Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
EnsignExpendable

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

Recommended Posts

On 4/28/2019 at 7:14 PM, skylancer-3441 said:

I guess it's better to use some other term that vague "Europe". At least because it does not include Germany.

 

I would like to remind about that article on Puma https://www.deutschesheer.de/portal/a/heer/start/aktuell/nachrichten/jahr2018/august2018/!ut/p/z1/hY5fC4IwFMW_kXf-m_Y4kURCCy3LvcRwwwzbZCzpoQ_fIvBNug8H7j2_ezhA4QJUsnnomRmUZKPdW4qveBPkmVejIvNOBJGmOu6aonSzfQANnP8h1NpoZQiCmgtobUa0nuFDDRTonc3s5UxKm1EYh3XfjtDemOSjOKiO_A4W5MLplLSMVSOkGaz2mhmll-_uqbV1nIFDi9w0QeHSyX0nfkwiHAQ4zZMKpsc2Lsuw_wCvRfxg/dz/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/#Z7_694IG2S0MG2UA0AVRTKVMN1GO3
it was 97th percentile male for crew, and - as a compromise - 75th percentile male for dismounts. 

 

And apparently they paid attention to female soldiers too.
This article https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/article180519422/Schuetzenpanzer-Puma-Soldaten-duerfen-nicht-groesser-als-1-84-Meter-sein.html mentions that there is also another restriction - to be at least 161 cm high (without helmet). Which is smaller than (~168cm high)  3rd percentile male in diagram from deutschesheer.de article (which covers man from Infants to 18 year olds, so I presume it gives height without helmet). 

 

Btw, during hearings in Bundestag on Puma - transcript available here http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/067/1906770.pdf - there was a response that "[google translate] Of the serving today in the Bundeswehr Panzergrenadieren are - 86 percent unrestricted use in the armored infantry fighting vehicle PUMA". I do not see any other way to get that 86 precent figure except including female soldiers into consideration.

 

...
altough Zetor Engineering's Wolfdog IFV proposal seems to be nothing but KF-41-alike wishful thinking, - at least it is capable of providing informantion about wishes themselves. It's brouchure mentions that "interior space transports crew up to 190 cm in height in a 3+8 (3+9) configuration", which is obviously male 90+ percentile, and also renders inside that brochure allow to measure space available for dismounts - and about 70 cm is available.

You can't average this stuff but you can say that the difference between the top %ile and the bottom %ile you have designed for represents the fraction of users who are suited to the design.  Knowing that Puma suits 86% of serving German soldiers (not sure if Germany uses German specific data) doesn't actually tell us much.  The top and bottom for each sex impact the overall number and there are multiple ways of coming up with 86%

 

Puma may seat 6 x 75%ile dismounts but that is a very long way from 8 x 95%ile.  Its even a long way from 6 x 95th%ile.  KF41 can seat 8 75th%ile but that is not 8 95%ile by a long way too.

 

I said Europe deliberately rather than Germany.  I don't know what BAE (Hagglunds)did but I suspect that they took the same approach as contemporary KMW/Rheinmetall - same market etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't simply compare %iles unless we know that we are talking about the same population data set.  Australia now uses a data set based on actual serving Australian soldiers.  In the past we used various DEF STAN and MILSTD data.  If German designers are using data that is German population specific, then %ile comparisons are pointless.  We would need to look at actual dimensions for the same %ile in each data set to make valid judgements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/29/2019 at 2:04 PM, DIADES said:

but you can say that the difference between the top %ile and the bottom %ile you have designed for represents the fraction of users who are suited to the design.

last I looked, when someone does that, they usually use words like "central" to distinguish that from percentile number, in order to aviod confusion. And they do not use Ordinal numbers, although a possibility of typos should not be excluded, obviously. 
Example I just googled: equipment to fit the ''5th to 95th percentile user,'' that is, the central 90%

 

On 4/29/2019 at 2:04 PM, DIADES said:

KF41 can seat 8 75th%ile but that is not 8 95%ile by a long way too.

Did I miss some description of KF-41 which stated what soldiers it can and can not fit, which says that it can not fit 8 95th percentile male soldiers?

