NS Military Worldbuilding Thread No. 12

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

im actually considering replacing MG 74 with Ultimax in the squad support role lol

[Gallia-]

A belt fed machine gun wants a crew by nature. Magazine fed can be a single dude, though I guess the lines have been blurred by recent things like M249 and casket magazines, but it just boils down to how many rounds the gunner has at the ready more or less. If the machine gun has more rounds of ammo than a typical automatic rifle (~20-40 or so) then it will want a removable barrel because it will likely be in action for periods twice or thrice as long as something with the same magazine as the automatic rifle, but a heavier barrel or bipod.

Replacing a magazine and recharging an automatic rifle is generally a sufficiently long lull in fire that a second machine gun must be used to a suppress a target and give the first gun time to cool off (about 30-60 seconds or so, depending on the magazine size). This is important for air-cooled weapons which have fixed barrels.

A belt-fed has a theoretically infinite firing time provided it is fed with ammunition and coolant, which is the job of loader/assistant, although air-cooled weapons require additional barrels to be transported, but a belt-fed like a SAW can fire longer. Which is why the M249 is issued with a second barrel. No one uses it. Partly you can attribute this to improved metallurgy: the SAW in particularly has a pretty tough barrel that is nice and heavily chromed, but old timers of Dad's Army who were issued the SAW in the '80s always carried the spare because they remembered back in 'Nam when barrels would get chewed up more often by .30 cal. Naturally, the downtime of servicing a gun yourself versus having a guy clip belts together and swap the barrel without pulling it out the long way makes for a longer period of lulls, but this is not a problem if you have two machine guns with 200-round boxes.

I guess that, plus the SAW being 5.56mm (and thus doubling the ammo load per man (potentially, in practice I think it's 600 rounds for the SAW and dudes in Nam were hauling 900 between the two members, but you'd spread another 300 over the TL, GL, and rifleman) over the M60 is why Army decided to make it a one-man instead of two-man weapon. In practice people just use nut sacks and never carry the spare, but they've also never been in a situation like Chechnya where you're using a machine gun semi-constantly and ripping through barrels in the LMGs. That's what the .50 cals are for, though, and it's not uncommon for Joes even in Irak to have come back to bases with warped or blown open barrels where they sagged and the bullet tore through the barrel wall or something.

A combination of GIs having constant availability of heavier weapons (.50 cals, Bushmasters, 120s, AT-4s/LAWs, etc.), barrels today being much tougher than they were 70 years ago, and not being in particularly demanding or dangerous firefights is why no one has had to use the spare barrel. Some guys carry it though, bless their souls, but they have never actually needed to use them AFAIK. Maybe at Wanat or something I guess, which was like the only real hardcore fight of the past 20 years where Joes actually were at risk of getting dominated like it's Vietnam or something, but maybe not.

SAW can probably be used as a medium machine gun if you really wanted but 5.56mm is weedy. 6x50mm SAW would be better, and then I imagine the US Army would have just bought more M249s instead of M240B in that case, if it had adopted it. Something like Ultimax would have a similar barrel construction both in materials and in the Ultimax III has a quick change barrel. This would be optimal for a infantry squad, in either case, since ultimately the only difference between a M249 and a M60 is that one has an assistant gunner. With the SAW, the Army decided to give the assistant an M60 instead. That's all. Joes still carry the spare barrel if they got balls and grit and everyone carries a belt or two if they aren't wimps, but you'd ideally still have a crew.

Dumbla IIRC either goes with an actual M60 with a dude with 400 rounds of NGSW-tier 6.5x51mm on person and another 200-400 rounds on the squad members (it depends, some squads have chungus 40mm pump actions like the Bofors/Carl Gustaf AGR) and a spare barrel or has a lighter 5.56mm XM233 thing with 600 rounds on the guy (200 in gun and four nut sacks) and a spare depending on the unit for the modern day. Some guys get the chungus 6.5x51mm super gats that unify the machine gun and rifle ammo (again) into a single anti-tank assault rifle that goes through a BRDM the long way, and other guys get the 5.56mm weedy guns that bounce off BRDMs and just make them angery.

