Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation Mk X

[Yohannes]

Whats tnakshrap?

An excel spreadsheet that lets you punch in a whole bunch of tank parameters and get a bunch of others out. Unfortunately, it's even clunkier than Springsharp and requires more background knowledge than even New Vihenia's spreadsheets in order to find appropriate input data, since aside from a bunch of largely irrelevant (for MT) options, it is short on included options.

Ty for the Tnakshrap info The Akasha Colony!

Also the 130/L51 conversation was fun to read!

[Purpelia]

And it's random question time.

Take a small light gun for fighting tanks and light work in general. Take a big gun for blowing up bunkers and things the tiny gun can't match. Put them together in a single vehicle (and NO extra turrets) and you get something apparently everyone did back in WW2. Off the top of my head we have the Churchill, the Char B1, the Neubaufahrzeug and the M3 Lee.

My question for you lot is which is your favorite? Which do you think was (or would have been) most effective? And did I miss any?

[The Manticoran Empire]

Would Tungsten be an effective vehicle armor to replace DU in Chobham style armor.

[Fordorsia]

And it's random question time.

Take a small light gun for fighting tanks and light work in general. Take a big gun for blowing up bunkers and things the tiny gun can't match. Put them together in a single vehicle (and NO extra turrets) and you get something apparently everyone did back in WW2. Off the top of my head we have the Churchill, the Char B1, the Neubaufahrzeug and the M3 Lee.

My question for you lot is which is your favorite? Which do you think was (or would have been) most effective? And did I miss any?

Churchill's howitzer was useless and was deleted after the MK.I. Char B1 was extremely inefficient in that the driver had to steer the tank to aim while looking through the sights, had the elevate, and then fire the gun. Neubaufahrzeug is good because the two guns are in one turret, but fairly bad because there is essentially no armour and the MG turrets, while cool, are dumb. M3 Lee is far and away the most successful and effective, because the bigger gun was an actual gun instead of a howitzer, and was built on a good chassis.

But this isn't surprising considering the M3 Lee is the odd one out of all these, because the 75 was the main gun for fighting both infantry and tanks. The 37mm was secondary for both these roles, not a dedicated weapon for one of them.

[Laritaia]

Would Tungsten be an effective vehicle armor to replace DU in Chobham style armor.

only the US uses DU in it's special armour to any meaningful degree.

while it is suspected that the 'Dorchester' armour used in the Chally 2 uses Tungsten, this could easily be another of the MoD's classic "lies told to small children(squaddies)"

[Yohannes]

Alright time to stop fooling around I guess (sorry). At the moment I am designing a composite armour combination (not for my NationStates Modern Tech/Post-Modern Tech canon; otherwise I wouldn't bother posting here), I am asking for a little help (if possible): does anyone have access to ANSYS Autodyn solver? That would help me greatly (so I can have someone who can criticise the figures I'll use)

[Gallia-]

You can't fork out $60,000 of your own money to get a licence?

[Yohannes]

You can't fork out $60,000 of your own money to get a licence?

$60,000 what..... are u joking or are u actually serious??

[Gallia-]

You can't fork out $60,000 of your own money to get a licence?

$60,000 what..... are u joking or are u actually serious??

That's the discounted network licence. From five years ago. The GSA Catalog is still around there for Autodyn but for someone who isn't a Federal organization like the U.S. Army or Naval Research Laboratory it'll cost you closer to $200,000. The solver and pre/post software bundle is closer to $300,000 probably. I'm not sure what the single user cost is but I'm not sure there is one, either, since ANSYS generally tends to be B2B rather than B2C, so you're looking at a investment for a LAN licence or something since you're clearly a startup engineering firm looking for good FEA software and $300,000 is chump change for a financially stable engineering company of pretty much any size.

If you don't know how much it costs why are you asking?

[Yohannes]

You can't fork out $60,000 of your own money to get a licence?

MY GOD you're right (just browsed around for price). Ain't no way paying that much for fictional stuff

Edit:

If you don't know how much it costs why are you asking?

Didn't bother to check for price. Thought it would be cheap or easily accessible...............................

[Gallia-]

You can't fork out $60,000 of your own money to get a licence?

MY GOD you're right (just browsed around for price). Ain't no way paying that much for fictional stuff

Also don't ask Retrotechnical Syndicalists to play around on his work computer since I'm p. sure he'd get in trouble. ):

Thought it would be cheap or easily accessible...............................

The most basic bitch comprehensive software packages for individual licence are $1,000-$1,500. That's just Adobe's Master Suite. Photoshop is $350 and whatever else comes with the Creative Suite n is going to be similar.

Autodyn also requires hardware security key to use so you can't pirate it. Good FEA packages (or any software packages) are expensive. Shocking.

Although I'm not sure if Retrotechnical Capitalists even uses Autodyn in his work since all we ever see are CAD drawings.

[The Manticoran Empire]

Would Tungsten be an effective vehicle armor to replace DU in Chobham style armor.

only the US uses DU in it's special armour to any meaningful degree.

while it is suspected that the 'Dorchester' armour used in the Chally 2 uses Tungsten, this could easily be another of the MoD's classic "lies told to small children(squaddies)"

I am not asking who uses it. I am asking if it would work.