...
upd:
DTR 2019-04 p.27 claimed it can fit 6 90th percentile (australian?) male dismounts, and 8 "at same seat spacing" (=90th percentile too, I guess) if required.

 

 

On 4/29/2019 at 2:13 PM, DIADES said:

We can't simply compare %iles unless we know that we are talking about the same population data set.  Australia now uses a data set based on actual serving Australian soldiers.  In the past we used various DEF STAN and MILSTD data.  If German designers are using data that is German population specific, then %ile comparisons are pointless.  We would need to look at actual dimensions for the same %ile in each data set to make valid judgements.

such chart for Geman male population is readily available from deutschesheer.de article:

BkiB7Q8.jpg


...
interior of CV-9030N with MkIII hull
D5RX5omXoAAES0s.jpg:large
12 Mpix version available there https://mediearkiv.forsvaret.no/fotoweb/archives/5000-Alle-bilder-2013-2019/Indekserte bilder1/2015/06/Teknologi kampvogn8.jpg.info#c=%2Ffotoweb%2Farchives%2F5000-Alle-bilder-2013-2019%2F%3F25%3Dcv9030

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another drip of information on upgrades and replacment for alot of Bundeswehr AFVs in the coming years.

 

So the big thing first the Spz Marder is getting upgraded.
Over 200 will be upgrade until 2025 with a new Thermal Imager for the Gunner, new night vision cameras for the driver, a new more powerful powerpack, a battlemanagment system and the

same tracks as the Puma and off course Spike instead of MILAN.


TSWA is still happening for Spz Puma with lethal and non lethal CS and Flashbang rounds (?)
Wiesel is first getting upgraded with Spikes and then replaced by 2025 with a new "Airdeployable Heavy Weapon Carrier".
A Mungo replacment is being looked into.
Jägerbataillons are getting heavy Weapon Carriers so probably Boxer with a turret.
A new Airdeployable Patform with Mortar System is due in 2027 to replace M113 and Lkw Wolf with the 120mm Mortar, so the Wiesel 2 with a Mortar probably.
Boxer will receive an APS but no word on hard or soft kill.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/29/2019 at 11:20 PM, David Moyes said:

Norwegian CV90 Mk III interior:

Wow.  Great pics.  Seriously cramped.  Note the legs extended to rest on opposite seat.  These look like pics of a mine blast test setup.  Feet off the floor is always needed.  It looks like there is not enough interior height to mount the seats high enough to allow the dismounts to rest their feet on a footrest that is part of their own seat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Serge said:

This is why the chassis can be kept low. 

Agreed - but that is not a practical posture.  More modern hulls have enough vertical space to allow legs tucked under instead of stretched out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Willy Brandt said:

Another drip of information on upgrades and replacment for alot of Bundeswehr AFVs in the coming years.

 

So the big thing first the Spz Marder is getting upgraded.
Over 200 will be upgrade until 2025 with a new Thermal Imager for the Gunner, new night vision cameras for the driver, a new more powerful powerpack, a battlemanagment system and the

same tracks as the Puma and off course Spike instead of MILAN. 


TSWA is still happening for Spz Puma with lethal and non lethal CS and Flashbang rounds (?)
Wiesel is first getting upgraded with Spikes and then replaced by 2025 with a new "Airdeployable Heavy Weapon Carrier".
A Mungo replacment is being looked into.
Jägerbataillons are getting heavy Weapon Carriers so probably Boxer with a turret.
A new Airdeployable Patform with Mortar System is due in 2027 to replace M113 and Lkw Wolf with the 120mm Mortar, so the Wiesel 2 with a Mortar probably.
Boxer will receive an APS but no word on hard or soft kill.

 

 

 

Great drip!  Subscriber access unfortunately.  I can't find any English language reporting of this stuff.  Anybody?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DIADES said:

Great drip!  Subscriber access unfortunately.  I can't find any English language reporting of this stuff.  Anybody?

I can post screenshots of the article.
And ESUT is a monthly magazine which has good connections into the industry and the Ministry.
That why they have articles with 3/4th old facts and 1/4th of new information that you cant get anywhere else.

 

 

Leopard2.PNG

SpzPuma1.PNG

 

SpzPuma2.PNG

 

Boxer.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Czech army magazine:
http://www.mocr.army.cz/assets/multimedia-a-knihovna/casopisy/a-report/ar5_2019.pdf

Page 28 has article on IFVs.

