Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation Mk X

[Allanea]

For the horse fans that I am sure still lurk in our midst...

A South African mine-resistant, armored, horse carrier for cavalry scouts:



Essentially an APC, but for horses.

An AHC, you could say.

[Gallia-]

pic: thwuppo wit blatter



filename is on point

[Laritaia]

the days when CAS was done by real men with rockets and miniguns

[Gallia-]

these days

[Laritaia]

these days it's all vdiya gaymes with their lasers and hellfire missiles

[Gallia-]

n o p e

not in the most magical of places with the most future-past of days



cool kids only

[Chinevion]

Replaced the LAHAT with my own version of the NOLOS:
C812 MPAT shell is the base for many different warheads including the W31 OTES (Obscured target engagement system) tandem warhead; the shell uses laser guidance from the O.C.CAM (Over Cover Camera) and 8 fins that allow the C812-W31 shell to make precision strikes on targets behind cover and out of a direct line of sight. The W31 has a penetration of 2,000mm.

Fixed the LRP:
4 cm wide 84 cm long depleted uranium long rod penetrator.

[Federated Kingdom of Prussia]

You can't really use a conventional shell like the MPAT as a base for a GLATGM, because the missile part requires a rocket motor that shells don't have.

Also, I'm not sure how your 'over-cover camera' is supposed to work - are you targeting tanks that are entirely covered by something in front of them? Is it a UAV that sits hundreds of meters in the air?

[Laritaia]

You can't really use a conventional shell like the MPAT as a base for a GLATGM, because the missile part requires a rocket motor that shells don't have.

Also, I'm not sure how your 'over-cover camera' is supposed to work - are you targeting tanks that are entirely covered by something in front of them? Is it a UAV that sits hundreds of meters in the air?

it's mounted on an elevating mast iirc

[Purpelia]

Would the use of self sealing fuel tank technology have helped alleviate the dangers of fire that existed in WW2 tanks when they were hit? And if so was it used in this capacity and why yes/not?

[Chinevion]

You can't really use a conventional shell like the MPAT as a base for a GLATGM, because the missile part requires a rocket motor that shells don't have.

Also, I'm not sure how your 'over-cover camera' is supposed to work - are you targeting tanks that are entirely covered by something in front of them? Is it a UAV that sits hundreds of meters in the air?

The guidance package at the front has some thrust vectoring similar to Rcs. The camera is mainly for over hills, or minor cover. The system is comparable to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1156_P ... idance_Kit
It can make minor adjustments to angel, and trajectory. Later versions of the Raksha will have a tethered drone to get better angels.

You can't really use a conventional shell like the MPAT as a base for a GLATGM, because the missile part requires a rocket motor that shells don't have.

Also, I'm not sure how your 'over-cover camera' is supposed to work - are you targeting tanks that are entirely covered by something in front of them? Is it a UAV that sits hundreds of meters in the air?

it's mounted on an elevating mast iirc

Correct

[Laritaia]

Would the use of self sealing fuel tank technology have helped alleviate the dangers of fire that existed in WW2 tanks when they were hit? And if so was it used in this capacity and why yes/not?

no, because more often then not the fire started with the ammunition

[Austrasien]

Would the use of self sealing fuel tank technology have helped alleviate the dangers of fire that existed in WW2 tanks when they were hit? And if so was it used in this capacity and why yes/not?

No. They have been tested for this purpose and found unsuitable.

1. Fuel fires in ground vehicles are started primarily by vapor inside the fuel tank itself. Not by spilled liquid fuel. Aircraft have a lot of small spaces inside the airframe were spilt fuel from a small leak can build up a dangerous amount of vapor quickly. Tanks, which are basically large boxes, do not have this problem.
2. Self sealing tanks can only seal very small holes like those caused by bullets and small autocannon shells. These weapons cannot pierce a tank in the first place.

[The Akasha Colony]

Replaced the LAHAT with my own version of the NOLOS:
C812 MPAT shell is the base for many different warheads including the W31 OTES (Obscured target engagement system) tandem warhead; the shell uses laser guidance from the O.C.CAM (Over Cover Camera) and 8 fins that allow the C812-W31 shell to make precision strikes on targets behind cover and out of a direct line of sight. The W31 has a penetration of 2,000mm.

2,000 mm vs RHA is probably a lot more than you can reasonably expect from a tank-caliber HEAT shell. This would be over 13 times the maximum possible charge diameter, even though it would be impossible for the charge to actually take up the entire width of the shell.

