Print

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

[evilcherry]

The thing is though, is that we have NOTHING dedicated to knocking out armour, and that's what's killing us. We need smaller artillery capable of punching through their armour. Concealment isn't an issue at this phase as they have armoured vehicles that can go around unharmed by ours.

We need a weapon that can punch through their frontal plates. The AA stallions are doing an admirable job holding off their air power. The air power is a concern, but we can hold on that front given the amount of AA we have. But we have NOTHING for dealing with their tanks.

To be fair, you are not going to punch armor with a small caliber howitzer better than a 3-inch long gun.

Either a Recoilless rifle:

Spoiler: "Tankbuster" "Rifle", 3 Inches, Recoil-less (click to show/hide)

A gun with a light rifled barrel of 3 Inches caliber, light enough to be carried by two men. The rearside of the barrel has numerous perforations and ports, designed to push the gun forward while firing, so the recoil can be reduced to a level bearable by brave Moskurg soldiers. The ammunition are of an integrated type, not unlike a oversized rifle cartridge, with the cartridge also having many holes to allow gas to escape in an orderly manner.

Or if you want a more useful, better tank gun:

Spoiler: "Tankhunter" Cannon, 2.5 Inches (click to show/hide)

A gun with a much longer barrel than the Bombardier, of around 50 calibers. designed for low-angle direct fire but also useable for AA purposes. Employs a sliding block breech system to facilitate easier loading in cramped spaces like turrets, and basic recoil compensation using exhaust ports and springs.

[Devastator]

We can build all the AT cannons we want, but if we don't take and hold the jungle, we lose the game as soon as they build a three-ore tank that our proposed AT cannon can't beat, or they overwhelm us with cheaper air power and better tanks.

That's why I want an infantry anti-tank weapon, and one that won't be obsolete in a year.

The next anti-tank cannon should be a real tank cannon, instead of something to beat the last gen of vehicles.  Which is why I want a PIAT, as it can do that.

I also want it as it shouldn't require much ore, and hence be cheap.

[evilcherry]

That's why I call for a recoilless rifle.....

Although another possible wonderweapon will be the shaped charge. But then it could be expensive.

[Ghazkull]

aye on both counts...a cheap recoilless rifle would be nice...alternatively what was it the americans used in world war II? THose explosive charges they put in socks and smeared in tar to throw them against tanks?

[Taricus]

I'd oppose a long tank gun for now, given that I doubt we have a tank to hold it. I was also hoping to revise the Smasher one final time to also give it RHA along with the cannon. If we have that, we'd have a formidable assault unit, doubly so if it resisted the 20mm cannon they have.

[evilcherry]

I'd oppose a long tank gun for now, given that I doubt we have a tank to hold it. I was also hoping to revise the Smasher one final time to also give it RHA along with the cannon. If we have that, we'd have a formidable assault unit, doubly so if it resisted the 20mm cannon they have.

If we are not making a long gun a easy way to make it AT is definitely using the revise phase for a shaped charge. The 3.6 Inch is a good howitzer caliber, let's stick with it.

[Kashyyk]

Thunder Flak 3 inch - effectively an oversized rifle firing 3 inch time fused HE shells (designed to detonate with a contrasting colour to the sky for ease of targeting). The gun is a semi automatic breech loader with a crew of four (Gunner, spotter,  two loaders). The time fuse can be set manually by one of the loaders. The gun has a 360 degree field of fire, allowing it also fire at ground targets if needed. Main requirements: high muzzle velocity, high RoF.

The timed fuse means that near misses may also cause damage, so we are no longer required to get a direct hit.

If you guys really want something AT, this should be effective,  as the high muzzle velocity will lend to hub penetration,  and the inherent need for high accuracy in an AA gun will also prove useful as an AT.

[Taricus]

Eh, we have enough AA given the brumbies and the stallions. And if necessary, we just modify the bombardier to fire flak shells. Tank attacks are the primary concern though, and I doubt that a flak shell could penetrate the armour.

[Kashyyk]

In that case,  I feel rockets are our best bet. Any AT guns are gonna be Ore expensive. As rockets have been around since medieval China, it shouldn't be that hard to design some sort of one man disposable AT ticket launcher. Like a  panzerfaust.

[evilcherry]

In that case,  I feel rockets are our best bet. Any AT guns are gonna be Ore expensive. As rockets have been around since medieval China, it shouldn't be that hard to design some sort of one man disposable AT ticket launcher. Like a  panzerfaust.

That's why I'm for a recoilless gun: Its no more than a carefully perforated thick water pipe.

[Taricus]

Rockets would likely be outside of our expertise. A recoiless rifle looks good though.

[Kashyyk]

How would it be outside of our expertise? We're weapons designers,  rockets have been around since the 9 th century.  It's not future tech.

[Taricus]

Maybe, mostly regarding the rocket. I just did a little research though and well...

Use it to fire a shaped charge and we're good. Though I'd still prefer a recoiless rifle because of the muzzle velocity and that effect it has on it's viability of an AA weapon

[evilcherry]

Also, in theory, if your rockets uses a soft launch arrangement, a recoilless rifle can double as a rocket launcher.

p.s. Actually, we do have all the techs available for the V-1.

[TheLordofHouseRiley]

I still support the Struunk II design an armored multi purpose half track would be useful in all theaters of operation and help us push back across the board.