Print

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

[3man75]

The enemy will have better tanks however and our new helipcopter (which I would like to be an attack helicopter.) would break our tanks and run over our infantry. Either we make better tanks to combat it one on one or we make better RPG's to penetrate their armor. Or both.

An SMG would be good to. I'll be putting down that as one of my votes.

Crusader armor - Using the new Kevlar idea and composites create a light weight tactical body armor. Cover on both the front and back while also having movability on the rear and arm hole areas.

Sniper rifle "Impaler" - Now for real. Same goals except now they have to be able to use our new munitions. Also they should have the power to pierce through body armor and kevlar.

Nerve gas - Paralysis of the lungs and to be able to kill anyone not protected by gas mask. Should be able to be easilly air dropped onto a field and 'cover' a medium to large area.

New heavy tank to replace this:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Tank, Heavy, Land Prince MK1
Weight: 51 tons
Length: 9m
Width: 3.8mm
Height: 3mm
Crew: 5 (Commander/Radio Operator, Gunner, Loader, driver, hull gunner.
Armour: 152mm on Front (upper and lower) Hull, Front turret and turret sides sloped. 90mm Everywhere else.
Main Armament: Royal Ordnance 80mm HV AT Gun – 90 round (80x650mm)
Secondary Armament: 2x Mortimer 8mm MGs, one Coaxial on hull mounted. 1xPintle Mounted Mortimer 8mm MMG/GPMG above commanders hatch.
Engine: 2x Meteor V12 Petrol engine, 600hp
Suspension: Sprung Bogie
Ground Clearance: 0.5m
Operational range: 100 miles.
Speed: 24mph.
NOTE: Slow, transmission issues due to dual-engine setup. Well armed and armoured. Small range.

In this spoiler is the old design. Lets make a new design that will replace this and not have its draw backs.

It should be faster, more maneuverable, while also keeping most of its armor.

SMG by Player.[/b]

[Playergamer]

The enemy will have better tanks however and our new helipcopter (which I would like to be an attack helicopter.) would break our tanks and run over our infantry. Either we make better tanks to combat it one on one or we make better RPG's to penetrate their armor. Or both.

An SMG would be good to. I'll be putting down that as one of my votes.

Crusader armor - Using the new Kevlar idea and composites create a light weight tactical body armor. Cover on both the front and back while also having movability on the rear and arm hole areas.

Sniper rifle "Impaler" - Now for real. Same goals except now they have to be able to use our new munitions. Also they should have the power to pierce through body armor and kevlar.

+1

[10ebbor10]

My only complaint with a new sub is that we won't be able to create the new tanks that we desprately need to combat the enemy armor that we are suppose to compete against in the next war. Said enemy has a really bad navy and I feel we don't need these naval assests yet. However, Tanks and new planes we do really need.

IIRC, we're an island nation.

So there's no way the enemy ground troops will ever get to reach our forces, unless we land an invasion on their shores. The only way we would be drawn into a war with them is if they attack our de factor friend, and in that case, I think it would be rather beneficial to the war effort if we could enforce a complete blockade against them. In any case, we can't have it that a large part of our navy, our submarine forces, are completely obsolete in the face of enemy air power.

[3man75]

My only complaint with a new sub is that we won't be able to create the new tanks that we desprately need to combat the enemy armor that we are suppose to compete against in the next war. Said enemy has a really bad navy and I feel we don't need these naval assests yet. However, Tanks and new planes we do really need.

IIRC, we're an island nation.

So there's no way the enemy ground troops will ever get to reach our forces, unless we land an invasion on their shores. The only way we would be drawn into a war with them is if they attack our de factor friend, and in that case, I think it would be rather beneficial to the war effort if we could enforce a complete blockade against them. In any case, we can't have it that a large part of our navy, our submarine forces, are completely obsolete in the face of enemy air power.

We are an army factory/research station. I think we should stay within that army role and let our navy trump theirs as the reports say. Plus our rocket idea seemed well liked by the Marshall.

Plus I think the Jet plane idea (which I forgot to add) would be able to smash theirs. Plus a new multi role plane once the Kerminsky planes come in would be good too.

But other than the Jet, we should continue making our troops and mechanical forces stronger like the enemy is doing. They could use the skies to drop forces off on our nation or just use the skies to break and force an amphibious assault.