Decision and Contract by August.
 

Quote

And the facts
Objectives for the re-armament of land forces by modern infantry combat vehicles:
• The aim of the project is to acquire 210 modern infantry tracked combat vehicles on a single chassis in seven modifications according to the specific needs of the army and the acquisition of 29 accompanying service and workshop vehicles on three wheeled chassis.
modifications.
• The requirement of the contracting authority and an integral part of the public contract is the robust involvement of the Czech defense industry, both in its own production of vehicles and in their maintenance, service and logistical support throughout their life cycle of approximately 30 or more
flight. To do this, it will be necessary to transfer the necessary rights, know-how and licenses to the Czech Republic, in particular to production processes, maintenance and further development of vehicles.
• Integrator of the Czech defense industry involvement in the production of vehicles and at the same time the coordinator of their logistical support during the entire period of military use will be the state enterprise
VOP CZ. The Czech Republic and the army will thus gain the necessary self-sufficiency in logistics
support for vehicles and thus guarantee their high combat capabilities.
Basic technical requirements of the Czech Army:
• Modern infantry fighting vehicles will bring a completely new quality to the ground
forces and thus a substantial increase in the military capabilities of our army in defense of the state.
• The military requires vehicles with strong equipment, a high degree of durability and protection
crew, advanced command and control systems and high potential for further modernization growth, especially in the field of armaments, crew protection and used technologies.
• High overall resistance and crew protection for all vehicles certified to standards
and NATO standards, including active protection systems to eliminate 360 ° interference
around the vehicle and protecting the upper polosphere.
• The crew of the combat vehicle will consist of a total of 11 soldiers - commander and gunner, driver, two
specialists and swarm (landing) of six soldiers.
• Armament will be a fast-firing 30mm caliber automatic cannon in a tower ensemble
for commanders and shooters, coupled machine guns and integrated anti-tank missiles;
• Vehicle communication, information and other systems will be involved in national
and alliance systems of command and control.
• Before entering into a contractual relationship with a potential supplier, it will be offered
vehicles on the territory of the Czech Republic for the practical verification of its capabilities and parameters,
including firing of all kinds of weapons.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lynx KF41 in Czech compatible configuration:

P3XQEGn.jpg

https://esut.de/2019/05/fachbeitraege/ruestung/12771/lynx-vom-reissbrett-in-den-wettbewerb/

Google translated:

Quote

The Lynx KF41 is an armored platform in the 40 tonne class. With 15 tons of configurable mass variants can be realized with combat weights between 36 and 50 tons. The trough and turret are made with a high level of basic protection and can be brought to higher levels of protection as needed (even with active protection). The combined air conditioner and ABC protection ventilation feature Beth El's ABC filters. The drive is a Liebherr 850 kW diesel in-line engine with high torque in conjunction with an automatic Renk HSWL 256C superimposed steering gearbox. The torsion bar-sprung drive with six rollers has shock absorbers by Supashock installed. The crawler is a system chain of Defense Service Tracks (DST).

The manned standard Lance tower is equipped with a 30 mm (Mk30-2 / ABM) or 35 mm automatic cannon, which can be reloaded under armor protection and is prepared for the firing of Airburst ammunition against aircraft or unprotected land targets. Mission pods on either side of the tower are suitable for equipment with e.g. Antitank rockets, UAV or means for the electronic fight provided.

The electronic architecture on 24 Volt basis with CANBus, Generic Vehicle Architecture (GVA), integrated computer system and WinBMS combat guidance system as well as the equipment with electronic / electrical devices over two generators with altogether 600 A with electrical energy supplies. When the vehicle is stationary, the engine can provide sustained electrical power with reduced power (and reduced noise).

Special feature of the Lynx KF41 is the removable cover of the tub. Thus, the combat area can be provided within a few hours with a high roof, and thus to create more volume for extensive mission equipment or to achieve standing height. Depending on the configuration, up to nine soldiers can be transported indoors in mine-protected seating. The equipment to be accommodated in the different versions will only be determined in all three competition procedures when the final tender documents have been submitted.

