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

COMPETITION Brawling Bobcat: Armored Truck for the Lone Free State (2245)

Recommended Posts

To defeat the Norman in the frontal arc you'd need around 300mm KE or around 400-450mm CE pen.

This translates to around 115mm BM-6 and around 80mm LP HEAT or 100mm HP HEAT.

At least as long as the Norman hasn't gotten its uparmor package yet...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Xoon said:

I am curious, what would be needed to penetrate the Norman at 1-2Km range?

Speaking about both HEAT and KE.


Would a 120mm be sufficent?
Or would a 150mm be needed?

I think it depends on whether it's the original version (probably the version current for this competition) or the hypothetical up-armoured ones, and whether you're talking frontal arc or a side shot.

 

A quick look at the original submission shows 200mm LOS RHA, an air gap and 60mm LOS HHA. So around 350mm RHA penetration equivalent should do it. This equates to about a 100mm HEAT-FS or a really, really beefy gun firing AP. Like, significantly more potent than the M58. Given the limits of APFSDS in this competition, you'd probably be looking at something in at least the 125mm range if that's what you want to sling.

 

For side shots you're looking at something like 160mm RHA equivalent penetration to get into the turret, which puts you in the realm of super-hot 75s and the 90mm M3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would the 120mm wombat's HESH round be suffice vs Norman?  Its a 12.8kg projectile supposedly rated at 400mm RHA. (27.2 kg complete round)

am_rr_l2_p03.jpg

Apparently there was also a Flechette round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, N-L-M said:

The Norman is basically covered by spaced armor all around, so HESH would be incredibly ineffective. Slinging HEAT from the same gun would however work.

Agreed. It would peel off HHS plates, but leave the base armour relatively unmolested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I booted up the Norman model. Turns out that thanks to the needlenose shape and being specced for the wide frontal arc, from directly ahead the Norman's cheeks are hilariously thick:
IlLKVet.png

of course the center of the needlenose, where the mantlet is, is significantly more sane.

 

RUvLIyp.png

cheek section at 30 degrees to the right

 

39aeJLA.png

Section at the mantlet.

 

 

The Norman is a really tough nut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BULLETIN

GOVERNMENT RELEASE OF NEW ORDNANCE FOR CITIZEN APPLICATION WITHIN THE LONE FREE STATE OF TEXAS

The Lone Free State of Texas government has developed an advanced new cannon which can meet both the needs of current citizen-settler militias and the Texas government law enforcement agencies moving forward. The new gun is 3-inch caliber, far larger than previous conventional cannons provided for Texas militias, and incorporates the most advanced barrel, mounting, and ammunition technology available to the Lone Free State. 

 

Find enclosed the following figures and specifications:

 

3in G-41 L/59 cannon

Mass (no mantlet): 1,975 lbs
Rifling: 12-groove polygonal

Twist rate: 1:17 calibers
Recoil system: Concentric
Breech: Vertical sliding block

 

rrciMSB.png

 

Qcpg4gP.png

 

ohwB2eP.jpg

 

 

 

Ammunition:

3in-23 G-141

 

zdLIicP.png

 

G-141B HVAP-T
Projectile weight: 12.7 pounds
Core: Tungsten Hard Alloy (WHA) Class 4

MV: 3,770 ft/s

V1000yd: 3,501 ft/s

V2000yd: 3,217 ft/s

Penetration, RHA, 1,000 yd: 10.4"

Penetration, RHA, 2,000 yd: 9.2"

 

vT2KK3O.png

 

869RvIz.png

 


G-141D HVAP-DS-T

Projectile weight: 12.9 pounds (in-bore), 10.0 pounds (in flight)
Core: Depleted Uranium

MV: 3,820 ft/s

V1000yd: 3,583 ft/s

V2000yd: 3,362 ft/s

Penetration, RHA, 1,000 yd: 11"

Penetration, RHA, 2,000 yd: 10"

 

lgBIjM8.png

 

3TEaIQc.jpg
 

 