[Yohannes]

Good FEA packages (or any software packages) are expensive. Shocking.

It's so unfair................

Although I'm not sure if Retrotechnical Capitalists even uses Autodyn in his work since all we ever see are CAD drawings.

Cool drawings though!

Thanks so much for the information Galla! I guess I will have to just reference stuff then...

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

Solidworks is about 5K per license with tech support although as a uni student I get it for the bargain bin discount of $75. We get autodesk inventor for free but it’s crap so I use SW. The CAD lab that I have access to in the engineering building on campus does have ANSYS (with autodyn, fluent, and other good stuff) which is like 50-100K plus per license and Siemens NX (Fancy CAD/CEA software) which is like 20K per license but those are installed on workstation computers and the software isn’t available to download for personal use so....

I like CAD because I can’t draw for crap and it makes dimensioning super easy...not to mention I can make qt 3D tankfu.

[Gallia-]

CAD is just Sketchup for flexibly employable people. ):

[Yohannes]

Solidworks is about 5K per license with tech support although as a uni student I get it for the bargain bin discount of $75. We get autodesk inventor for free but it’s crap so I use SW. The CAD lab that I have access to in the engineering building on campus does have ANSYS (with autodyn, fluent, and other good stuff) which is like 50-100K plus per license and Siemens NX (Fancy CAD/CEA software) which is like 20K per license but those are installed on workstation computers and the software isn’t available to download for personal use so....

I like CAD because I can’t draw for crap and it makes dimensioning super easy...not to mention I can make qt 3D tankfu.

I have access to CAD too, but hasn't figured out a way to somehow change it to png or svg format......

Not sure about Autodyn, though I doubt it

Also (and especially Galla because I love your tendency to criticise things openly), I will be designing this in my spare time: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=442314

If there are any things that I will write (or has written) there that you guys think are wrong facts (or unrealistic for real life modern technology) please do tell so I can fix them in future. Thanks!

[Schwere Panzer Abteilung 502]

Did someone copy the MCA-7G?

[Yohannes]

Did someone copy the MCA-7G?

Licensed from the legendary Sumer:

88 tonnes traveling at 90 kilometres per hour, firing autotrack 99% hit probability with no thermographic camera able to hit target from 20 km

Electrothermal chemical technology vaguely based on 2006 The Macabees design without adjustment firing at the the American, German, and Russian tanks

Three layers of "classified" armour able to stop quadruple tandem charge hit post explosive reactive armour 1,000 mm RHAaeae

ETC technology with "classified" electric charge able to pubch through ramour at 3,000 m/s with the same penetrator diameter from some calculator online

In future, where tanks meet aircraft. Cars meet armoured fighting vehicles. And there is no limit to funding. A world where you can be invaded by the force of a million ships.

Welcome to the dream

Edit:

40 140 mm ammunition at a rate of fire of 15 every minute non-stop

60 mm mortar with autocannon to engage enemy three enemy helicopters

30 to -9 power elevation with 1980 gun design

All electric turret along 1980 concept

Muitifuel capabilities, 700 km range

Active protection system along 1993 technology with "classified" framework able to detect incoming target from 100 km and destroy twenty threats simultaneously, rela time, 1000 degrees rotation every 0.300 milliseconds

1980 propellant modified to become "classified" twenty-first cenutry technology necessitated by cold war crises and by virtue of constant tension state to state

A world where calculators reign supreme and shraptna dictates your dream

[The Akasha Colony]

Would Tungsten be an effective vehicle armor to replace DU in Chobham style armor.

"Chobham style armor" (Burlington armor) doesn't include any heavy metal modules. The addition of DU modules is a US-specific development and so far as is known isn't inherently related to the bulging plate concept that Burlington armor and its relatives/descendants rely on. It's just part of a more complex armor arrangement that also includes bulging plate layers (and possibly other stuff too) that make up the bulk (by volume) of the arrangement and are responsible for the now-iconic sloped-face Abrams turret.

The exact working of the DU layer is not known so whether tungsten would be a suitable replacement cannot be confirmed. Tungsten's reasonably similar properties mean that it would probably perform in a reasonably similar manner, but not identically. How the armor would have to be changed to accommodate tungsten is obviously not known.

[Fordorsia]

[Laritaia]

only the US uses DU in it's special armour to any meaningful degree.

while it is suspected that the 'Dorchester' armour used in the Chally 2 uses Tungsten, this could easily be another of the MoD's classic "lies told to small children(squaddies)"

I am not asking who uses it. I am asking if it would work.

Sorry i was trying to say that while it's use irl has been suggested, those in the know have a habit of lying about everything including the colour of the sky.

This being the case it's really difficult to say if it would work as a direct replacement for DU or if it can serve the same purpose through a different implementation.
Even if it would work at all is at best barely educated speculation.

[Gallia-]

Machine tank from a solid block of depleted uranium.

Literal atomic tank.

[New Vihenia]

beauty

noice... E-100 is proud of you.

[Fordorsia]

E-100 was a good boy who will be remembered

[Schwere Panzer Abteilung 502]

In tanks, how does the engine supply power to the turret without relying on cables or some other power transfer mechanism which might become wound up and break if the turret were to turn a full 360 degrees?