[kahn1234]

EDIT: Gm what does "Kormayev Tyazla Promlysh" mean?

((I couldnt think of a decent name for a company that would translate well from russian to English, so I took three Russian names are combined them in the same way as Glaxo-Smith-Klein combine their three names.

I do love the debates!

A few things to note:

Your submarines arent particularly out of date. They could run silently and roam a wide area. However, despite that they are more like very late WW2 subs, and still have surface needs. And external torpedo tubes, despite their downsides.

On the subject of aircraft carriers, i was wondering when someone was going to notice. You dont have any cruisers either, although one could say they arent particularly needed as the Frigates, Destroyers and Battleships are packed full of firepower and AA.

Thirdly, I am left wondering somewhat whether one or two people have overlooked something from the initial post, a design. The Atkinson carbine is actually similar to what a lot of people are proposing and its defects arent that serious. It could be a nice base for other, similar, weapons?......

On the subject of the weapons overall, especially the MGs, there is a decidedly defensive slant to them. Whilst there are good infantry portable MGs, the main weapons are designed to be dug in and then used to put extreme fire down range.

This is, obviously both good and bad. You could possibly do to produce a few designs based around offensive operations.....))

((Update Tomorrow once I have analysed the votes and rolled the die.))

[Funk]

New heavy tank to replace this:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Tank, Heavy, Land Prince MK1
Weight: 51 tons
Length: 9m
Width: 3.8mm
Height: 3mm
Crew: 5 (Commander/Radio Operator, Gunner, Loader, driver, hull gunner.
Armour: 152mm on Front (upper and lower) Hull, Front turret and turret sides sloped. 90mm Everywhere else.
Main Armament: Royal Ordnance 80mm HV AT Gun – 90 round (80x650mm)
Secondary Armament: 2x Mortimer 8mm MGs, one Coaxial on hull mounted. 1xPintle Mounted Mortimer 8mm MMG/GPMG above commanders hatch.
Engine: 2x Meteor V12 Petrol engine, 600hp
Suspension: Sprung Bogie
Ground Clearance: 0.5m
Operational range: 100 miles.
Speed: 24mph.
NOTE: Slow, transmission issues due to dual-engine setup. Well armed and armoured. Small range.

In this spoiler is the old design. Lets make a new design that will replace this and not have its draw backs.

It should be faster, more maneuverable, while also keeping most of its armor.

Hows this do?

Spoiler: Land King MK1 Tank, Heavy (click to show/hide)

Land King MK1 Tank, Heavy

Weight: 70 tons?
Length: 11m
Width:   4.2m
Height:  3m

Engine: 2 × Magician XX liquid-cooled V12 engines, 1,280 hp
Suspension: Torsion bar
Ground Clearance: 0.4m
Operational range: 100 miles.
Speed: ?

Main Armament
Royal Ordnance 100mm AA Gun Casemate mounted.

Secondary Armament:
2 20mm auto cannons in top turret.
2 X 1 50Cal and 1 60mm AT Gun in Side turrets
1 X Pintle Mounted .50 Cal above commanders hatch.

Armour: 152mm on Front (upper and lower) Hull sloped at 30 degrees (Relative thickness 304mm), Sides from 90mm and sloped at 40 degrees from top and bottom(Relative thickness 140mm).
Main Turret from 90mm with a 30 degree frontal slope(Relative thickness 180mm), sides less sloped.
Side Turrets from 152 mm.
The rest from 90mm and not sloped.

Crew: 10 (Commander/Radio Operator, 2 Hull Loaders, Hull Gunner, Driver, 3 Turret Gunners, 2 Turret loaders.

NOTE: Well armed and armoured. Limited arc of main gun countered by the turrets, the top turret should keep any planes away.

Heres a link to the Relative Armor Calculator i used, LINK

[3man75]

Good but I think we should sacrifice the anti-air guns for more movability of the guns. This is a heavy tank that going to take on another heavy tank in possible show downs so it should be built for that.

It should:

Take hits.
Give hits.
Out maneuver.
Be able to take a hit.

That said Funk, it does look like a good design.