G-141A HE-T

Projectile weight: 14.0 pounds
High Explosive: 2.7 lbs RDX

MV: 2,800 ft/s

 

q5d1MT9.png

 

ZtUt4AL.png


I will be releasing the files for this gun shortly (once it's completely finished), and it may be used by any entrant, should they so choose. It also provides a reference of what sort of technology the Texan government is capable of producing, gun-wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While waiting for the competitors to continue their work, I got bored and decided to produce a design at the other end of the scale:

oAIrKPv.jpg

This is the Maxcat, an experimental heavy wheeled AFV which uses a rather insane hydraulic drive system which uses three engines to power the 14 individually-articulating road wheels (each provided with hydraulic motor). The drive system is a power hog, and requires the use of an elaborate hydraulic control system to make it all work. The final wrinkle is that the inner set of wheels need a complex geared torsion bar system to provide the correct amount of travel using stubby torsion bars. 

 

The results are impressive, however: the Maxcat sports a 120mm/L60 gun with the same ballistics as the pre-war M58 (including a useful APDS round based on the one used in the old British L1A2), and has impressive survivability thanks to the large distances between the outer hull and the major components. The hull front has respectable KE resistance (260-350mm RHA equivalent depending on the angle and the region targeted) and frankly insane CE resistance (well over 1000mm of RHA equivalent in some places). The turret front is actually less protected over all, but still manages up to 270mm/750mm KE/CE resistance depending on the angle and area hit. The brow armour is also notable, and gets around 300mm/>1000mm KE/CE resistance against attacks from the front. The Maxcat weighs in at just under 70st unloaded, and hits the minimum range requirement by dint of six massive fuel tanks with a maximum capacity of just over 1150 gal. It hits 90km/h on roads, and will try to do the same offroad if the driver is foolish enough to open the throttle.

 

With all of the above, the Maxcat is designed to be an MBT in all but name - meant to take on all comers head-on and win. It would probably be an expensive, resource-devouring maintenance queen at base, but while out in the field it would be an unholy terror to anything foolish enough to get in its way.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Toxn said:

The turret front is actually less protected over all, but still manages up to 270mm/750mm KE/CE resistance

That kind of CE resistance is still enough to flat out stop the Mormon 2"/4" tandem warhead, if the armor is properly arranged.

Very impressive beast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, N-L-M said:

That kind of CE resistance is still enough to flat out stop the Mormon 2"/4" tandem warhead, if the armor is properly arranged.

Very impressive beast.

Tandem charges are tricky. The Mormon weapon sneaks through from the front (0.63"/16mm residual penetration into the fighting compartment) if shot at a very specific point on the upper hull. However, adding another 1.5"/38mm RHA spaced armour layer midway down the tunnels on either side of the driver (the most vulnerable area of the upper hull front) allows it to defeat the tandem HEAT pretty effectively across the entire 30' aspect. 

 

There's also a bit of growth potential in the design - around 9.7st (8.8mt) before the vehicle bumps over the loaded ground pressure requirement, with generous space in the hull front, hull sides, turret interior front and turret exterior sides for NERA.

 

The final thing to note is that the dimensions of this thing are simply hilarious: 26'/2.9" (8m) long without the gun, 41'/6" (12.65m) with, 16'/4.9" (5m) wide and 13'/1.9" (4.01m) high. The Maxcat is house-sized, yet cramped.

 

Edit: the turret is very tricky to work out, as the ERA is arranged at two angles and there's a lot of ways it can get hit. As near as I can tell a shot from the 2"/4" directly from the front and hitting the side panel ERA, turret skirt, air gap and front armour still gets in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Toxn said:

While waiting for the competitors to continue their work, I got bored and decided to produce a design at the other end of the scale:

oAIrKPv.jpg

This is the Maxcat

 

I think my favorite part about this is the insane drivetrain used just to get reasonable ground pressure with wheels, when there is no explicit requirement in the solicitation to even use wheels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

 

I think my favorite part about this is the insane drivetrain used just to get reasonable ground pressure with wheels, when there is no explicit requirement in the solicitation to even use wheels.

There's the option to build a wheeled death trap and I'm taking it.