Rheinmetall presented the Lnyx KF41 to international specialist journalists in a version suitable for the Czech competition. The equipment with weapons, observation, target and Feuerleiteinrichtungen as well as communication and further electronic device was exemplary, since the final specification for the vehicle does not exist yet. Due to the required participation of the Czech industry, the selection of industrial partners will influence the choice of equipment. The presented Lynx will be exhibited at the International Defense and Security Technologies Fair (IDET) at the end of May 2019 in Brno.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roof armor of the Lynx KF41. It's very reminiscent of the Marder 1A3's roof armor.

 

Lynx-01d_IMG_6689.jpg

 

Obviously the armor package can be configured to a certain extent according to the user's wishes, but I was expecting a bit more, given how beefy the roof armor of the Puma is.

 

On 5/7/2019 at 12:48 AM, David Moyes said:

Decision and Contract by August.

 

Worth noting that PSM still submitted the Puma as offer, but they are looking at options to modify its design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 1:04 PM, DIADES said:

You can't average this stuff but you can say that the difference between the top %ile and the bottom %ile you have designed for represents the fraction of users who are suited to the design.  Knowing that Puma suits 86% of serving German soldiers (not sure if Germany uses German specific data) doesn't actually tell us much.  The top and bottom for each sex impact the overall number and there are multiple ways of coming up with 86%

 

Puma may seat 6 x 75%ile dismounts but that is a very long way from 8 x 95%ile.  Its even a long way from 6 x 95th%ile.  KF41 can seat 8 75th%ile but that is not 8 95%ile by a long way too.

 

I said Europe deliberately rather than Germany.  I don't know what BAE (Hagglunds)did but I suspect that they took the same approach as contemporary KMW/Rheinmetall - same market etc.

 

LYNX can indeed fit 8 x 95% Adult males in full battle rattle, and they will not have to squeeze in like sardines like in the CV90 of course if you Mount 6 seats in the LYNX, you can cram an awful lot of gear in with your lads as well. Trust me, even in my Army days I was a big lad, and I fit in the seats quite comfortably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2019 at 3:17 PM, SH_MM said:

Roof armor of the Lynx KF41. It's very reminiscent of the Marder 1A3's roof armor.

 

Lynx-01d_IMG_6689.jpg

 

Obviously the armor package can be configured to a certain extent according to the user's wishes, but I was expecting a bit more, given how beefy the roof armor of the Puma is.

 

 

Worth noting that PSM still submitted the Puma as offer, but they are looking at options to modify its design.

Comparing the LYNX and Marder is like comparing a 1980's Porsche 911 to the Current Model 911.... the Marder and the KF41 are vastly different, as is the KF41 to the KF31, this is obvious if you put them all lined up, do they look similar... somewhat, but it is coming from the same design house... are they the same... no.... also note that the LYNX has modular armor packages.... the above is STANAG 5 and above, well exceeding MARDER, PUMA is over engineered in typical german Fashion, it is good.... for the bundewehr.... and the Bundeswehr only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 3:18 PM, skylancer-3441 said:

last I looked, when someone does that, they usually use words like "central" to distinguish that from percentile number, in order to aviod confusion. And they do not use Ordinal numbers, although a possibility of typos should not be excluded, obviously. 
Example I just googled: equipment to fit the ''5th to 95th percentile user,'' that is, the central 90%

 

Did I miss some description of KF-41 which stated what soldiers it can and can not fit, which says that it can not fit 8 95th percentile male soldiers?

...
upd:
DTR 2019-04 p.27 claimed it can fit 6 90th percentile (australian?) male dismounts, and 8 "at same seat spacing" (=90th percentile too, I guess) if required.

 

 

such chart for Geman male population is readily available from deutschesheer.de article:

BkiB7Q8.jpg


...
interior of CV-9030N with MkIII hull
D5RX5omXoAAES0s.jpg:large
12 Mpix version available there https://mediearkiv.forsvaret.no/fotoweb/archives/5000-Alle-bilder-2013-2019/Indekserte bilder1/2015/06/Teknologi kampvogn8.jpg.info#c=%2Ffotoweb%2Farchives%2F5000-Alle-bilder-2013-2019%2F%3F25%3Dcv9030

 

Did I miss some description of KF-41 which stated what soldiers it can and can not fit, which says that it can not fit 8 95th percentile male soldiers?

