Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation [NO MECHS] Mk.V

[Radictistan]

I've just discovered that "Tank Protection Levels" is down. When did that happen?

[The Kievan People]

Are rubber tracks a good idea for MBT's?

Shhhh I am still drawing...

[Anemos Major]

While we are at it it's question time.

What gun caliber do everyone's tanks use?
The Purpelian standard is 123mm rifled.

128mm smoothbore.

[Allanea]

152mm smoothbore here.

[Czechovelkov]

Don't get shot at by them. APS (smoke, jamming, hard kill systems, etc.) is another option, though missiles have been developed which supposedly fool some types of APS.

There is no way you could really armor the roof of a combat vehicle enough to withstand some of the larger ATGMs without making it ridiculously heavy or compromising other areas of protection.

You used to be able to suppress ATGMs with autocannon fire. A big reason the US went with a 25mm cannon (which is a bit of an oddball ammunition choice) with the Bradley was to suppress AT-3 Sagger crews. The effective range of the HEI-T round was about 3000 meters, about the same range as the AT-3 Sagger. The coaxial gun's range of 900 meters also happened to match the range of the RPG-7. 1700 meters for the ADPS-T round matched the average field of fire in Western Europe, and outranged the BMP-1's gun by about 800 meters.

Of course, nowadays, you have fire and forget top-attack ATGMs that have tandem-charge HEAT warheads with a hit rate of over 95 percent at 2,500 meters and beyond. How can you counter that? Not really sure. At least they are quite expensive.

I'm guessing some sort of armor to reduce damage if impact occurs and the usual detection and soft and hard kill systems would be good.

[New Tsavon]

While we are at it it's question time.

What gun caliber do everyone's tanks use?
The Purpelian standard is 123mm rifled.

As of what year?

Anyways, Tsavonian tanks go from carrying 9.6x70mm GPMGs, to 50mm autocannons, to 75mm rifled guns, to 75mm smoothbores a year later, to 90mm smoothbores about halfway through WWII, then to 105mm smoothbores some time around the 1960's, and finally 135mm smoothbores near the end of the third World War (1978 or so). I hope that answers your question.

I may or may not have forgotten a few things there.

[Immoren]

How on earth do you protect from top down attacks?

[Czechovelkov]

How on earth do you protect from top down attacks?

lol ty

[Immoren]

lol ty

I wonder if I should tell you that someone actually suggested that seriously?

[Dostanuot Loj]

While we are at it it's question time.

What gun caliber do everyone's tanks use?
The Purpelian standard is 123mm rifled.

As of what year?

Anyways, Tsavonian tanks go from carrying 9.6x70mm GPMGs, to 50mm autocannons, to 75mm rifled guns, to 75mm smoothbores a year later, to 90mm smoothbores about halfway through WWII, then to 105mm smoothbores some time around the 1960's, and finally 135mm smoothbores near the end of the third World War (1978 or so). I hope that answers your question.

I may or may not have forgotten a few things there.

Why do you adopt smoothbores at least a decade (or really two) before they became necessary and/or effective? In the middle of WW2 there is not only no reason to go smoothbore, but nothing to fire from it that would not be more effective from rifled guns.

[The Kievan People]

[
3. If you make a 120mm HE shell long enough, it would be just as effective.
6. One could also suppress ATGM teams with mortar or grenade fire.

3. And if you fired an extra-long 152mm shell... This isn't terribly practical though, a 120mm shell needs to be over 60% longer than a 152mm shell to have equal volume (approximately double the aspect ratio). The shell would likely be comparable in length to a complete 152mm round.
6. This is true, but it makes tanks unduly dependent on artillery in my opinion. Because of their portability and the ease with which they can be concealed, ATGMs are one of the most difficult threats to suppress in advance and consequently one of the weapons tanks are most likely to face. ATGM ambushes* are likely to be a bigger obstacle than enemy tanks and ones own tanks should maximize their ability to overcome them so that their dependence on slow-moving artillery supply trains can be minimized.

*So all is clear, I do not expect tanks to overcome all AT defenses solely through their own firepower. But I think they should definitely be able to break through a hasty defense with minimal recourse to supporting arms and minimal casualties.

[Dostanuot Loj]

From what I've seen of the T-64/T-80 autoloader, though, it looks like they do use two-piece ammunition - only the shell and charge are stored upright and aligned during the loading process, whereas the T-72 and T-90 store the shell and charge horizontally and ram them one at a time. Or am I missing something?

Huh, maybe.
I'm confused.

Never bothered to look in detail, but I thought the T-64 autoloader (later used in the T-80) used single-piece 125mm rounds, or at least, because of its orientation, it can take much larger penetrators and warheads than the T-72 loader could. I also figured that since it uses a T-80 turret, the T-90 would use the T-80 type loader.

All Russian/Soviet/Post-Soviet 125mm rounds share the same basic physical criteria. And are thus all two-piece.
And T-90 uses a T-72 based autoloader I believe. It is much less temperamental then the T-64/80 autoloader system.

[New Tsavon]

As of what year?

Anyways, Tsavonian tanks go from carrying 9.6x70mm GPMGs, to 50mm autocannons, to 75mm rifled guns, to 75mm smoothbores a year later, to 90mm smoothbores about halfway through WWII, then to 105mm smoothbores some time around the 1960's, and finally 135mm smoothbores near the end of the third World War (1978 or so). I hope that answers your question.