 

Don't worry though - I'm sure I'll get bored in a week's time and try to design a half-track that can do highway speeds or something.

 

Edit: or a 60-tonne convertible drive tank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A more aesthetic picture of my creation:

 

GWG6KIS.jpg

I'm imagining shitty 90s toy commercial faux-rock playing in the background.

 

Edit: here are some of the vital stats:

 

Length: 26'3" (hull), 41'6" (gun forward)

Width: 16'5"

Height: 13'2" (top of commander’s cupola)

 

Engine: 3 12-cylinder liquid-cooled turbodiesel, 2,368 ci displacement each, 2520hp total

Transmission: hydraulic drive system, 120hp motors on each wheel

Suspension: swing-arm, torsion bars/geared torsion bars

PWR: 32.1hp/st loaded (note: due to inefficiencies, only around 25-26hp/st makes it to the ground)

Ground clearance: 4'2"

Max road speed: 56mph

Max recommended offroad speed: 22mph

Operational range (on road/offroad): 435mi/170mi

 

Base hull thickness:

Hull front: 2" sloped at 60' from the vertical

Hull sides, rear, bottom, inner compartments: 1.5"

Turret front: 5.9" sloped at 20'

Turret sides: 1.5" sloped at 20'

Mantlet: 6.1"

Turret floor, roof: 0.8"

 

Protection (ERA fitted, no fuel, KE/CE):

Upper hull front: 12"/>39" RHA equivalent

Upper hull sides (30’ arc): 14"/>39" RHA equivalent

Upper hull sides (60’ arc): 5.9"/8.7" RHA equivalent

Upper hull sides (90’): 4.9"/6.3" RHA equivalent

Turret front: 10.6"/12.9" RHA equivalent

Turret 30’ arc: 10.2"/29.5" RHA equivalent

Turret sides (90’): 4.3"/4.3" RHA equivalent

 

Turret ring diameter: 98.4"

Main gun: 120mm L/60 medium-pressure gun

Ammunition stowage: 52 rnds complete

+22/-6 degree elevation (-12 if not facing forwards).

 

Ammunition:

4.7x34.6" propellant charge (56.7lb max weight)

AP (M358): 50.9lb, 3480ft/s, 11.8" RHA penetration at 110yd, 10.6" RHA penetration at 1090yd

HEAT-FS (M469): 31lb, 3480ft/s, 15" RHA penetration (reduced charge propellant case)

HEAT-FS (advanced): 31lb, 3480ft/s, 17.3" RHA penetration (reduced charge propellant case)

HE (M356): 50.3lb (10.25lb fill), 2490ft/s, 1.8" RHA penetration (normal or reduced charge propellant case)

APDS (tungsten core): 16.8lb, 4890ft/s, 14.2" RHA penetration at 110yd, 13.8" RHA penetration at 1090yd

 

Secondary weapons:

.50 cal coaxial MG (800 rnds)

.50 cal loader’s MG (600 rnds)

.50 cal commander’s MG (600 rnds)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Beer said:

How do You change the inner wheels? 

You build a small shrine to the crewmen of late-war German tanks and then get to work taking the outer suspension units off.

 

Edit: I should say inner suspension units. Taking the outer units off would certainly make it easier though. This is made more complex by the fact that each swing arm actually has hydraulic cabling running through it, so you'd probably want to just run on flats until you can get back to depot and change out there. Sort of the same principle as modern MBTs and their torsion bars - if one breaks the most common thing is just to run on it until you have the option of going back in to have it properly looked at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The competition is discontinued due to lack of interest. It's my fault. I substantially undermined one of the contestants due to petty concerns which were not relevant to the competition at large, and which I could have handled more gracefully. I chose not to do so and this has resulted in the tacit withdrawal of many of the entrants. I am sorry to those who have put in the effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been talking with people and it seems there is still some interest in the Texas car competition. I don't think it was properly structured initially, and I'll be reviewing it and rebooting it (likely picking up where we left off, but with maybe a different judge structure. Last time some judges really wanted to participate but weren't able to because of da ruuruus). 

