Toxn

That's just the numbers I have: 0.39/0.52 KE/CE TE (what an acronym stew!). Density of 1.85g/cm3 More knowledgeable people, please chime in.

It improves the TE of the composite versus one made of pure textolite. Remember that textolite has a TE of something like 0.39, but an ME of a bit over 2. HHA has a TE of 1.5 and an ME of 1.5.

I've now reached the point where I hate my design and I'm burning it. With CAD software, it turns out that getting to this point takes about a week rather than a few days...

It lowers ME but improves TE. The end result of a 50:50 composite is a material with a TE that's exactly the same as RHA, but weighs much less. You know, for all those backing plates and what-not that you regrettably still need to have behind a layer of ERA.

Textolite is phenolic resin rather than epoxy, although still an exothermic reaction. I knew a guy who used to be the plant manager for a plant that used phenolic to make grinding disks. Apparently he had one of the cooling loops on a large tank go out in the dead of night as it was setting up and it blew the top off the thing. He also had a tank that failed less spectacularly but ran to completion in the tank. Apparently some poor bastards had to spend a week jackhammering the hardened resin out from the inside of the tank. One advantage to phenolics though: they don't melt, and they don't really burn. Instead they keep structural integrity more or less up until the point that they char, then crumble. Hence the use in grinding disks.

25mm of HHA, 25mm of texto, all in layers. You could do something sneaky like embed plates in textolite to allow you to make curved surfaces, but honestly layers sounds like less of a chore.

Never seen a boat before? In all seriousness though: you can make big, heavy things out of fiberglass. It's just a) hella expensive and b) complex, given the need to mold metal inserts everywhere you have a mounting point, bearing, axle etc.

So here's another revelation about non-reactive armours: if you want to use blends of textolite and HHA, the best ratio is something like 1:1. What this gets you is a material that has almost exactly the same TE as ordinary RHA against both kinetic and chemical threats, but also has 1.54/1.64 KE/CE mass efficiency. This means that, to get the same protection as a given of RHA against KE, you can use a blended plate of the same thickness but around 2/3 the mass. So... is an all-fibreglass tank (with lots of HHA plates inside) an option?

@Sturgeon naïve question, but the pressure that we should use for our guns when calculating performance is the 70,000 PSI peak operating pressure, right? My second "high threat" gun option is a brute of a thing (5 inches, 55 calibres) and I just want to make sure that I'm speccing it out to be all that it can be. I mean, if I'm going to have to reload in two parts, I want to make damn sure that whatever is on the receiving end of this thing is very, very sorry to be there.

I spent far too long last night designing a gyro-stabilized gun sight, but in the process I was able to find a cute application that allowed me to rough out the configuration of planes, mirrors and lenses: https://ricktu288.github.io/ray-optics/simulator/

I bring tidings: The first is a low-pressure gun for conservative HEAT slinging. The second is a mini-turret for doing mini-turret things while aggressively Texan.

It'll be fun to watch him try though.

Yay textolite! Yay good mass efficiency and terrible thickness efficiency!

Oh wow, it managed to come out looking even worse than in the Soviet trials.

Good point. Judges, what's the TE for textolite now?

Some of them even make it back to the helipad they flew off from.

Hahahahahaha, no.

Something to note: with the change in ME/TE of HHA, textolite is now the supreme form of non-reactive armour. Build your arrays accordingly.

I too have noticed this trend

{Sidles up to the bar at a nondescript neo-revivalist saloon, motions you to a quiet table after pretending to meet you} Okay, so I've heard that you're also an engineer from "across the citrus curtain" and are still getting used to life in boots instead of skirts. That's fine, there are more of us than you'd think. But since the locals use some sort of ancient, impenetrable script instead of an actual system of weights and measures, I figure this might help you get your bearings: Protection: The protection standard against enemy HEAT is fairly laughable, given what we know the Mormonhadeen are packing thanks to the Cascadians. The "6 inch" projectiles being used as a reference hit like ancient panzerfausts and can punch through around 180mm of RHA on the flat. The protection standard against KE is much more up-to-date, and obviously reflects a run-in with (or espionage against) the new Cascadian Norman tank. The "4 inch/54 calibre" gun is actually the 105mm L/51 gun off the Norman. The relevant penetration figures are 263mm RHA at 1800m, and 394mm at 1100. I'd suggest leaving some growth potential in the hull and suspension for when the Cascadians re-discover APFSDS. The other protection requirements are more or less self-explanatory, provided you can multiply by 2.54. Firepower: The firepower requirements get interesting once you consider the option of low-pressure or high-pressure shaped charges. Low-pressure HEAT (similar to the pre-war 90mm Cockerill guns) can beat the low-penetration 13" requirement using a ~76mm tube, and the high-penetration requirement using something in the 85-100mm range. The high-pressure guns can beat the low-penetration requirement using an 85-90mm tube, while the 15" high-penetration requirement can be handled by a gun of about 105mm. So our new Texan employers are essentially asking us to clone the Cascadian gun. In terms of maxing out the firepower requirements, it looks like Texan loaders can't sling much more than Californian ones: around 25kg. The weight of a one-piece round is obviously variable (and depends on the type of projectile, its velocity and the composition of the cartridge case) but using 100mm UOF-412 as a reference you're looking at a maximum calibre of something like 80-90mm in order to allow loaders to sling full-bore AP and HE. If you instead limit yourself to HEAT-FS you're looking at 100-105mm guns. Going further and looking at APFSDS, you could probably get up to 120-130mm weapons. If you use separate shells and charges, then the maximum size of HE or solid shot that a loader can sling goes up to around 120mm. For HEAT-FS, this goes up even further to around 130-140mm. For APFSDS the issue actually ends up being the charge weight rather than the projectile weight. Mobility: The range requirement comes down to a conversion factor of about 0.148 kg of fuel per hour per kW of power. In term of the range itself: 483 (baseline) and 805 (desired) km or range is impressive, and represents functionally one to two days of unrefueled driving. The power requirement is for 11.5kW/mt. Put all the above together and you can very quickly scope out the limits of the design space. For instance: a T-55 analogue will need a 556hp/415kW motor to make the cut in terms of PWR. It will then need around 1355lb/614.5kg of fuel to make the minimal 300mi range requirement. This translates (using a density of 850kg/m3 for diesel) to around 0.723m3 of fuel storage, or 723 litres. Using the 500mi requirement, you need around 1200l of fuel storage (which comes to nearly 3% of the vehicle's total mass) Looking at the ground pressure, this requirement seems to be based on a simple weight/track area calculation rather than MMP. The converted units come to around 95.8 kPa. This is fairly light, but certainly doable given the latitude we're allowed on width. Anyway, I hope this helps you landing that contract. Us former Californians have to stick together, after all. {Tips oversized cowboy hat to you, says goodbye in exaggerated Southern accent, walks out of saloon}

My plan to use mini-turrets is getting more complicated

Does the coax count towards the number of independent MGs?

No, but the commenters on his videos are.

Ah, the typical Western front Tiger story: - scratch unit (because most of the effort is in the East) - breakdowns start immediately - mauled by infantry - more breakdowns - mauled by infantry and halftracks - one successful engagement (that wehraboos won't shut up about) - yet more breakdowns - outfoxed by Comets and their 'quick reversing' - fail to reposition - get ouflanked and shot in the side