Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

TokyoMorose

Contributing Members
  • Content count

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TokyoMorose

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. TokyoMorose

    StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)

    Final drives gave out after 150km on average, transmission excluding 3rd gear was ~1500km. (Governed) Engines were also around ~1,500km. The French also found that pivot steering greatly accelerated wear on the final drives, to the point of having cases of the drives breaking mid-turn, and they gave strict orders to avoid pivot steering it.
  2. TokyoMorose

    StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)

    AFAIK, the 3rd gear wasn't any particularly weaker than any other gear in the AK 7-200, but it was the most common gear used (by mileage) and thus wore out the fastest. If I remember the French postwar numbers right, they averaged 1000 km before busting the 3rd gear, while the transmission on average overall lasted 1500 km. The difference IMHO, is that in particular with regards to the AVDS-1790 improvements and the advanced torsion bars developed by TCM, these were literal drop-in upgrades. It's only the more complex transmission replacement or suspension overhaul that took any actual real modification work, it's purely the army being stubborn.
  3. TokyoMorose

    StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)

    To further muddle the waters, by the late 60s/early 70s, several drivetrain improvements and improved suspension components were developed for M60 that would have made up the performance gap had the army actually bought them. (Thinking of the XT-1400 and RK304 transmission options, various improvements to the engine culminating in the 1200hp versions, and the different torsion bar replacements)
  4. I also thought they were once confirmed to share the same IP? He's had the *claim* of being totally not blacktail for as long as blacktail has been around.
  5. TokyoMorose

    Israeli AFVs

    I didn't check that thread before posting here, just saw them. I got Loooser'd.
  6. TokyoMorose

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    As far as my translation seems to get, they are only comparing the probabilities of dealing with what seem to be original M1A1s and 2A5s. Am I wrong, or is that report really comparing the (then) current tank fleet to 25-30 year old configs?
  7. TokyoMorose

    Israeli AFVs

    This is purely hypothetical speaking, but I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually find a Tamuz launcher on a Eitan or Namer. I also know there exists a Tamuz launcher for the Sand Cat, so that's a possibility.
  8. TokyoMorose

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    Yeah, I'm not really sure why they are convinced it's so important - it is a purely second strike weapon, and has far less flexibility than missile systems. It's also *got* to be fantastically expensive. That's got to be the single most expensive weapon in the Russian development book...
  9. TokyoMorose

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    A shame, but those strategic programs have to be eating funding at a prodigious rate; Poseidon and Avangard in particular are going to be extremely expensive. If I remember right, Rubezh and Barguzin had already been frozen to free up funds for Avangard.
  10. The biggest issue isn't so much the turbine's performance itself - which does live up to the promises, but rather that the Turbine is only compatible with the X1100 transmission, which sadly is not terribly good. Of all the transmissions they did calculations on, it was the worst performing (particularly bad on downshifts).
  11. From the Army's perspective, redoing the contest after both teams (purely because the army was going to mandate the turbine and did want that change to be done after signing the GM contract) had seen each other's solution gave them the best possible deal from their perspective, Chrysler's final winning proposal was everything they wanted. It's been said Chrysler needed the contract badly, but considering GM's tank branch up and closed shop immediately after losing the M1 contract, I have to imagine they were just as badly in need (Chrysler still had the Patton family for defense revenues...). It's amusing in a certain way that the winner of the contest in both cost and performance was knocked out of the running because of incredibly optimistic views of the turbine as the superior engine of the future. They had estimated lower costs, less maintenance, growth to 2000hp, and other idealistic views.
  12. No, the ROKIT program that became K1 was designed substantially later, and actually subcontracted mostly out to GDLS - the inheritors of the Chrylser Defense group that designed the M1. Army liked the GM's armor layout, FCS, and ability to fit the 120mm. But they *really* had a hankering for the Turbine powerplant of Chrysler's offering. So they basically came out and said they wanted a hybrid tank that was mostly like GM's but with the turbine drivetrain. Chrylser's offer to redesign their machine won the bid over GM's redesign, helped by Chrysler having some political favoritism.
  13. A ZBD-05? Odd they are using a Chinese system (unless they standardized on that for the whole race this year). I suspect it'll at least last for a race. It's not quite as heavy as its size would imply (26 t).
  14. TokyoMorose

    AFV Engines

    I know pretty much all there is to know about Turbochargers - and the reason nobody has put a twin-scroll variable geometry system into mass production is for the reason I mentioned, they are utterly redundant. Variable Geometry solves the problem that twin scroll turbos were introduced for, better than twin scroll turbos do. Twin Scroll is still around because it is simpler and cheaper, but there's no reason to have multiple scrolls if you are going to pay for variable geometry. If you absolutely have to have low end response faster than a pure-VGT option can offer, it's much simpler to use a small electric boost motor attached to the turbine - it's quite common nowadays. Ah, so you want to heat the coolant with the exhaust instead of intake air, sorry. However, even this isn't terribly practical - it adds a bunch of complexity to the block, which is already quite the complicated part, and once the engine is at operational temperature it simply adds more heat to the coolant that has to be diffused by the radiator. The gains in turbo performance are utterly marginal and is much cheaper/simpler to simply use a slightly larger turbo for the same effect. Volkswagen's use of water-cooled exhaust is an extremely oddball development, and probably has to due with Volkswagen's general love of complexity. I mean, they were the crazy guys who put the Twincharger into production. The gains you get from water-cooling the exhaust just aren't worth the costs added unless you are physically out of other ways to get the engine heated in time or can't use a bigger turbo and need the sliver of performance.
  15. TokyoMorose

    AFV Engines

    Having a variable multi-scroll would be redundant - having multiple scrolls is to allow multiple ratios, which is what variable does anyhow. And running a hot air intake from the exhaust manifolds don't really help on a pure cold start, and once you have the engine running it's just going to sap performance by decreasing intake air density.
×