However, right now I don't have the time to do that, so in the interim we're running a mostly discord-based mini competition, see the thread for that.

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.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By Sturgeon
      We're holding a smaller, lower-effort competition while things simmer down enough for me to reboot the Texas competition to allow more people to participate. Those of you that choose to participate, enjoy.

      This competition is intended to be a brief 1-2 week long effort which should require only a handful of man-hours to complete, depending on skill level. Unlike a proper competition, this has one person who's judge,
      jury, and executioner (me!), to allow the maximum number of competitors. Consider this a brief interlude before the reboot of the Texas competition (which is likely to pick up more or less where
      it left off). Accordingly, there will be relatively little fluff and editorializing. Contestants will be given a basic setting and a set of requirements with a description of the unique mission needing to be solved. Beyond that, contestants will be responsible for filling in the gaps on their own, to whatever degree they see fit.
       
      Programs required: Solid modeling software, ammunition load development software, ballistic calculator, performance estimators (provided)
       
      Expected man-hours: 5-10
       
      Deliverables required: Image of loaded cartridge and projectile, cutaway or exploded view of projectile or projectile + cartridge, cartridge data sheet, bill of materials (including all component masses and materials), ballistic charts (not required to be in graph form), completed performance estimate sheets, any supplementary materials the contestant chooses to provide.

      The competition will be largely conducted via the SH discord, if you're interested please PM me for a link if you don't already have one.

      BEGIN FLUFF

      After the War, the Great Plains became virtually cut off from the rest of the former United States. Governments fractured into small polities based around towns and cities, as local populations realized they no longer were enfranchised as part of a larger economy and logistical network. State governments began to be seen overwhelmingly as distant meddlers who offered nothing in return for their interference in local politics. The area around the Black Hills was no exception. The states of South Dakota and Wyoming disintegrated quickly once the Federal Government of the United States no longer took a direct role in state affairs. A loose government formed around Rapid City, supported by strong manufacturing jobs, traders, and a large ammunition plant that could support paramilitary operations ranging around the Black Hills region and securing the roads that remained passable. Due to this, their influence expanded well into Eastern Wyoming and north to Southeast Montana and North Dakota. The emerging Dakota Union became the primary, if thinly spread, force in the northern plains region. Their most famous agents would be the Sioux Scouts.



      Unlike most pre-war infantry forces, which operated as part of large combined arms units in a highly tiered structure, the Scouts are highly independent light infantry. Often, Sioux Scouts will travel hundreds of miles unsupported in units as small as pairs, or even the occasional single Scout. While on patrol, they are responsible for their own sustenance and upkeep, foraging for food and shooting with their rifles what they need to survive. For the moment, there are no other organized military forces in the region, and Scouts are tasked primarily with maintaining contact, trade, and awareness of the peoples living inside the Northern Great Plains, and the hills to the West. As part of their duties, they are sometimes called to settle disputes, mete out justice, or are even permanently stationed in affiliated regions to maintain law and order. In times of war, they function in larger units as an army to protect Black Hills from incursion, but this hasn't happened in many decades. There is no distinction between "officers" and "enlisted" in the Sioux Scouts, but there is a basic hierarchy, and Scout pairs will often have a subordinate and a superior. In times of greater trouble, Scouts are also expected to marshal and lead local forces in the local defense. Generally, Sioux Scouts travel on foot or on horseback. They are substantially made up of Indian peoples, although any residents of the Dakota Union may join the all-volunteer force.
       

       
      Currently, the Sioux Scouts are armed with a motley assortment of both manually-operated and semiautomatic rifles in various calibers. The Sioux Scouts have requested a new semiautomatic rifle to replace these, and it has been determined that they require a new caliber to go along with it, hopefully phasing out the assorted legacy calibers in the process. Thanks to the plant in Rapid City, this is a very feasible request for the Dakota Union (and helps sustain jobs in its largest city). You are an engineer at the Rapid City plant, tasked with creating a report on what the new caliber's characteristics should be. Resources, testing facilities, and reams of research are made available to you. The year is 2221. Get to work.

