Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Patrick Hunt]

I'm not basing it at that at all, I used the picture to show the kind of shape of evehicle I want. Thats all.

The vehicle has plenty of uses and the guns are OPTIONAL. The design includes mounts for them and thats all it does not include them as default armaments.
It won't cost 3 tanks, it uses less materials then the tanks do so how exactly did you get it costing 3x more? Crawl? It won't crawl at all, with duel engines it'll be perfectly fine and again. The guns are OPTIONAL,  so crew size will fit whatever you put onto it.
Don't add side mounted guns? Thats 4 less crew for it.
Also how is it going to be slower? Less armor, less stuff inside, no massive gun. If anything it's lighter. It might be heavier depending what guns you mount on it but the base design would cost less then a tank and be lighter.

Your major problems all relate to completely optional things that will only be included if they are needed and can be easily removed against after.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

It won't cost 3 tanks, it uses less materials then the tanks do so how exactly did you get it costing 3x more? Crawl? It won't crawl at all, with duel engines it'll be perfectly fine and again.

My planned tank projects:

Tank A
20mm front armor, 15mm side armor, 10mm rear armor, 5mm roof and bottom
Arnament: turret with twin 15mm machineguns
Engine: current tank engine

Tank B
25mm front armor, 15mm side and rear armor, 10mm roof, 7.5mm bottom
Arnament: turret with 40mm gun, 2 8mm auxulary machine-guns
Engine: The truck engine

Yes, they'll cost several times cheaper...

The vehicle has plenty of uses and the guns are OPTIONAL. The design includes mounts for them and thats all it does not include them as default armaments.

So you want empty armored mounts that will take weight\space for nothing?

[Taricus]

Oh yeah, one thing I have to ask, is that MG having it's ammunition stated at 8x20mm a typo?

[Patrick Hunt]

Hmm I need to reword that, the armor can be added to the mount if you are going to use them otherwise it's left off.

It's just an armored truck with mounts and platform that you can mount anything you want onto, so it can fill any role you need it to fill at the time from transporting supplies to mobile fire support. I included mounts because some roles will require the extra security.

The base MSV will not cost more, it'll cost less since it includes no weapons at all, it'll cost more if you include whatever you mount on it but whatever you mount is going to get built either way. Mounted or not we'll build machineguns, artillery, AA guns. This is simply a way to use them and keep them mobile at the same time.
Mobility plays a big part in a war, the side with the greater mobility has an advantage so being able to move artillery and air cover into position faster then our enemy is a massive edge.

[Dorsidwarf]

To everyone saying his ideas for a mobile indirect artillery gun are impractical/impossible. The Birch Self Propelled Gun. 360-degree turret with an artillery howitzer attached. first SPG ever - reasonably fast, open-air, highly mobile.

Also, 9cm of armour is nothing. The famous German "Maus 2" prototype has 24cm of armour, and weighed nearly 200 tonnes. Weight is Not. A. Problem. At least, with tanks.

Additionally, 5mm armour is so weak that a HMG or even a rifle could most likely punch straight throught it. High-powered cannon (20mm upwards) could blast through any of the armour on your infantry support tank, and explosions ( like grenades) would cripple or kill it's crew.

Add 10mm, or even just 5 would be extremely effective to all those measurements

[Patrick Hunt]

I know my vehicle is effective, I need to add a second engine to it and clear up the language a bit, but 2cm of armor for something thats designed not to face heavy fire should be plenty.

[Dorsidwarf]

No, the other one. 1cm isn't great, and the roof armour ( the bit that keeps your crewmens' brains in) is laughable. Infantry armoured support should at least be able to bounce rifle fire from all angles.

[Patrick Hunt]

Hmmm good point, I'll bump it up to 3cm armor all around 2cm thick for the shield. Should be good enough then right?

[Ukrainian Ranger]

 

No, the other one. 1cm isn't great, and the roof armour ( the bit that keeps your crewmens' brains in) is laughable. Infantry armoured support should at least be able to bounce rifle fire from all angles.

Just in case, real world tank of the era:

Vickers 6 ton, desined in 1931
Front armor 13mm, side armor 13mm, rear armor 8mm, bottom armor 5mm, top armor 5mm

[Funk]

Oh yeah, one thing I have to ask, is that MG having it's ammunition stated at 8x20mm a typo?

yes it now 15x125mm.

I like the tanks Ukrainian Ranger.
Armour wise it needs about 8mm of steel to stop normal rifle ammo.
we need to get armor up to about 25mm in a few years time to stop anti-tank guns.

Im toying with the idea of a light tank/ armoured car with a ram that holds a built in flame thrower, the idea being that it can batter open it target then destroy it from the inside with fire.

Tank wise we need some better weapons, the 15mm is good but it is overpowered for infantry and to slow for anti air use.
The 40mm is far to heavy by a good 1000kg, and probably much to big to fit.

Id like a new tank gun around about 45mm and a light 8mm machine gun for infantry and general use.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Heh, I like a 1924 year halftrack idea with armor thicker than early WW2 medium tanks had. Almost tempted to vote to get analogue of that propelled gun from the Nadaka's game

Funk
Well 15mm is bassically an anti tank machinegun, what surprizes me that 10ebbor10 made it so light. It should have been like 50-80kg, because it's borderline light autocannon

[Taricus]

It's probably more like the M2HB than an autocannon. Still could punch through the armour of a light armoured vehicle, such as a halftrack or armoured car though.

[Patrick Hunt]

I did my own research and then edited it, it's armor is 1.5 mc, barely above the examples I found so not enough to be unrealistic for the time of creation.

[Aseaheru]

UR, I think he is basing it pretty much off this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SdKfz_251

[Patrick Hunt]

I'm not basing it on any vehicle, I@m using that shape. Thats all.