...
upd:
DTR 2019-04 p.27 claimed it can fit 6 90th percentile (australian?) male dismounts, and 8 "at same seat spacing" (=90th percentile too, I guess) if required.

 

No... Skylancer you are right.... he is making up his own figures to Support his own argument

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 3:40 PM, SH_MM said:

 

It is quite a mess:

  • The requirements of the Czech army aren't finished yet. They are still working on them, adding new ones and increasing the overall length of the documents containing the requirments - it has reached more than one hundred pages (DIN A4). Only four pages of requirements were given to the defence industry (BAE Systems, General Dynamics, PSM and Rheinmetall) before they started bidding/show-casing their offers.  
  • Only European companies (and trans-European such as Turkey and Israel) were asked and allowed to bid. South Korea, despite being a large industrial partner, was ignored.
  • The requirements didn't specify a manned or unmanned turret until recently - that's why three our of five IFVs tested in Libava had unmanned turrets. The new requirement for a manned turret was added - according to Czech journalists who asked a spokesperson of the Czech MoD - because Australia demands a manned turret for LAND 400 and the United States have showncased optionally manned turrets on the Stryker. This new requirement invalidates test results and eliminates the Puma, the ASCOD 35 and the CV90 CZr from the competition. 
  • All IFVs tested in Libava were configured for nine men (crew of 3 + 6 dismounts) as originally required - but the requriement for crew capacity was changed to eleven men (crew of 3 + 8 dismounts). None of the vehicles tested in Libava is capable of transporting 11 men with a manned turret. 
  • The bidding companies have time until some point of time in May to submitt their offers, the rather short time between the changes of requirements and the deadline is a huge problem.
  • The Czech army doesn't want to be the first user of a new infantry fighting vehicle, they want to buy a vehicle that is already in service with at least one user. This effectively eliminates the Lynx KF31, Lynx KF41, ASCOD 35 and Ajax/ASCOD 42. In combination with the manned turret and the dismount requirements, there is no IFV meeting all requirements oof the Czech army. 
  • The Czech government demands that the state-owned company VOP CZ will act as system integrator, manufacturer of components and provider of maintenance services. The army dislikes this, because it will increase the costs of the new IFVs.
  • Side note: while it has been previously reported that the Puma hit 37 out of 40 shots at targets at Libava, the results of the other contenders have been rather unknown. According to the article, the next best result was 19 out of 40 shots hit.
  • A lot of people are really pissed, because quite a lot of money was invested into the development, search for industrial partners and marketing of vehicles that are now eliminated from the tender. The ASCOD 35 with Samson Mk. 2 RWS and the CV90 CZr with Kongsbergt MCT 30 turret were more or less specifcally developed for the Czech tender (well, CV90 CZr already existed earlier, but as unfinished variant), while PSM held multiple expensive conferences to find industrial partners.

I will give you a tip.... it is very rare that a vehicle ever meets all the requirements.... most of your Information is correct though, the unmanned turret isnt the controversy that PSM is making it out to be... the 2 Major acquisition Projects other then Czech are Australia and US... guess what Puma isnt in either because both requested manned turrets that can be converted to unmanned at a later time.

 

All responsed to the Initial requirements have been made, KF31 FYI was a prototype and that only, stop quoting that it is an Option... at best it was Proof of concept, as for the Kongsberg CEO whinging and whining... yeah of course it is in his interest, not the interest of the CR... and General Opata made it clear... CZ will get a manned turret.

 

As for the Turkish and Korean offers.... I feel you cant be serious on this matter... do you want another PANDUR Situation?

 

"the rather short time between the changes of requirements...." No one cares... the companies will reply in time, or choose No bid.

 

As for seating... stick your head in a CV90 filled with 8 People... then a Puma with 6 and then a LYNX... I think you will understand what 95% seating is.... just saying....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 11:05 PM, DIADES said:

I disagree - Rheinmetall clearly state that the Puma carries a LANCE turret - the first of the family.  Statement was made to CoA in support of maturity during Ph2 bid.   This is supported across various sites on the web.  I suspect that the LANCE name was not being used during the initial development tho.