      END FLUFF
       
      The new round must:
      1. Produce no less than 700 ft-lbs at 600 yards.
      2. Penetrate twenty-four 1/2" pine boards at 600 yards (equivalent to a lethal penetrating shot on a quartered buffalo).
      3. Drop no more than 96 inches at 600 yards (2.6in sight height, 100yd zero, 59.0F temperature, 29.92in Hg pressure).
      4. Drift no more than 36 inches at 600 yards (2.6in sight height, 100yd zero, 59.0F temperature, 29.92in Hg pressure, 10mph 90 degree crosswind).
      5. All performance requirements must be met at 200 ft/s below the spec velocity, except the 600 yard energy requirement, which can be met at 500 yards at -200 ft/s, instead.
      6. Produce pressure no greater than 52,000 CUP (brass cased) or 50,000 CUP (steel cased).
      7. Use a projectile composed only of any combination of the following: Copper alloy, bronze alloy, lead alloy, iron alloy, steel alloy, tin alloy, nickel alloy, and/or zinc alloys. Titanium, tungsten, aluminum, magnesium, and other exotic metals are not allowed.
      8. Minimum magazine capacity must be 20, with a stack height no greater than 5 inches.
      9. Cartridge overall length may not exceed 2.8 inches.
      10. Cartridge recoil from a 10lb weapon may not exceed 12 ft-lbs.
      11. Cartridge must meet performance requirements from a 22" barreled weapon.
      12. Cartridge must cost as little as possible.

      You are provided with calculators to use to estimate these values for the competition. For trajectory, drift, and energy, you must use JBM Ballistics calculator here. Internal ballistics must be estimated via the Powley Computer (just check the pressure box and enter 52,000 CUP for brass or 50,000 CUP for steel). Also please see my guidelines for modeling steel cases here. The pine penetration value must be calculated with this spreadsheet, and the recoil energy with this spreadsheet. For the purposes of this competition, cost per round is determined solely by the materials used. Please reference the material cost sheet here. If you do not already have a solid modeling program, you can use Google SketchUp for free. @Toxn has a lot of experience with it, you might ask him.
    • By Sturgeon
      If you exclusively reside in Mechanized Warfare, as many of you do, you might have missed that SH is holding its quasi-annual design competition, which is for an armored car to be developed for the future post-apocalyptic Lone Free State of Texas, circa 2245. Check out the thread here.
    • By N-L-M
      ATTENTION DUELISTS:
      @Toxn
      @LostCosmonaut
      @Lord_James
      @DIADES
      @Datengineerwill
      @Whatismoo
      @Kal
      @Zadlo
      @Xoon
      detailed below is the expected format of the final submission.
      The date is set as Wednesday the 19th of June at 23:59 GMT.
      Again, incomplete designs may be submitted as they are and will be judged as seen fit.
       
      FINAL SUBMISSION:
      Vehicle Designation and name

      [insert 3-projection (front, top, side) and isometric render of vehicle here)



      Table of basic statistics:

      Parameter

      Value

      Mass, combat


       
      Length, combat (transport)


       
      Width, combat (transport)


       
      Height, combat (transport)


       
      Ground Pressure, MMP (nominal)


       
      Estimated Speed


       
      Estimated range


       
      Crew, number (roles)


       
      Main armament, caliber (ammo count ready/stowed)


       
      Secondary armament, caliber (ammo count ready/stowed)


       

       
      Vehicle designer’s notes: explain the thought process behind the design of the vehicle, ideas, and the development process from the designer’s point of view.

      Vehicle feature list:
      Mobility:

      1.     Link to Appendix 1- RFP spreadsheet, colored to reflect achieved performance.

      2.     Engine- type, displacement, rated power, cooling, neat features.

      3.     Transmission- type, arrangement, neat features.

      4.     Fuel- Type, volume available, stowage location, estimated range, neat features.

      5.     Other neat features in the engine bay.

      6.     Suspension- Type, Travel, ground clearance, neat features.

      Survivability:

      1.     Link to Appendix 1 - RFP spreadsheet, colored to reflect achieved performance.

      2.     Link to Appendix 2- armor array details.

      3.     Non-specified survivability features and other neat tricks- low profile, gun depression, instant smoke, cunning internal arrangement, and the like.