Anyway a user on this very forum once made a Pokemon get half a dozen permanent limp dicks from how vigorous he was with them, so always bring your spare barrel with your SAW in the field and whistle or hum John Mellencamp while doing it. That's how you keep it real.

tl;dr It doesn't really matter what machine gun you have. If you want to burden guys with a belt-fed that's 25 lbs with a box magazine you can be fine for it. A belt-fed will have about twice the firing rate (80-100 rounds as opposed to 40-50) provided it has a spare barrel though. An assistant can swap the barrel and feed the ammo fast enough to avoid giving an extra machine gun to the squad, but that restricts your ability to split the squad.

The only difference is how many barrels you have and how much time you have between lulls in fire (changing magazines/belts) ultimately. If you have a long period of fire and a single spare barrel you can sustain a rate of fire of about 80-100 rounds for a good while provided you got a puddle or snowdrift or something to toss hot barrels into and you do this by yourself, and you don't accidentally drop a barrel down a shaft or onto another floor or something and just keep swapping them around, which means a two-man machine gun team can become two automatic riflemen. This gives you a maximum rate of about 200 rounds per minute for like two minutes, more if you add more spare barrels, and a more general cap of around 85-100 rounds per minute.

If you don't have spare barrels (i.e. RPK or HK416 or you're just fucking lazybones ass), then your fire rate with the belt-fed will be no more than the magazine-fed automatic rifle, and you might as well shave 10 pounds off what the gunner has to carry and give the guy normal automatic rifle magazines instead, which will simplify the matter of issuing ammo somewhat. Fixed barrels have a maximum rate of fire of about 40 rounds per minute continuously (for a set number of minutes, typically 10) and twice that for for a single minute of firing. Which means you're shooting about a single magazine a minute normally and two magazines occasionally. This lends itself well to a single operator with two separate machine gunners.

So yeah it just comes down to barrels at the end of the day and the only reason people don't carry SAW's spare barrels is because they're lazy and never got punished for it i.e. by being rolled up by motor rifles because your MGs ran out of shoot tubes.

Spare barrels are love spare barrels are life. Pack 'em in.

[Kerberos]

Hey, thanks for the advice, I was having some trouble with the snipers and mortars. I made a few alterations to unit composition, it seems a lot more streamlined now.

I was looking at 60mm mortars but noticed the 82mm white phosphorous shells seem to produce a really good smoke screen. Also, I had trouble finding a 60mm mortar produced by the soviets that wasn't a ww2 leftover, that might be an error on my part

I am very aware of what Willy Pete does to people.

With regards to the NBC Team, its entirely based on my nation's history, basically they had a civil war and both sides had operational nuclear weapons. Which got used. A lot... When the dust settled there were (are) several warheads unaccounted for. The fear of nuclear suicide attacks, boobytraps and the like meant the NBC teams started getting a lot of specialized equipment and training. Post civil war, there was a fairly large group of very skilled operatives and significantly less nuclear threats to worry about. Now they get attached to units when circumstances require it. You will notice that while everyone else is using Cold-War hand-me-downs, they get actual modern equipment.

I was debating the DShK on the platoon level, it comes down to "use what you have," a company might not be able to get a SAM team but at least they got something, I am planning on designing my own weapons, but I kind of want to roleplay Kerberos' entry into the 21st century, because fun.

Probably something like the Yugoslav M57

Issuing GP-25s is another option but those grenades are shit.Probably stick with rifle-grenades if you need to blow something up within 150 to 400 meters and don't want to waste an RPG-7 on it.

I totally missed the M57, I'll be making some alterations shortly

Edit, new mortar section,

Mortar Section
Sergeant – AKS-74U
1x Communication Specialist – AKS-74U
9x mortarmen – 6x FAL Para 3x AKS-74U
3x M57 60mm Mortars

I like this a lot more, its just a better setup.

