Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Xoon

Members
  • Content count

    170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Xoon last won the day on September 21 2016

Xoon had the most liked content!

About Xoon

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

110 profile views
  1. Modern Tank Destroyers / Gun Carriers

    What is that on the exhaust of the Stryker? What is the name of this vehicle?
  2. Transmissions and final drives

    Feel free to share it as much as you want, anything I find for that matter. It's not mine anyways. Found it at Forsvarets forskningsinstitutt's site (Norwegian Military Science Institute).
  3. Transmissions and final drives

    It just struck me, but, does AFVs use ABS?
  4. General AFV Thread

    Should this be categorized as misinformation or just very bad research at the topic? Also, the amount of inaccurate depictions and misconceptions is staggering. Pretty sure the artist just reused old assets.
  5. General AFV Thread

    Good points, just wanted to add my two cents.
  6. General AFV Thread

    I see what you are saying. But I feel the egg shape falls flat because of this: Yes, a circle provides the most volume alone, followed by the hexagon when grouped together. But the thing is, most equipment is usually square, some with rounded edges. Radios, engines, ammo racks, seats, the turret basket/floor in the horizontal plane. This makes it really hard to use the extra volume created by a circle, as visualized above. All this volume becomes wasted and may add more weight to the vehicle. You could, of course, use fuel tanks, hydraulic lines, cabling or specially made equipment to better utilize the volume. Though this is not very optimal. The egg shape also removes some useful volume where it angles inwards, before it angles out again. Considering the wasted volume, the need for casting for because of the complex shapes and the added height of the vehicle, it is really hard to say if this shape really pays off. The angled side can be thinner, but it also has to be thicker than a similar RHA plate, since it is cast. And with the lost volume, you might end up finding the flat RHA plate lighter. It is a little unfair to compare the bottom of the hulls, since the egg shape could still be flat, at the cost of less blast mine protection. But it still shows off the amount of wasted volume. I feel the Russians really nailed with their shape, combing the best of both worlds, (The green is optional to show protection against blast mines):
  7. Transmissions and final drives

    Felt like sharing this gem: http://www.ffi.no/no/Rapporter/08-01220.pdf A report on hybrid electric vehicles. A neat idea here is to use the hybrid electric system to power a ETC gun. This could solve the power issue, at the cost of no or reduced mobility during firing.
  8. General AFV Thread

    I see the the reasons why, but did it really work out that well in practice? Does it provide any more protection than the T-54s hull shape, for the same weight?
  9. General AFV Thread

    What is the advantage of this hull cross section, say over the IS-7s hull cross section?
  10. Ah, thanks, I remembered wrong. 1200mm for missile. 600mm for Rocket.
  11. 600mm for large caliber ATGMs if I remember correctly, anything less and penetration increases.
  12. I am thinking about the big hole in the mound, with a big back shadow making a big contrast. And zero effort to hide the sticks supporting the hole. Use a netting at least. Same goes for the green spotter, in yellow-orange mound. It just makes my camouflage OCD go crazy .
  13. Just noticed this picture.... What type of camouflage is this? Against planes?
×