      Firepower:

      A.    Weapons:

      1.     Link to Appendix 1- RFP spreadsheet, colored to reflect achieved performance.

      2.     Main Weapon-

      a.      Type

      b.      Caliber

      c.      ammunition types and performance (short)

      d.     Ammo stowage arrangement- numbers ready and total, features.

      e.      FCS- relevant systems, relevant sights for operating the weapon and so on.

      f.      Neat features.

      3.     Secondary weapon- Similar format to primary. Tertiary and further weapons- likewise.

      4.     Link to Appendix 3- Weapon system magic. This is where you explain how all the special tricks related to the armament that aren’t obviously available using Soviet 1961 tech work, and expand to your heart’s content on extimated performance and how these estimates were reached.

      B.    Optics:

      1.     Primary gunsight- type, associated trickery.

      2.     Likewise for any and all other optics systems installed, in no particular order.

      C.    FCS:

      1.     List of component systems, their purpose and the basic system architecture.

      2.     Link to Appendix 3- weapon system magic, if you have long explanations about the workings of the system.

      Fightability:

      1.     List vehicle features which improve its fightability and useability.

      Additonal Features:

      Feel free to list more features as you see fit, in more categories.

      Free expression zone: Let out your inner Thetan to fully impress the world with the fruit of your labor. Kindly spoiler this section if it’s very long.


       Example for filling in Appendix 1
    • By N-L-M
      Restricted: for Operating Thetan Eyes Only

      By order of Her Gracious and Serene Majesty Queen Diane Feinstein the VIII

      The Dianetic People’s Republic of California

      Anno Domini 2250

      SUBJ: RFP for new battle tank

      1.      Background.
      As part of the War of 2248 against the Perfidious Cascadians, great deficiencies were discovered in the Heavy tank DF-1. As detailed in report [REDACTED], the DF-1 was quite simply no match for the advanced weaponry developed in secret by the Cascadian entity. Likewise, the DF-1 has fared poorly in the fighting against the heretical Mormonhideen, who have developed many improvised weapons capable of defeating the armor on this vehicle, as detailed in report [REDACTED]. The Extended War on the Eastern Front has stalled for want of sufficient survivable firepower to push back the Mormon menace beyond the Colorado River south of the Vegas Crater.
      The design team responsible for the abject failure that was the DF-1 have been liquidated, which however has not solved the deficiencies of the existing vehicle in service. Therefore, a new vehicle is required, to meet the requirements of the People’s Auditory Forces to keep the dream of our lord and prophet alive.


       
      Over the past decade, the following threats have presented themselves:

      A.      The Cascadian M-2239 “Norman” MBT and M-8 light tank

      Despite being approximately the same size, these 2 vehicles seem to share no common components, not even the primary armament! Curiously, it appears that the lone 120mm SPG specimen recovered shares design features with the M-8, despite being made out of steel and not aluminum like the light tank. (based on captured specimens from the battle of Crater Lake, detailed in report [REDACTED]).
      Both tanks are armed with high velocity guns.

      B.      The Cascadian BGM-1A/1B/1C/1D ATGM

      Fitted on a limited number of tank destroyers, several attack helicopters, and (to an extent) man-portable, this missile system is the primary Cascadian anti-armor weapon other than their armored forces. Intelligence suggests that a SACLOS version (BGM-1C) is in LRIP, with rumors of a beam-riding version (BGM-1D) being developed.

      Both warheads penetrate approximately 6 cone diameters.

      C.      Deseret tandem ATR-4 series
      Inspired by the Soviet 60/105mm tandem warhead system from the late 80s, the Mormon nation has manufactured a family of 2”/4” tandem HEAT warheads, launched from expendable short-range tube launchers, dedicated AT RRs, and even used as the payload of the JS-1 MCLOS vehicle/man-portable ATGM.
      Both warheads penetrate approximately 5 cone diameters.