[The Dolphin Isles]

Does any country other than Vietnam use an asymmetric, 3-man, 3-cell squad format? I guess France could be kind of similar in theory with the squad leader and marksman in a separate part of the squad, but they really just have very different roles.

As of now, my mechanized squads follow something very akin to the French squad, but my light infantry platoon follows something a little more eccentric. Is 1x MG enough for a squad of 9 as long as they are part of a team of 2 so they can provide more consistent fire?

Command Squad
Platoon Commander
Platoon Sergeant
Radio Operator
Systems / UAS Operator
Medic (attached)
Forward Observer (attached)
FO Radio Op. (attached)

3x Rifle Squad
Squad 2IC (FAMAS)
Autorifleman (Minimi or FN Mag)
Rifleman / AR Asst. (FAMAS + AT-4CS)
---
Squad Leader (FAMAS)
Grenadier (FAMAS + LGI 51mm)
Marksman (HK417 + AT-4CS)
---
Squad 3IC (FAMAS)
AT Gunner (FAMAS + LRAC or Carl G)
Rifleman / AT Assistant (FAMAS)

1x MG section (usually attached)
Team Leader (FAMAS)
MMG Gunner (FN Mag)
MMG Assistant (FAMAS)

1x ATGM Section (sometimes attached)
Team Leader (FAMAS
AT Gunner (FAMAS + Akeron)
AT Assistant (FAMAS)

[Immoren]

Does any country other than Vietnam use an asymmetric, 3-man, 3-cell squad format? I guess France could be kind of similar in theory with the squad leader and marksman in a separate part of the squad, but they really just have very different roles.

Finnish Army in its regional forces uses 3x3.
with

Team 1

Squad leader
Demoman
Marksman

Team 2

2nd in command
Machinegunner
Rifleman

Team 3

Team leader
MAchine gunner
CLS

Or 1+2x4 with

Squad leadr
1st demisquad

2nd in command
Machinegunner
Rifleman
Marksman

2nd demisquad

Team leader
MAchine gunner
CLS
Demoman

Based on needs of leadership or something I guess.

[Gallia-]

is demoman apilas or sth

[The Dolphin Isles]

Does any country other than Vietnam use an asymmetric, 3-man, 3-cell squad format? I guess France could be kind of similar in theory with the squad leader and marksman in a separate part of the squad, but they really just have very different roles.

Finnish Army in its regional forces uses 3x3.
with

Team 1

Squad leader
Demoman
Marksman

Team 2

2nd in command
Machinegunner
Rifleman

Team 3

Team leader
MAchine gunner
CLS

Or 1+2x4 with

Squad leadr
1st demisquad

2nd in command
Machinegunner
Rifleman
Marksman

2nd demisquad

Team leader
MAchine gunner
CLS
Demoman

Based on needs of leadership or something I guess.

That's really interesting. It is similar something I've been toying with the idea of in my mechanized squads where an AT team isn't really necessary and just having two symmetric fire teams and a specialist command team with marksman and grenadier.

Do you know more about the demolitions position in the squad? Are squads expected to operate without ready access to support from the battalion-level or even company-level? I could see a situation where you give a squad the objective to hold a bridgehead or roadway for as long as possible and then blow it up or mine it (along with other things like tree barricades) on the retreat.

[Immoren]

is demoman apilas or sth

That can be their one role.

The blaster is specially trained in the use of explosives and charges and in mine detection. The blaster can act as a reserve machine gunner and close-range anti-tank gunner, as well as a combat messenger for the group.

The blaster is specially trained to use explosives and charges and identify mines. The blaster can act as a backup gunner for a machine gun and a close-in anti-tank gunner, as well as a squad's combat messenger.

[Immoren]

Are squads expected to operate without ready access to support from the battalion-level or even company-level? I could see a situation where you give a squad the objective to hold a bridgehead or roadway for as long as possible and then blow it up or mine it (along with other things like tree barricades) on the retreat.

