]

Why have regular screen when you can make it touchscreen too? It's a nice addition, without having to risk losing memory training from manual knobs by making it all touchscreens.

touchscreens can induce errors from things on the OS side (i had a cashier's POS terminal cancel my transaction after obviously hitting yes, twice; more than once ive had e621 send me to a dumb image i didnt press; etc.) and can be accidentally pressed due to lack of haptic feedback; theyre also harder to learn for the latter reason

[Purpelia]

Why have regular screen when you can make it touchscreen too? It's a nice addition, without having to risk losing memory training from manual knobs by making it all touchscreens.

touchscreens can induce errors from things on the OS side (i had a cashier's POS terminal cancel my transaction after obviously hitting yes, twice; more than once ive had e621 send me to a dumb image i didnt press; etc.) and can be accidentally pressed due to lack of haptic feedback; theyre also harder to learn for the latter reason

I am aware of all that which is why I'd be keeping the stuff you do in combat conditions on the controller. And the touch screen stuff would mostly be relegated to things you're supposed to set up once in a while like track tension or things that are fairly obvious (like having a button to toggle your sight from nightvision to regular).

[Gallia-]

And the touch screen stuff would mostly be relegated to things you're supposed to set up once in a while like track tension

father i cannot click tanker bar

(like having a button to toggle your sight from nightvision to regular).

a button

not a touchscreen

touchscreens have no benefit whatsoever and terrible/literally deadly disadvantages

[Purpelia]

And the touch screen stuff would mostly be relegated to things you're supposed to set up once in a while like track tension

father i cannot click tanker bar

(like having a button to toggle your sight from nightvision to regular).

a button

not a touchscreen

touchscreens have no benefit whatsoever and terrible/literally deadly disadvantages

But you can't have programmable physical buttons thus making it impossible to reconfigure which crewman does which role.

[Gallia-]

you can reconfigure what they do by making them change seats

it's faster and easier

[Purpelia]

you can reconfigure what they do by making them change seats

it's faster and easier

That's:
1. Boring
2. Problematic if one is wounded, dying, sleeping or just has horrible diarrhea
3. Not future enough

[Gallia-]

you can reconfigure what they do by making them change seats

it's faster and easier

That's:
1. Boring
2. Problematic if one is wounded, dying, sleeping or just has horrible diarrhea
3. Not future enough

1. Good.
2. Then you don't have that guy and someone else sits there.
3. The future-past is being able to entertain the thought of human contact. The past-future is robot touchscreens.

[Austrasien]

Why can't physical buttons function be reconfigured?

Austrasia is down with large screen displays and maybe a stereo display for the driver so he can use the stereo driving FLIRs. But miss us with those touchscreens (there may be some kind of tacticool eink tablet the commander can draw on with a stylus). Touch screens are a really ambiguous kind of input device. All of the crew stations have at least one joystick and can duplicate the core functions of any other station if needed (commander can drive if he needs to, driver can shoot etc).

[Gallia-]

youd have to take off the cover and rearrange all the wires of the buttons ):

just brush the brains off and sit in the commander's hatch e-z

[Theodosiya]

CRT display, LCD or LED?

[The Akasha Colony]

CRT display, LCD or LED?

LED is just a method of illuminating an LCD, it is not a distinct form of display in and of itself. Early LCDs generally used fluorescent bulbs for illumination. Unless you mean OLED, which is not ideal for this use, or micro-LED, which is not ready for mass production.

Given the space constraints, a flat panel LCD would be the best choice. It is compact and basically any desirable formfactor is already available off the shelf given the tremendous volume of units produced for consumer and commercial use, including some which are already designed for ruggedized use. This makes it cheap and easily replaced.

CRTs are large and heavy, no longer in significant mass production, and pose a safety hazard as they have a nasty tendency to send shards of glass flying if they are damaged due to the vacuum in the glass tube.