      D.      Cascadian HEDP 90mm rocket
      While not a particularly impressive AT weapon, being of only middling diameter and a single shaped charge, the sheer proliferation of this device has rendered it a major threat to tanks, as well as lighter vehicles. This weapon is available in large numbers in Cascadian infantry squads as “pocket artillery”, and there are reports of captured stocks being used by the Mormonhideen.
      Warhead penetrates approximately 4 cone diameters.

      E.      Deseret 40mm AC/ Cascadian 35mm AC
      These autocannon share broadly similar AP performance, and are considered a likely threat for the foreseeable future, on Deseret armored cars, Cascadian tank destroyers, and likely also future IFVs.

      F.      IEDs

      In light of the known resistance of tanks to standard 10kg anti-tank mines, both the Perfidious Cascadians and the Mormonhideen have taken to burying larger anti-tank A2AD weaponry. The Cascadians have doubled up some mines, and the Mormons have regularly buried AT mines 3, 4, and even 5 deep.

      2.      General guidelines:

      A.      Solicitation outline:
      In light of the differing requirements for the 2 theaters of war in which the new vehicle is expected to operate, proposals in the form of a field-replaceable A-kit/B-kit solution will be accepted.

      B.      Requirements definitions:
      The requirements in each field are given in 3 levels- Threshold, Objective, and Ideal.
      Threshold is the minimum requirement to be met; failure to reach this standard may greatly disadvantage any proposal.

      Objective is the threshold to be aspired to; it reflects the desires of the People’s Auditory Forces Armored Branch, which would prefer to see all of them met. At least 70% must be met, with bonus points for any more beyond that.

      Ideal specifications are the maximum of which the armored forces dare not even dream. Bonus points will be given to any design meeting or exceeding these specifications.

      C.      All proposals must accommodate the average 1.7m high Californian recruit.

      D.      The order of priorities for the DPRC is as follows:

      a.      Vehicle recoverability.

      b.      Continued fightability.

      c.       Crew survival.

      E.      Permissible weights:

      a.      No individual field-level removable or installable component may exceed 5 tons.

      b.      Despite the best efforts of the Agriculture Command, Californian recruits cannot be expected to lift weights in excess of 25 kg at any time.

      c.       Total vehicle weight must remain within MLC 120 all-up for transport.

      F.      Overall dimensions:

      a.      Length- essentially unrestricted.

      b.      Width- 4m transport width.

                                                                    i.     No more than 4 components requiring a crane may be removed to meet this requirement.

                                                                   ii.     Any removed components must be stowable on top of the vehicle.

      c.       Height- The vehicle must not exceed 3.5m in height overall.

      G.     Technology available:

      a.      Armor:
      The following armor materials are in full production and available for use. Use of a non-standard armor material requires permission from a SEA ORG judge.
      Structural materials:

                                                                    i.     RHA/CHA

      Basic steel armor, 250 BHN. The reference for all weapon penetration figures, good impact properties, fully weldable. Available in thicknesses up to 150mm (RHA) or 300mm (CHA).
      Density- 7.8 g/cm^3.

                                                                   ii.     Aluminum 5083

      More expensive to work with than RHA per weight, middling impact properties, low thermal limits. Excellent stiffness.

       Fully weldable. Available in thicknesses up to 100mm.
      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 1 vs CE, 0.9 vs KE.
      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 0.33 vs CE, 0.3 vs KE.
      Density- 2.7 g/cm^3 (approx. 1/3 of steel).

      For structural integrity, the following guidelines are recommended:

      For light vehicles (less than 40 tons), not less than 25mm RHA/45mm Aluminum base structure

      For heavy vehicles (70 tons and above), not less than 45mm RHA/80mm Aluminum base structure.
      Intermediate values for intermediate vehicles may be chosen as seen fit.
      Non-structural passive materials:

                                                                  iii.     HHA

      Steel, approximately 500 BHN through-hardened. Approximately twice as effective as RHA against KE and HEAT on a per-weight basis. Not weldable, middling shock properties. Available in thicknesses up to 25mm.
      Density- 7.8g/cm^3.