I mean every infantry squad carries some mines so mining is default state when going setting up camp.
I'm can't remember specifics, but "demolition" part in "demoguy" is mostly command detonated claymores and something like when doing ambushes for delay actions.
(so maybe that was misleading translation in my part.)

Hopefully they'd fight at least as platoons, but modern fighting might stretch companies quite far, but I don't think expectation is to operate withouth company or battalion level support.
These were "line infantry" in the end.

[Kerberos]

I was playing with what a bunch of modified Soviet vehicles might look like after being frantically modernized in the aftermath of a civil war.

Pray for the poor suspensions...

ZIL-131s, turns out they look amazing as guntrucks


70 years mothballed, new engines and necessity make strange ideas seem good. I'm aware I'm nuts but it worked for Paraguay's Stuarts. It would be a interesting way to get 82mm mortars somewhere useful.


Open topped BTR-60s, plus new engines, a roof, reinforced front armour, the inability to swim and 2 side by side DShK mounts.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

I was playing with what a bunch of modified Soviet vehicles might look like after being frantically modernized in the aftermath of a civil war.

Pray for the poor suspensions...

During Afghanistan, the soviets would strap night vision optics to the Dushkas, and have the scarf-ring mounted on the cab.

In Vietnam, there were two schools of thought on armored trucks, to either armor the cabs only to protect the drivers so they can GTFOOTKZ, or the passenger-compartment only so they could lay down a good base of fire.

Crew survived.

[Kerberos]

I was playing with what a bunch of modified Soviet vehicles might look like after being frantically modernized in the aftermath of a civil war.

Pray for the poor suspensions...

During Afghanistan, the soviets would strap night vision optics to the Dushkas, and have the scarf-ring mounted on the cab.

In Vietnam, there were two schools of thought on armored trucks, to either armor the cabs only to protect the drivers so they can GTFOOTKZ, or the passenger-compartment only so they could lay down a good base of fire.

Crew survived.

Thanks for the resources, that article on soviet tactics is awesome, giving me crazy ideas...

As for that unfortunate guntruck I'm guessing RPG, in any case, unless you were in the passenger seat the improvised armour would definitely have saved you.

[Gallia-]

The 40th Army mounted aviation rocket pods on T-62s and BTRs for impromptu fire support.

Just loose a dozen or more 3-5" rockets on a thing.

Libya one upped them by mounting SA-3s on T-62s though.

[Kerberos]

The 40th Army mounted aviation rocket pods on T-62s and BTRs for impromptu fire support.

Just loose a dozen or more 3-5" rockets on a thing.

Libya one upped them by mounting SA-3s on T-62s though.

I remember a video of a rocket pod mounted on a little Toyoda land cruiser in Libya, it technically worked. I mean all the rockets fired before the truck was completely on fire.

In all seriousness, the only way to get fire support on time is to provide your own...

[Gallia-]

The difference between a BTR and a Toyota is that a BTR doesn't care about fire or shockwaves I guess?

[Kerberos]

The difference between a BTR and a Toyota is that a BTR doesn't care about fire or shockwaves I guess?

(Image)

(Image)

Yeah, those things have crazy backblast. You would definitely need to close all the hatches before firing, otherwise you'd join the burning 'yoda.

That T62 is beautiful, like a vodka soaked Sherman Calliope... I'm tempted... One thing about the nation of Kerberos, is we don't have a lot of tanks or aircraft, that might be a way to help with that.

I mean its not as good as a proper gunship but if its all you got...

edit:found it
https://youtu.be/RqyY5VeuB4w

[Omarios]

Finally done, my most detailed tank yet.

I'm not gonna delve too much into what the tank is because I made it based on an old design which I made that was very undetailed and unfinished, so I wanted to improve on it further. Plus I really like how the Abrams TUSK II looks.