 

This makes sense at turrets and guns were what Rheinmetall brought to the PSM ( Projekt System Management GmbH ) partnership with KMW.

It is the same weapon System a Mauser MK30/2 ABM... the turret is different, as is the loading mechanism... and Lance for the most part is a 2 manned turret... of course before you bitch about it... yes there is an unmanned Version... irregardless the PUMA loading and feeding mechanism is not the same as the LANCE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2019 at 11:43 PM, Ronin10 said:

oading and feeding mechanism is not the same as the LANCE

LANCE is not a turret - it is a family of turrets.  A bit pile of turret component and sub-system lego.  The Puma turret is the first production turret in the LANCE family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2019 at 10:42 PM, Ronin10 said:

he is making up his own figures to Support his own argumen

it is always wise to assume the people you are debating with are at least as well informed and intelligent as yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2019 at 11:17 PM, SH_MM said:

Roof armor of the Lynx KF41. It's

You are looking at a demonstrator - that is not armour, that is space claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By LostCosmonaut
      Backstory (skip if you don't like alternate history junk)
       
      The year is 2239. It has been roughly 210 years since the world was engulfed in nuclear war. Following the war, the United States splintered into hundreds of small statelets. While much knowledge was retained in some form (mostly through books and other printed media), the loss of population and destruction of industrial capability set back society immensely.
       
      Though the Pacific Northwest was less badly hit than other areas, the destruction of Seattle and Portland, coupled with the rupturing of the Cascadia Subduction Zone in 2043, caused society to regress to a mid-19th century technology level. However, in the early 2100s, the Cascade Republic formed, centered near Tacoma. The new nation grew rapidly, expanding to encompass most of Washington and Oregon by 2239. The Cascade Republic now extends from the Klamath River in the south to the Fraser River in the north, and from the Pacific roughly to central Idaho. Over time, the standard of living and industrial development improved (initially through salvaging of surviving equipment, by the late 2100s through new development); the population has grown to about 4.5 million (comparable to 1950 levels), and technology is at about a 1940 level. Automobiles are common, aircraft are less common, but not rare by any means. Computers are nonexistent aside from a few experimental devices; while scientists and engineers are aware of the principles behind microchips and other advanced electronics, the facilities to produce such components simply do not exist. Low rate production of early transistors recently restarted.
       
      The current armored force of the Cascade Republic consists of three armored brigades. They are presently equipped with domestically produced light tanks, dating to the 2190s. Weighing roughly 12 tons and armed with a 40mm gun, they represented the apex of the Cascade Republic's industrial capabilities at the time. And when they were built, they were sufficient for duties such as pacifying survivalist enclaves in remote areas. However, since that time, the geopolitical situation has complicated significantly. There are two main opponents the Cascade Republic's military could expect to face in the near future.
       
      The first is California. The state of California was hit particularly hard by the nuclear exchange. However, in 2160, several small polities in the southern part of the state near the ruins of Los Angeles unified. Adopting an ideology not unfamiliar to North Korea, the new state declared itself the successor to the legacy of California, and set about forcibly annexing the rest of the state. It took them less than 50 years to unite the rest of California, and spread into parts of Arizona and northern Mexico. While California's expansion stopped at the Klamath River for now, this is only due to poor supply lines and the desire to engage easier targets. (California's northward advanced did provide the final impetus for the last statelets in south Oregon to unify with the Cascade Republic voluntarily).
       
      California is heavily industrialized, possessing significant air, naval, and armored capabilities. Their technology level is comparable to the Cascade Republic's, but their superior industrial capabilities and population mean that they can produce larger vehicles in greater quantity than other countries. Intelligence shows they have vehicles weighing up to 50 tons with 3 inches of armor, though most of their tanks are much lighter.