Tank-fired HEAT shells are generally not actually designed to squeeze every ounce of penetration, partly because this because this makes them more expensive and hinders their multi-role capability. And mostly because it's simply unnecessary, they only need to penetrate enough to kill moderately-armored targets like IFVs and anything more protected (like an MBT) can be dealt with using APFSDS. The US actually adopted a sub-caliber HEAT shell with M830A1 which sacrificed penetration for greater muzzle velocity and thus better accuracy, which made it more useful as a multi-purpose round.

Fixed the LRP:
4 cm wide 84 cm long depleted uranium long rod penetrator.

Not entirely. It's now physically possible in that it doesn't have an excessive L:D ratio, but now you've actually made it suboptimal because it's too fat.

When Kyiv said the maximum practical L:D is 30:1, that should have been your goal. But now you've taken it all the way down to 21:1.

2,100 m/s is pretty extreme, although I imagine the MV should decrease if the penetrator gets heavier because you've made it fatter. Still, 840 mm is not very large for a 152 mm gun and it would be better to trade a lower muzzle velocity for more mass. A 2,100 m/s gun would very likely have fairly extreme wear problems and the round would very rapidly lose velocity and thus penetrating power during flight.

[Chinevion]

Replaced the LAHAT with my own version of the NOLOS:
C812 MPAT shell is the base for many different warheads including the W31 OTES (Obscured target engagement system) tandem warhead; the shell uses laser guidance from the O.C.CAM (Over Cover Camera) and 8 fins that allow the C812-W31 shell to make precision strikes on targets behind cover and out of a direct line of sight. The W31 has a penetration of 2,000mm.

2,000 mm vs RHA is probably a lot more than you can reasonably expect from a tank-caliber HEAT shell. This would be over 13 times the maximum possible charge diameter, even though it would be impossible for the charge to actually take up the entire width of the shell.

Tank-fired HEAT shells are generally not actually designed to squeeze every ounce of penetration, partly because this because this makes them more expensive and hinders their multi-role capability. And mostly because it's simply unnecessary, they only need to penetrate enough to kill moderately-armored targets like IFVs and anything more protected (like an MBT) can be dealt with using APFSDS. The US actually adopted a sub-caliber HEAT shell with M830A1 which sacrificed penetration for greater muzzle velocity and thus better accuracy, which made it more useful as a multi-purpose round.

Fixed the LRP:
4 cm wide 84 cm long depleted uranium long rod penetrator.

Not entirely. It's now physically possible in that it doesn't have an excessive L:D ratio, but now you've actually made it suboptimal because it's too fat.

When Kyiv said the maximum practical L:D is 30:1, that should have been your goal. But now you've taken it all the way down to 21:1.

2,100 m/s is pretty extreme, although I imagine the MV should decrease if the penetrator gets heavier because you've made it fatter. Still, 840 mm is not very large for a 152 mm gun and it would be better to trade a lower muzzle velocity for more mass. A 2,100 m/s gun would very likely have fairly extreme wear problems and the round would very rapidly lose velocity and thus penetrating power during flight.

1. Yeah, understood
2. I also understood, what would you recommend? MIm thinking 100cmX3.3Cm at a MV of 1,500

Also starting to add more detail:
http://imgur.com/YJTIumx

[Fordorsia]

In the chieftains newest video on the strv 103, he mentions its two hull MGs. He said that each time you pull the trigger, it alternates the bursts between the two guns. So you pull the trigger, one guns fires. Next trigger pull, the other fires.

Why is it like this instead of just having a thicker barrel and shit? It's not like alternating between the two like that decreases the chance of one jamming. Or because of the guns being external and sealed away, is it just a pair for the unlikely chance that one does malfunction?

[Chinevion]

In the chieftains newest video on the strv 103, he mentions its two hull MGs. He said that each time you pull the trigger, it alternates the bursts between the two guns. So you pull the trigger, one guns fires. Next trigger pull, the other fires.

Why is it like this instead of just having a thicker barrel and shit? It's not like alternating between the two like that decreases the chance of one jamming. Or because of the guns being external and sealed away, is it just a pair for the unlikely chance that one does malfunction?

It could be so they dont over heat, wait do each gun fire alternatively each time you pull or does only one travel at a time?

[Fordorsia]

In the chieftains newest video on the strv 103, he mentions its two hull MGs. He said that each time you pull the trigger, it alternates the bursts between the two guns. So you pull the trigger, one guns fires. Next trigger pull, the other fires.

Why is it like this instead of just having a thicker barrel and shit? It's not like alternating between the two like that decreases the chance of one jamming. Or because of the guns being external and sealed away, is it just a pair for the unlikely chance that one does malfunction?

It could be so they dont over heat, wait do each gun fire alternatively each time you pull or does only one travel at a time?

Each pull of the trigger fires the other gun. So pull the trigger, first guns does a burst. Next time you pull it, the other gun does a burst.