“General specifications of the tank; it’s powered by a Rudaid 6L150 V12 turbo Diesel engine, giving around 1650 hp, the tank itself weights around 59 tons, and with the package above weights around 70 tons. It’s primary armament is the R70 127mm auto loading smoothbore tank gun, with capabilities of firing ATGMs, it’s got a 14mm coaxial Y66-D HMG located right next to the main gun. The tank has a 3 man crew.

The HHM (Huzmat Harb al-Mudun) - roughly translating to urban warfare package, adds to the tank further to suit it better for in city fighting, since that’s where most wars in the 21st century take place. Originally, the HHM package added composite armor to the hull and turret, coupled with slat armor on said areas too, the tank also got a new remote controlled 14mm HMG that can be used by the commander, upgraded communication systems, and a tank phone for easier communication with infantry units.

HHM-S1 (pictured above), adds even more to that, radically focusing on urban warfare and trying to maximize the tank’s role in such areas where it’s general knowledge that tanks are at a disadvantage. The remote control HMG has been removed, and instead replaced with a much more hard hitting M-K30 30mm cannon that fires HE rounds; originally, a grenade launcher was going to be placed but instead the M-K30 was selected since it could fire farther, faster and more accurately than a grenade launcher. The cannon can be used by either the gunner or commander, and is suited for splashing areas where enemy combatants are suspected to be, instead of opting to waste a whole tank shell. It can rotate a full 360 degrees, is stabilized, and has its own optics, giving the commander extra options to scout for targets in case his main sight is shot out.

The commander and gunner’s hatches also received additional armoring which allows them to safely peak outside, each of them also receives a 14mm Y66-M machine gun. The upgraded fire control system offers easier authorization and switching between the commander and gunner, and more responsive gun elevation/depression alongside better turret traverse.

A hard kill APS system, which has a total of 12 projectiles is obvious and placed after the turret composite armor, giving the vehicle more survivability against armored or infantry targets.

The front lower plate has been reinforced by a pair of independent 20mm swinging plates, these plates aren’t really meant to stop anything, instead they are used as a first line of defense against shaped charges, prematurely detonating and dissipating them on impact in order to minimize the damage that could potentially be done to the lower plate itself. These plates can be removed at will or be fixated at certain angles to give the tank more clearance.

One of the more radical changes is the addition of a signal jammer. Since this package is focused on maximizing protection for the tank in urban areas, a jammer has been added that jams all frequencies except friendly ones, in a circular radius of 250m. Not only does this help jam enemy signals, but it also disrupts signals from cell phones or radios that can be used to remotely trigger IEDs of all kinds.

A rear view camera has been added to increase visibility and ease the driver’s life when reversing since urban areas are mostly tight. The commander receives a top-down 360 vision camera of the tank in his information screen, much like the ones found on luxury cars today; he can use the screen to relay information and mark points of interest to other tanks in his platoon or company.

The vehicle’s power pack has been upgraded to help the tank maintain its speed with the additional weight, so as for easier traverse; and an additional reverse gear has been added to further increase reverse speed.

All in all, not many O-3’s would see this upgrade due to budget and logistical restraints.”

Copied this over from the make your everything thread because I want some insight on some of the features which I added to this tank, namely the jammer, top down 360 vision cam, and 30mm and how they would fare on a real tank in an urban scenario today.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

The 40th Army mounted aviation rocket pods on T-62s and BTRs for impromptu fire support.

Just loose a dozen or more 3-5" rockets on a thing.

Libya one upped them by mounting SA-3s on T-62s though.

I remember a video of a rocket pod mounted on a little Toyoda land cruiser in Libya, it technically worked. I mean all the rockets fired before the truck was completely on fire.

In all seriousness, the only way to get fire support on time is to provide your own...

Speaking of which, for company mortars (the 82mm ones) you may want to mount those inside a truck, kinda make it into a self-propelled armored mortar, with a spare mortar that can either replace a hot-tube or be deployed in conjunction with the mounted one, and have two trucks. Just don't forget to put out the jack-stands to prevent the recoil from bottoming-out the suspension. Also have enough room inside to carry ammo or shove one of the battalion 120mm morts in there. Because shell-economy.