      The expected frontlines for an engagement with the Californian military would be the coastal regions in southern Oregon. Advancing up the coastal roads would allow California to capture the most populated and industrialized regions of the Cascade Republic if they advanced far enough north. Fortunately, the terrain near the border is very difficult and favors the defender;


      (near the Californian border)


      The other opponent is Deseret, a Mormon theocratic state centered in Utah, and encompassing much of Nevada, western Colorado, and southern Idaho. Recently, tension has arisen with the Cascade Republic over two main issues. The first is the poorly defined border in Eastern Oregon / Northern Nevada; the old state boundary is virtually meaningless, and though the area is sparsely populated, it does represent a significant land area, with grazing and water resources. The more recent flashpoint is the Cascade Republic's recent annexation of Arco and the area to the east. Deseret historically regarded Idaho as being within its sphere of influence, and maintained several puppet states in the area (the largest being centered in Idaho Falls). They regard the annexation of a signficant (in terms of land area, not population) portion of Idaho as a major intrusion into their rightful territory. That the Cascade Republic has repaired the rail line leading to the old Naval Reactors Facility, and set up a significant military base there only makes the situation worse.
       
      Deseret's military is light and heavily focused on mobile operations. Though they are less heavily mechanized than the Cascade Republic's forces, operating mostly armored cars and cavalry, they still represent a significant threat  to supply and communication lines in the open terrain of eastern Oregon / southern Idaho.


      (a butte in the disputed region of Idaho, near Arco)
       
      Requirements
       
      As the head of a design team in the Cascade Republic military, you have been requested to design a new tank according to one of two specifications (or both if you so desire):
       
      Medium / Heavy Tank Weight: No more than 45 tons Width: No more than 10.8 feet (3.25 meters) Upper glacis / frontal turret armor of at least 3 in (76mm) LoS thickness Side armor at least 1in (25mm) thick (i.e. resistant to HMG fire) Power/weight ratio of at least 10 hp / ton No more than 6 crew members Primary armament capable of utilizing both anti-armor and high explosive rounds Light tank Weight: No more than 25 tons Width: No more than 10.8 feet Upper glacis / frontal turret armor of at least 1 in thickness Side armor of at least 3/8 in (10mm) thickness Power/weight ratio of at least 12 hp / ton No more than 6 crew members Primary armament capable of utilizing both anti-armor and high explosive rounds  
      Other relevant information:
      Any tank should be designed to operate against either of the Cascade Republic's likely opponents (California or Deseret) The primary heavy machine gun is the M2, the primary medium machine gun is the M240. Use of one or both of these as coaxial and/or secondary armament is encouraged. The secret archives of the Cascade Republic are available for your use. Sadly, there are no running prewar armored vehicles, the best are some rusted hulks that have long been stripped of usable equipment. (Lima Tank Plant ate a 500 kt ground burst) Both HEAT and APFSDS rounds are in testing. APCR is the primary anti-armor round of the Cascade Republic. Either diesel or gasoline engines are acceptable, the Cascade Republic is friendly with oil producing regions in Canada (OOC: Engines are at about a late 1940s/early 50s tech level) The adaptability of the tank to other variants (such as SPAA, SPG, recovery vehicle, etc.) is preferred but not the primary metric that will be used to decide on a design. Ease of maintenance in the field is highly important. Any designs produced will be compared against the M4 Sherman and M3 Stuart (for medium/heavy and light tank), as these blueprints are readily available, and these tanks are well within the Cascade Republic's manufacturing capabilities.  
       
       
       
       
    • By Sovngard
      Meanwhile at Eurosatory 2018 :
       
      The Euro Main Battle Tank (EMBT), a private venture project intended for the export market.
       


    • By Alzoc
      Topic to post photo and video of various AFV seen through a thermal camera.
      I know that we won't be able to make any comparisons on the thermal signature of various tank without knowing which camera took the image and that the same areas (tracks, engine, sometimes exhaust) will always be the ones to show up but anyway:
       
      Just to see them under a different light than usual (pardon the terrible pun^^)
       
      Leclerc during a deployment test of the GALIX smoke dispenser:
       
      The picture on the bottom right was made using the castor sight (AMX 10 RC, AMX 30 B2)
       
      Akatsiya :
       

       
      T-72:
       


       
      A T-62 I think between 2 APC:
       

       
      Stryker:
       

       
      Jackal:
       

       
      HMMWV:
       

       
      Cougar 4x4:
       

       
      LAV:
       

    • By Walter_Sobchak
      Bundeswehr Weasel and British Light tank Mark IV
       

×
×
  • Create New...