I dunno about overheating. It would be far simpler and cheaper to just have on gun with a thicker barrel. A coaxial shouldn't be shooting enough to overheat anyway, because you kinda have the main gun if there's a target threatening enough to warrant long MG bursts.

[Chinevion]

It could be so they dont over heat, wait do each gun fire alternatively each time you pull or does only one travel at a time?

Each pull of the trigger fires the other gun. So pull the trigger, first guns does a burst. Next time you pull it, the other gun does a burst.

I dunno about overheating. It would be far simpler and cheaper to just have on gun with a thicker barrel. A coaxial shouldn't be shooting enough to overheat anyway, because you kinda have the main gun if there's a target threatening enough to warrant long MG bursts.

Maybe more ammo, but then why not just have one gun with more ammo

[Austrasien]

It's from Sweden so it is to be expected it would be strange and impractical.

[Taihei Tengoku]

It's a hetzerized "Chi-Ha" with a Pak 43

Type 2611 Tank Destroyer Ha-I
Weight: 21,050kg
Length: 5.50m
Width: 2.35m
Height: 2.20m
Crew: 3 (Driver-gunner, loader, commander)

Main gun: 8cm Type 2590 (32 rounds)
Secondary armament: 6.5mm Type 88 machine gun (Vickers VGO), 2000 rounds
Armor: maximum 6cm front, 2.5cm sides

Engine: Daihatsu VD12A 22-liter V12 air-cooled diesel, 240hp
Transmission: Daihatsu 5+2(+1) double differential transmission
Suspension: Bell crank
Range: 210km
Top speed: 33km/h

The Type 2611 Ha-I is a modification of the Type 2597 Chi-Ro medium tank into an assault gun armed with the Gallan Bofors m/29 80mm anti-aircraft gun. The Type 97 and 97 Kai were both reliable tanks and easily matched the primitive armored vehicles (or lack thereof) in the Pearl Sea. However, the late 1940s saw the beginnings of decolonization and the widespread reduction in size of Alisnan armies, who sold their military surplus at bargain rates to their ex-colonies. The Questarians in particular sold off their massive stocks of the A51 Hayes to Taihei rivals in Ruccola and Guurdalai. With a powerful radial engine, up to 10cm of frontal armor and a 75mm or high-velocity 76mm rifle, they were wholly superior to the Chi-Ro's meager 3cm frontal armor and 47mm gun. Work on what would later become the Type 56 proceeded at speed but projections yielded a far more expensive armored vehicle than any made by Taihei Tengoku. The Chi-Ro would need to pose a credible challenge to Alisnan export models in the interim.

The Chi-Ro was innovative for its time (1937)--it introduced air-cooled engines and the double-differential transmission. It was the first tank in the world to use a yoke rather than tiller bars and the first tank capable of the pivot steer. Engineers mated the smooth and precise steering of the Type 97 with the Bofors anti-aircraft gun, which Alisnan experience showed to be just as capable against tanks as against planes. The turret and bow machine gun of the Type 97 were replaced with a large casemate for the Type 90 cannon mounted on the port side of the hull. The gun had elevation controls for +15/-7 degrees elevation but no horizontal deflection. The new tank destroyer, the Ha-I, would aim by turning its hull to face the enemy.

The lack of a traverse gear allowed the gun to be securely fixed to the hull and allowed the driver and gunner to combine into one position. The removal of the fourth crewmember and the fixed recoil path of the gun freed up space for the loader to work in the rear of the combat compartment, which gave the compact Ha-I a surprisingly high rate of fire of around nine rounds per minute. The commander stood between the driver and the loader, and could operate the roof-mounted 6.5mm machine gun from within the hull using pantographs and a Bowden cable.

Armor protection on the Ha-I was rationalized with the replacement of the upper hull with a simpler, welded superstructure. Maximum armor thickness is 6cm of rolled steel on the upper front plate, thinning out to 2.5cm on the sides. The conversion to the Ha-I uprated the suspension bogeys to handle the extra weight of the gun and armor, and replaced the 170hp diesel engine with a newer 240hp diesel.

pleace respond

[Fordorsia]

Viking warriors dual wielded axes so I guess it makes sense for their ancestor spirit

[Chinevion]

Viking warriors dual wielded axes so I guess it makes sense for their ancestor spirit

Ford you have not made anything in a while, can you post something, its hard being the only idiot here...

[Fordorsia]

Only been like three days. What do you think I am, an art whore?


Have some reheated shit

[Chinevion]

Only been like three days. What do you think I am, an art whore?


Have some reheated shit
(Image)

Lol, i am sorry i messed that, last thing of yours I have seen was the castel