In theory you could mount two, but the recoil would cause the frame to rock and roll too much for any appreciable increased RoF... maybe a slightly better sustained RoF though.

Also, although the Zu-23-2 on a Ural is a meme, I'll point out that if your air-force is perma-grounded... why not strip the guns from your warplanes? GSh-6-23 or YakB-12.7?

(Infantry) Lessons of Chechnya
Small arms procurement and training in the Vietnam war
RPG-7 being an RPG-7
This one is a bit on the nose considering current events

Oh, right, if your dudes REALLY ever need an 82mm or even a 120mm commando-mortar, stick a shell on the end of an RPG-7 propelling charge. This was done largely to provide a long(er) ranged anti-personnel shell for the RPG, but also sorta makes the whole package more mobile as long as you can hit whatever you're aiming at in 3 shells or less.

As noted in artillery expenditure norms, 82mm is the minimum necessary to reduce fortifications, and 120mm is better in every way for that. This leaves 60mm for harassment, illumination/smoke, and engaging targets with a fair amount of precision.

Still gonna recommend rifle-grenades, either cup-dischargers on AK-74s for lobbing hand-grenades for smoke, or spigot-type launchers/adapters to allow the everyman-infantry dudes to launch a stonk of 60mm or even 82mm mortar-bombs out to 300 meters with their FN-FALs (using the Enegra grenade's stats) Although in an emergency-pinch, direct-fire at 75 meters is probably doable.

[Kerberos]

(Image)

Finally done, my most detailed tank yet.

I'm not gonna delve too much into what the tank is because I made it based on an old design which I made that was very undetailed and unfinished, so I wanted to improve on it further. Plus I really like how the Abrams TUSK II looks.

“General specifications of the tank; it’s powered by a Rudaid 6L150 V12 turbo Diesel engine, giving around 1650 hp, the tank itself weights around 59 tons, and with the package above weights around 70 tons. It’s primary armament is the R70 127mm auto loading smoothbore tank gun, with capabilities of firing ATGMs, it’s got a 14mm coaxial Y66-D HMG located right next to the main gun. The tank has a 3 man crew.

The HHM (Huzmat Harb al-Mudun) - roughly translating to urban warfare package, adds to the tank further to suit it better for in city fighting, since that’s where most wars in the 21st century take place. Originally, the HHM package added composite armor to the hull and turret, coupled with slat armor on said areas too, the tank also got a new remote controlled 14mm HMG that can be used by the commander, upgraded communication systems, and a tank phone for easier communication with infantry units.

HHM-S1 (pictured above), adds even more to that, radically focusing on urban warfare and trying to maximize the tank’s role in such areas where it’s general knowledge that tanks are at a disadvantage. The remote control HMG has been removed, and instead replaced with a much more hard hitting M-K30 30mm cannon that fires HE rounds; originally, a grenade launcher was going to be placed but instead the M-K30 was selected since it could fire farther, faster and more accurately than a grenade launcher. The cannon can be used by either the gunner or commander, and is suited for splashing areas where enemy combatants are suspected to be, instead of opting to waste a whole tank shell. It can rotate a full 360 degrees, is stabilized, and has its own optics, giving the commander extra options to scout for targets in case his main sight is shot out.

The commander and gunner’s hatches also received additional armoring which allows them to safely peak outside, each of them also receives a 14mm Y66-M machine gun. The upgraded fire control system offers easier authorization and switching between the commander and gunner, and more responsive gun elevation/depression alongside better turret traverse.

A hard kill APS system, which has a total of 12 projectiles is obvious and placed after the turret composite armor, giving the vehicle more survivability against armored or infantry targets.

The front lower plate has been reinforced by a pair of independent 20mm swinging plates, these plates aren’t really meant to stop anything, instead they are used as a first line of defense against shaped charges, prematurely detonating and dissipating them on impact in order to minimize the damage that could potentially be done to the lower plate itself. These plates can be removed at will or be fixated at certain angles to give the tank more clearance.

