Print

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

[~Neri]

Typically, it the same as those sorts of tanks. Generally the profile is smaller due to design decisions and that. Kevak, I'd assume that's from some of the more powerful rounds on most of it's armour given that shoulder-launched missile tend to explode.

Anyway, details. For the most part the armour on the sides should be equal to 1000mm of RHA (The actual amount is going to be much lower, due to composites and new materials and such). Speed, around 50-60 KM/h seems reasonable for the maximum, especially with a diesel engine. If we can hit 70 that would be a bonus. The gun itself, reasonably long-barreled, preferably auto-loaded.

Explosives are still kinetic. There's a reason most modern tanks have rounded edges and rounded plates. It diverts some of the kinetic energy.

[Parsely]

Badger
- Diesel Engine
     + 1300-1400 Horsepower
- Armored Ammo Compartment
- AP Weapons
     + 14.5mm Calibre Remote Operated Weapon
     + 7.62x51mm Calibre Turret Coaxial
- Smoke Dispensers OR Engine capable of generating smoke from fuel
- 1300mm Armor
     + Composite
     + Sloped
     + Track Skirts
     + Internal (Armored) Fuel Cells
- Low Profile (less than 3m tall)
- 120mm Main Gun
     + HEAT and APFSDS Payload
     + Smooth Bore
     + Fire Control Computer
     + Auto-Loader
- Crew of 3 (commander, gunner, driver)
     + Crew must be able to perform all mechanical and digital maintenance in the field (basically engineers are told to 'keep it simple stupid')


Could cut composite armor and electronics (fire control computer and cameras) to save money. Cameras are probably an easy cut if we don't care overly much about crew survivability in urban environs.

[Taricus]

Eh, I'm not convinced so much, especially given some of the angular designs out there...

And UR, while I do appreciate the effort, making the cannon being able to fire both missiles and shells seems a little off. Missiles themselves are expensive compared to conventional shells and making the barrel capable of launching both would take a lot of work for little effort. Add in the backblast of the rocket, and I'm not convinced it's effective.

The armour layout I like though, that kind of armouring on the roof would also aid against other munitions that strike there as well.

Badger
- Diesel Engine
     + 1400-1500 Horsepower
- Armoured Ammo Compartment
- AP Weapons
     + 14.5mm Calibre Remote Operated Weapon
     + 7.62x51mm Calibre Turret Coaxial
- Smoke Dispensers
- 1500mm RHA Equivalent Armour
     + Composite
     + Sloped
     + Track Skirts
     + Internal (Armored) Fuel Cells
- Low Profile (less than 3m tall)
- 120mm Main Gun
     + HEAT and APFSDS Payload
     + Smoothbore
     + Fire Control Computer
     + Auto-Loader
- Crew of 3 (commander, gunner, driver)
     + Crew must be able to perform all mechanical and digital maintenance in the field

Alright, edit it to make a bit more sense there Gunin.

[Stirk]

And UR, while I do appreciate the effort, making the cannon being able to fire both missiles and shells seems a little off. Missiles themselves are expensive compared to conventional shells and making the barrel capable of launching both would take a lot of work for little effort. Add in the backblast of the rocket, and I'm not convinced it's effective.

But you are fine with 1300mm armor? That is a lot more expensive than a good handful of guns. I agree it is completly unnecissary for it to fire both rockets and normal munitions.

Why do you want to go far away from the "real world" UR? We are in a mostly-realistic modern setting, a modern realistic tank would make since.

Eh, I'm not convinced so much, especially given some of the angular designs out there...

Sloped=angular . "Sloped" armor basically means "Not vertical or horizontal". In other words, angular. "Sloped armour is armour that is neither in a vertical nor a horizontal position. Such "angled" armour is often mounted on tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles(AFVs)." From the Wiki page on sloped armor. Bold added. He is right. I think that U is supposed to be there, too. Don't know as much about armrour as I do guns.

[Parsely]

Alright, edit it to make a bit more sense there Gunin.

Uh, what exactly do you find unclear..?

The armour layout I like though, that kind of armouring on the roof would also aid against other munitions that strike there as well.

Tanks are never armored up top because it's just either: a lot of additional weight to the tank that you don't need, or you're sacrificing armor from the sides, back and front, where you're far more likely to be hit. Plus there's little point armoring it in the first place since infantry fired, top-attack guided missiles are striking a completely flat, very wide surface. The way they're designed it's almost impossible to stop even those relatively small missiles from penetrating even with armor, and that's the only possible thing that could hit from the top unless it's being fired from an aircraft, and if that's the case then no amount of armor will save you since jet and heli mounted tank busters are just too damn big.

Anything beyond the minimum amount of dorsal armor is a waste of time.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

And UR, while I do appreciate the effort, making the cannon being able to fire both missiles and shells seems a little off

Wrong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAHAT


As for why I want to go away from real world... I want to design better than real world, not go back to 1980s while our enemies develop next generation weapon systems.

[Stirk]

Uh, what exactly do you find unclear..?

He changed your 50 gun to .50 gun, I think.

[Taricus]

The number there is a figure for how much protection the equivalent amount of rolled homogeneous armour would give. Mostly used as a yardstick on armour protection. The final amount of armour would be much lower, but providing that much protection still.

Also, Kevak stated rounded armour, not sloped. Big difference on that

And the changes? Actually go through it and you'll see them

EDIT: Also UR, I don't think we can really afford that, given that we aren't being funded by a superpower

[Parsely]

Uh, what exactly do you find unclear..?

He changed your 50 gun to .50 gun, I think.

Yeah I see it now, the way he worded it was really weird. I took it to mean he meant the whole design made no sense so I was confused and slightly outraged. >_>

[Stirk]

As for my suggestion, we should choose between a rifled barrel and a APFSDS rounds. We shouldn't use sabots with rifling, it defeats the point. Either go smoothbore and go with the sabots, or make a KE round that is made for a rifled barrel.

[Parsely]

As for my suggestion, we should choose between a rifled barrel and a APFSDS rounds. We shouldn't use sabots with rifling, it defeats the point. Either go smoothbore and go with the sabots, or make a KE round that is made for a rifled barrel.

Edited for smoothbore.

[Aseaheru]

Yah, we need smoothbore. Rifled limits us to HESH and AP.

[Taricus]

Whoops, sorry about that Gunin. The design was mostly Solid. All I really did was up-armour it, upgraded the calibre of the cupola MG and made the engine more powerful.

Also you guys are forgetting about HEAT munitions as well.

[Aseaheru]

HEAT cant really be used well in a rifled barrel, they have HESH instead.

[Parsely]

I already said I edited in the smoothbore, so we can stick with HEAT.

Reposting for clarity.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Badger
Badger
- Diesel Engine
     + 1400-1500 Horsepower
- Armoured Ammo Compartment
- AP Weapons
     + 14.5mm Calibre Remote Operated Weapon
     + 7.62x51mm Calibre Turret Coaxial
- Smoke Dispensers
- 1500mm RHA Equivalent Armour
     + Composite
     + Sloped
     + Track Skirts
     + Internal (Armored) Fuel Cells
- Low Profile (less than 3m tall)
- 120mm Main Gun
     + HEAT and APFSDS Payload
     + Smoothbore
     + Fire Control Computer
     + Auto-Loader
- Crew of 3 (commander, gunner, driver)
     + Crew must be able to perform all mechanical and digital maintenance in the field