[tryrar]

You might be overlooking something in that he doesn't have the main gun in an actual turret(which he meant by casemate). This isn't a heavy tank so much as a vanity project tank destroyer and any non-braindead military personnel would take one look at this proposal and laugh us right out of the country. I vote no to this POS.

[10ebbor10]

You might be overlooking something in that he doesn't have the main gun in an actual turret(which he meant by casemate). This isn't a heavy tank so much as a vanity project tank destroyer and any non-braindead military personnel would take one look at this proposal and laugh us right out of the country. I vote no to this POS.

Yeah, the very high weight + much more powerfull engines are also likely to further worsen transmission problems and shorten range.

[tryrar]

What we really need is a higher horsepower engine-maybe combining the two meteors into one larger unit?

Edit: Here's a better tank for consideration using a new engine:

Spoiler: Hoplite Universal Tank (click to show/hide)

Tank:Universal Tank, Hoplite Mk-1
Powerplant:(new)one 800hp v-12 Meteor-II petrol engine(single 600hp existing meteor is acceptable)
Suspension:Horstmann bogie
Weight:55 tons
Length:8m
Width:4m
Height:3.2m
Crew:4(commander/radio operator, gunner driver, loader)
Armor:120mm armor on hull sloped @60 degrees(240mm LOS thickness), side and rear armor 60mm. turret 152mm all around(sloped at 30 degrees for a los thickness of 238). Edges should all be rounded when possible
Main Armament:100mm Royal Ordinance AA gun modded for AT mounted in turret
Secondary armament:1 coaxial Mortimer 8mm machine gun, 1 pintle-mounted Mortimer machine gun on the turret
Ground Clearance:.5m
Speed:30mph
Operational range:150 miles

[Ukrainian Ranger]

I don't want a heavy tank, I want an MBT, and I want to do this project first

110mm tank gun
Gun designed to be used by future tanks and only by future tanks.

but this is next turn material because I want to see result of our medium tank upgrade

Designing a diesel engine as a separate action is a good idea (or jet engine for the  tank. insane? So what? )

[3man75]

What we really need is a higher horsepower engine-maybe combining the two meteors into one larger unit?

Edit: Here's a better tank for consideration using a new engine:

Spoiler: Hoplite Universal Tank (click to show/hide)

Tank:Universal Tank, Hoplite Mk-1
Powerplant:(new)one 800hp v-12 Meteor-II petrol engine(single 600hp existing meteor is acceptable)
Suspension:Horstmann bogie
Weight:55 tons
Length:8m
Width:4m
Height:3.2m
Crew:4(commander/radio operator, gunner driver, loader)
Armor:120mm armor on hull sloped @60 degrees(240mm LOS thickness), side and rear armor 60mm. turret 152mm all around(sloped at 30 degrees for a los thickness of 238). Edges should all be rounded when possible
Main Armament:100mm Royal Ordinance AA gun modded for AT mounted in turret
Secondary armament:1 coaxial Mortimer 8mm machine gun, 1 pintle-mounted Mortimer machine gun on the turret
Ground Clearance:.5m
Speed:30mph
Operational range:150 miles

Looks good to me. +1 and I hope to see this drawn up by our guys.

I don't want a heavy tank, I want an MBT, and I want to do this project first

110mm tank gun
Gun designed to be used by future tanks and only by future tanks.

but this is next turn material because I want to see result of our medium tank upgrade

Designing a diesel engine as a separate action is a good idea (or jet engine for the  tank. insane? So what? )

What's the advantage of a 110 mm vs a 100 mm gun? What exactly do the extra 10 mm do?

[Ukrainian Ranger]

a) it is 33% more powerful by size alone.
b) It is designed as a tank gun, not as AA gun

[3man75]

a) it is 33% more powerful by size alone.
b) It is designed as a tank gun, not as AA gun

a. Where does 33% come from? I don't have alot of orientation with these types of games so I don't know how significant that is.

b. We don't have a tank gun on the other one just an tank gun and a universal machine gun that can be used to shoot at aircraft.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

a) Simple math - 1.1 larger calibre = 1.1*1.1*1.1 heavier shell
b) Exactly. And we need a tank gun, not 100mm aa gun hasty modified for another role

BTW, did anyone note that the list has no howitzers? It is rather strange