One of the more radical changes is the addition of a signal jammer. Since this package is focused on maximizing protection for the tank in urban areas, a jammer has been added that jams all frequencies except friendly ones, in a circular radius of 250m. Not only does this help jam enemy signals, but it also disrupts signals from cell phones or radios that can be used to remotely trigger IEDs of all kinds.

A rear view camera has been added to increase visibility and ease the driver’s life when reversing since urban areas are mostly tight. The commander receives a top-down 360 vision camera of the tank in his information screen, much like the ones found on luxury cars today; he can use the screen to relay information and mark points of interest to other tanks in his platoon or company.

The vehicle’s power pack has been upgraded to help the tank maintain its speed with the additional weight, so as for easier traverse; and an additional reverse gear has been added to further increase reverse speed.

All in all, not many O-3’s would see this upgrade due to budget and logistical restraints.”

Copied this over from the make your everything thread because I want some insight on some of the features which I added to this tank, namely the jammer, top down 360 vision cam, and 30mm and how they would fare on a real tank in an urban scenario today.

Overall, love the art and information, 100% agree that it would be crazy expensive to implement. On pavement or hard, level ground in a straight fight its a monster, the only real threat would be 100lbs+ IEDs with wired connections, massed RPG fire or another modern MBT (Heavy MBT?)

Personally if faced with this I would bug out, preferably to somewhere with steep grades and soft soil, without modern ATGMs, tanks or air support I would say its biggest threat is mobility kills. I will say that if the camera system works as advertised it would be amazing, especially in tight spots, the 30mm looks like it can elevate enough to hit anyone firing from rooftops.

If there is one deadly flaw, its the 3 man crew, thats a lot of guns to aim with 3 guys, and you would have a lot of blind-spots out of 360 camera range, might be able to get a seat into the 30mm turret, it would take a lot of pressure off the commander and increase the overall effectiveness.

But as I said, in my opinion, if you keep it off soft, messy ground, its a real monster no matter what...

[The Akasha Colony]

-snip-

It seems way overarmed, particularly with heavy machine guns. It has more guns than the crew can actually use. It's turning into a mini-Baneblade.

HMGs are cool but the sheer size of their ammunition limits the amount that can be carried, and in turn makes them bad for suppression work (which is important in urban combat). This is why Abrams carries about a thousand rounds for the commander's .50 cal M2, but over ten thousand rounds for its two 7.62 mm M240s. It would be interesting to know how many rounds per machine gun this tank is carrying, especially given all of the additional non-HMG stuff that's been added and the fact that each 14.5 mm round is twice the volume of a .50 cal round.

The 30 mm seems rather unnecessary too. It makes the tank look as tall as a house (and thus much easier to spot), probably carries an insufficient amount of ammunition, and doesn't do anything that the rest of the guns don't. More importantly, this role is normally handled by supporting arms, either from an IFV or from a dedicated tank support vehicle like BMPT. It seems like a case of Swiss army knife syndrome, in which a specific vehicle is envisioned as fighting alone for some reason (and therefore must do everything), rather than as part of an integrated team in which roles can be divided and shared between different units.

When deciding what to add, it's worth considering what tanks bring to urban operations that other platforms don't already have. And that's a big gun and a lot of armor. They don't need to do everything, and overloading both the crew and the vehicle with many unnecessary weapons doesn't make the tank any more effective in its role. This is why IRL urban operations kits like TUSK don't focus on adding a ton of extra guns, but instead on addressing specific tank weaknesses: all-around protection (with the extra armor), crew protection (RWS in place of the crew-served commander's gun and armored shields around the hatches), awareness (additional optics), and coordination with supporting arms (tank telephone). IIRC out of all the components in TUSK, the least used one is the extra M2 mounted over the main gun, which is the only weapon added as part of the kit. Many tanks received the mount but few bothered fitting the gun.

