Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Sign in to follow this  
Toxn

Competition: A modern medium AFV

Recommended Posts

Nobody suggested a tracked carrier tossing salvos of TOW or M47's at tanks from cover, either using a periscopic sight or perhaps incorporating displaced spotters for secondary guidance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody suggested a tracked carrier tossing salvos of TOW or M47's at tanks from cover, either using a periscopic sight or perhaps incorporating displaced spotters for secondary guidance?

 

Can I make an M50 Ontos: Meplat edition?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I found the thread! yay......

 

Sorry, I lost track of the thread when it was moved and school decided to throw a exam and a lot of important tests at me. 

 

I can see if I can post my submission just for fun.

 

(On a side note, could we have thread discussing volume and fighting compartment size? I am having a real problem figuring out the needed space for different designs, for example the CV90s troop compartment, which is a CV-90 gunner told me is roughly 1,5 meters wide, which is hard to imagine.)

 

Mvh

Xoon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Toxn said:

Wasn't yours a 75mm though?

 

It was, but it also had a very compact case geometry. Far bigger autocannons have been designed (up to 8 inch!), with higher rates of fire. Their primary issue was thermal loading, which is why the high ROFs for the Caracal were limited to 3 round bursts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sturgeon said:

 

It was, but it also had a very compact case geometry. Far bigger autocannons have been designed (up to 8 inch!), with higher rates of fire. Their primary issue was thermal loading, which is why the high ROFs for the Caracal were limited to 3 round bursts.

I thought the primary issue was the giant rube goldberg machine you need to load a cannon once it gets too big to have a reciprocating breech.

 

But I will bow to your technical knowledge here, as I'm well aware that mine is lacking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Toxn said:

I thought the primary issue was the giant rube goldberg machine you need to load a cannon once it gets too big to have a reciprocating breech.

 

But I will bow to your technical knowledge here, as I'm well aware that mine is lacking.

 

You are underestimating how much space there is in an M1's turret. There's plenty for the mechanism I had in mind. Which, granted, wasn't a reciprocating breech, but that's besides the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By EnsignExpendable
      Since I clearly have too much time on my hands, and Jeeps has a pretty cool tread going on, I decided that I'm going to do the same thing, but for T-34s. Here's a quick sample that I whipped up last night, I'm probably going to cover major exterior features of at least wartime T-34s and T-34-85s, then we'll see. I'll update the document in batches per organic time period rather than some arbitrary year-based cutoff. 
       
      Post constructive criticism and the T-34-iest pics you got
    • By Walter_Sobchak
      Today somebody sent me an email asking if I had any material showing what the bottom of the T-34 looked like.  Glancing through my books on the topic, none really show this view of the vehicle.  The guy asking is working on a series of T-34 models and wants as much detail as possible.  Anyone got something on this?
    • By Collimatrix
      Since we've got the new AFV design competition going and not everyone has solidworks, I thought I would share this information from Technology of Tanks so those who do not have CAD/CAM programs could come up with a reasonable accounting of what a tank ought to weigh:
      -Armor usually contribute between 35% and 51% of the total mass of the vehicle. The lower figure is typical for light tanks, the higher for MBTs. If the armor were reduced to the minimum necessary for structural purposes it would still be about 20% of the total mass. The highest figure on record is 57% for the armor of the IS-3.
      -The tracks contribute about 8% to 10% of the mass of the vehicle in the case of steel link tracks. On a fast track-laying combat vehicle the tracks are getting slung around over all sorts of rocks and whatnot, so they need to be tough, which means that they're heavy. Band tracks weigh 25%-50% less than steel link tracks, but band tracks can only be used on lighter vehicles. The heaviest vehicle I know of that uses band tracks is the Turkish Tulpar IFV at 32 tonnes.
      -Suspensions contribute about 8% to 10% of the total mass of the vehicle. Hydropneumatic suspensions are the lightest, but not by an enormous margin. Higher performance suspensions weigh more.
      -The power pack, that is the engine and the transmission together, account for about 12% of the vehicle's mass.
      -Guns typically contribute 3% to 7% of the total mass of the vehicle, although cramming the very largest gun possible into the very smallest tank possible can bring this up to about 10%.
      -Ammo generally weighs less than the gun. Fuel weighs about the same as ammo.
      On any fictional or notional tank design, I'll be looking to see if the weight of the components are within these bounds. If they're not there had better be a damned good explanation.
    • By Toxn
      Dear [iNSERT NAME OF COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE HERE],
       
      Congratulations!
      Your company has been selected to partake in a competition to design an aircraft for the Republic of Kerbalia. The competition will be in the form of a fly-off, with entrant designs being assessed relative to each other and the current front-line multirole fighter of the Republic (specifications included in data pack attached hereto).
       
      Should you choose to partake in this process, initial development funds of up to 40 000 Kerbalians will be made available to you. Technological limitations being what they are, the use of speculative engine designs (SABRE et al.) will not be accepted as a means of achieving competition goals.
       
      The aircraft submitted must be of the multirole fighter type, with the ability to perform a variety of missions while still being able to outfight current aircraft on a 1-to-1 basis. Significant leeway will, however, provided as to the details of the design. If required, a flyable example of the current front-line aircraft will be provided for internal comparison.
       
      Submissions must include, at minimum:
      - A name and internal design number (a prototype designation number will be assigned)
      - A full list of specifications
      - A background and detailed description 
      - One or more images of the submission
       
      We wish you the best of luck with your undertakings in this regards.
       
      Yours Sincerely,
       
      Lotho Kerman
       
      Head Company Wrangler,
      Department of Defence,
      Republic of Kerbalia 
×