                                                                  iv.     Glass textolite

      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 2.2 vs CE, 1.64 vs KE.

      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 0.52 vs CE, 0.39 vs KE.
      Density- 1.85 g/cm^3 (approximately ¼ of steel).
      Non-structural.

                                                                   v.     Fused silica

      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 3.5 vs CE, 1 vs KE.

      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 1 vs CE, 0.28 vs KE.
      Density-2.2g/cm^3 (approximately 1/3.5 of steel).
      Non-structural, requires confinement (being in a metal box) to work.

                                                                  vi.     Fuel

      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 1.3 vs CE, 1 vs KE.

      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 0.14 vs CE, 0.1 vs KE.

      Density-0.82g/cm^3.

                                                                vii.     Assorted stowage/systems

      Mass efficiency vs RHA- 1 vs CE, 0.8 vs KE.

                                                               viii.     Spaced armor

      Requires a face of at least 25mm LOS vs CE, and at least 50mm LOS vs KE.

      Reduces penetration by a factor of 1.1 vs CE or 1.05 vs KE for every 10 cm air gap.
      Spaced armor rules only apply after any standoff surplus to the requirements of a reactive cassette.

      Reactive armor materials:

                                                                  ix.     ERA-light

      A sandwich of 3mm/3mm/3mm steel-explodium-steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.

      Must be spaced at least 3 sandwich thicknesses away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 81% coverage (edge effects).

                                                                   x.     ERA-heavy

      A sandwich of 15mm steel/3mm explodium/9mm steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.
      Must be spaced at least 3 sandwich thicknesses away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 81% coverage (edge effects).

                                                                  xi.     NERA-light

      A sandwich of 6mm steel/6mm rubber/ 6mm steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.
      Must be spaced at least 1 sandwich thickness away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 95% coverage.

                                                                 xii.     NERA-heavy

      A sandwich of 30mm steel/6m rubber/18mm steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.
      Must be spaced at least 1 sandwich thickness away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 95% coverage.

      The details of how to calculate armor effectiveness will be detailed in Appendix 1.

      b.      Firepower

                                                                    i.     2A46 equivalent tech- pressure limits, semi-combustible cases, recoil mechanisms and so on are at an equivalent level to that of the USSR in the year 1960.

                                                                   ii.     Limited APFSDS (L:D 15:1)- Spindle sabots or bourelleted sabots, see for example the Soviet BM-20 100mm APFSDS.

                                                                  iii.     Limited tungsten (no more than 100g per shot)

                                                                  iv.     Californian shaped charge technology- 5 CD penetration for high-pressure resistant HEAT, 6 CD for low pressure/ precision formed HEAT.

                                                                   v.     The general issue GPMG for the People’s Auditory Forces is the PKM. The standard HMG is the DShK.

      c.       Mobility

                                                                    i.     Engines tech level:

      1.      MB 838 (830 HP)

      2.      AVDS-1790-5A (908 HP)

      3.      Kharkov 5TD (600 HP)

                                                                   ii.     Power density should be based on the above engines. Dimensions are available online, pay attention to cooling of 1 and 3 (water cooled).

                                                                  iii.     Power output broadly scales with volume, as does weight. Trying to extract more power from the same size may come at the cost of reliability (and in the case of the 5TD, it isn’t all that reliable in the first place).

                                                                  iv.     There is nothing inherently wrong with opposed piston or 2-stroke engines if done right.

      d.      Electronics

                                                                    i.     LRFs- unavailable

                                                                   ii.     Thermals-unavailable

                                                                  iii.     I^2- limited

      3.      Operational Requirements.

      The requirements are detailed in the appended spreadsheet.

      4.      Submission protocols.

      Submission protocols and methods will be established in a follow-on post, nearer to the relevant time.
       
      Appendix 1- armor calculation
      Appendix 2- operational requirements
       
      Good luck, and may Hubbard guide your way to enlightenment!
×
×
  • Create New...