[Vavlar]

Does anyone here know how new guns are designed? Or any equations?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

The 30 mm seems rather unnecessary too. It makes the tank look as tall as a house (and thus much easier to spot), probably carries an insufficient amount of ammunition,

To add to this: Unless you have either a ridiculously slow rate of fire (Rarden tier) a 30 mm with like 200 rounds (based off of T-72M2 Moderna) is going to have a pitiful number of stored kills.
10,000 rounds of .30 calibre bullets for 2 medium machine guns however...
Furthermore, there is no dire need for 120, 30 or even 12,7 to kill a truck. .30 will do perfectly for that.

[Kerberos]

I remember a video of a rocket pod mounted on a little Toyoda land cruiser in Libya, it technically worked. I mean all the rockets fired before the truck was completely on fire.

In all seriousness, the only way to get fire support on time is to provide your own...

Speaking of which, for company mortars (the 82mm ones) you may want to mount those inside a truck, kinda make it into a self-propelled armored mortar, with a spare mortar that can either replace a hot-tube or be deployed in conjunction with the mounted one, and have two trucks. Just don't forget to put out the jack-stands to prevent the recoil from bottoming-out the suspension. Also have enough room inside to carry ammo or shove one of the battalion 120mm morts in there. Because shell-economy.

In theory you could mount two, but the recoil would cause the frame to rock and roll too much for any appreciable increased RoF... maybe a slightly better sustained RoF though.

Also, although the Zu-23-2 on a Ural is a meme, I'll point out that if your air-force is perma-grounded... why not strip the guns from your warplanes? GSh-23-6?

(Infantry) Lessons of Chechnya
Small arms procurement and training in the Vietnam war
RPG-7 being an RPG-7
This one is a bit on the nose considering current events

Oh, right, if your dudes REALLY ever need an 82mm or even a 120mm commando-mortar, stick a shell on the end of an RPG-7 propelling charge. This was done largely to provide a long(er) ranged anti-personnel shell for the RPG, but also sorta makes the whole package more mobile as long as you can hit whatever you're aiming at in 3 shells or less.

As noted in artillery expenditure norms, 82mm is the minimum necessary to reduce fortifications, and 120mm is better in every way for that. This leaves 60mm for harassment, illumination/smoke, and engaging targets with a fair amount of precision.

Still gonna recommend rifle-grenades, either cup-dischargers on AK-74s for lobbing hand-grenades for smoke, or spigot-type launchers/adapters to allow the everyman-infantry dudes to launch a stonk of 60mm or even 82mm mortar-bombs out to 300 meters with their FN-FALs (using the Enegra grenade's stats) Although in an emergency-pinch, direct-fire at 75 meters is probably doable.

I'm slowly compiling and organizing a merchandised infantry company in modernized BTR-60s, did a bit of research into truck engines, and we have come a crazy long way in engine power in the last 60 years

seriously, one shitty modern engine literally doubles the HP, I was very surprised to say the least

. Tangent aside, how does a BTR-152 with a 200 horsepower engine courtesy of Ford and an 82mm mortar mounted in the back sound?

I officially love the GSh-23-6 idea, maybe in a BTR with the troop compartment given over to ammo stowage... TO MS PAINT!!!

[Gallia-]

a 200 hp engine btr-152 is just btr-60 my guy

[Crookfur]

Does anyone here know how new guns are designed? Or any equations?

Folk look at existing designs and think on how they could make them better, they see a problem or gap in the market and come up with a solution or they just come up with a cool idea and work it through.

Unless you are part of a big industry team who needs to make something that x whilst meeting y and z requirements there is a good chance your stuff will never exist as anything other than a few hand make (or CNCed) prototypes.


There are loads of equations, it depends on what you want to figure out.

If you want to create something yourself the best bet is to read ALL the things about ALL the guns, including those that failed as they are often the most educational. The Works of Williams, Popenker, McCollum, Kasarda and Fergusson are well worth checking out for a grounding.