I may or may not have forgotten a few things there.

Why do you adopt smoothbores at least a decade (or really two) before they became necessary and/or effective? In the middle of WW2 there is not only no reason to go smoothbore, but nothing to fire from it that would not be more effective from rifled guns.

Well, can you fire canister from a rifled gun?

If so, I'll probably switch over, because dealing with massed infantry (of any sort) charges was still big consideration in Tsavonian doctrine at the time, because it was thought that the next world war would be fought like the last one. Either that or the Naðrfirar would show up again, possibly with even greater numbers.

[Celritannia]

Some alterations to the Versatile Armoured Transport (V.A.T):

[Purpelia]

Why do you adopt smoothbores at least a decade (or really two) before they became necessary and/or effective? In the middle of WW2 there is not only no reason to go smoothbore, but nothing to fire from it that would not be more effective from rifled guns.

Well, can you fire canister from a rifled gun?

If so, I'll probably switch over, because dealing with massed infantry (of any sort) charges was still big consideration in Tsavonian doctrine at the time, because it was thought that the next world war would be fought like the last one. Either that or the Naðrfirar would show up again, possibly with even greater numbers.

Canister is meaningless. Just use a time fused (AKA Airburst) HEFrag that is fused to blow up a few meters out of the barrel.

[New Tsavon]

Well, can you fire canister from a rifled gun?

If so, I'll probably switch over, because dealing with massed infantry (of any sort) charges was still big consideration in Tsavonian doctrine at the time, because it was thought that the next world war would be fought like the last one. Either that or the Naðrfirar would show up again, possibly with even greater numbers.

Canister is meaningless. Just use a time fused (AKA Airburst) HEFrag that is fused to blow up a few meters out of the barrel.

B-but I like canister!

That might be more effective, but it isn't as cool as a 75mm shotgun!

[Purpelia]

Canister is meaningless. Just use a time fused (AKA Airburst) HEFrag that is fused to blow up a few meters out of the barrel.

B-but I like canister!

That might be more effective, but it isn't as cool as a 75mm shotgun!

I disagree. Shotguns might be nice and all. But when a tank swings it's gun over to say hello there is nothing quite as cool as a face full of hypersonic shrapnel.

[Kouralia]

123mm Smoothbore, designed and made in Crookfur, for Kouralia.

[Czechovelkov]

DU Canister Shell Pellets

[Czechovelkov]

lol ty

I wonder if I should tell you that someone actually suggested that seriously?

Why the fuu

[Immoren]

I wonder if I should tell you that someone actually suggested that seriously?

Why the fuu

:mikesparks:
Or atleast iirc it was him.

[New Tsavon]

B-but I like canister!

That might be more effective, but it isn't as cool as a 75mm shotgun!

I disagree. Shotguns might be nice and all. But when a tank swings it's gun over to say hello there is nothing quite as cool as a face full of hypersonic shrapnel.

I'll have to disagree with you there.

On another note, I feel the urge to design the first Tsavonian tank, since I haven't already. So, should it be an uparmored tractor or not?

[The Soodean Imperium]

Huh, maybe.
I'm confused.

Never bothered to look in detail, but I thought the T-64 autoloader (later used in the T-80) used single-piece 125mm rounds, or at least, because of its orientation, it can take much larger penetrators and warheads than the T-72 loader could. I also figured that since it uses a T-80 turret, the T-90 would use the T-80 type loader.

All Russian/Soviet/Post-Soviet 125mm rounds share the same basic physical criteria. And are thus all two-piece.
And T-90 uses a T-72 based autoloader I believe. It is much less temperamental then the T-64/80 autoloader system.

T-90 was the result of taking the structure of a T-72BM and loading it with the equipment (gun, fire control, etc) of a T-80U. It retained the T-72's two-stroke autoloader. The T-80, on the other hand, was developed from the T-64 and kept the more complex autoloader, which had a slightly faster rate of fire (shell and case inserted in a single motion) but was more complex, and separated the turret crew from the driver.

T-72/T-90 autoloader: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NIaoOabF_0
T-64/T-80 autoloader: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p32slFNgbOo (at 0:00, 0:12, and 0:37)

Now that I watch it again, it looks like the T-64 version slips the back of the last spent charge (forgot what it's called) into the next round's loading case; T-72/T-90 ejects it from the turret like the old T-62, which could compromise your NBC airtightness.

[The Soodean Imperium]

I disagree. Shotguns might be nice and all. But when a tank swings it's gun over to say hello there is nothing quite as cool as a face full of hypersonic shrapnel.

I'll have to disagree with you there.

On another note, I feel the urge to design the first Tsavonian tank, since I haven't already. So, should it be an uparmored tractor or not?

Up-Armored Tractor.

Do it.

[Oaledonia]

While we are at it it's question time.

What gun caliber do everyone's tanks use?
The Purpelian standard is 123mm rifled.

Our main calibres from frontline service are the 120mm and 135mm guns. (Oscillating Turret FTW). . . and let's not forget the 150mm prototypes loafing around . .
However, Imperial Territorial Guard units Uses the 105mm gun.

I hope that the oscillating turret is purely for recoil reduction and not elevating purposes