Lord_James

It’s on par for a BRDM

Where is the line drawn between “suicide drone” and “loitering ATGM/munition”?

I (personally) preferred all the links and videos that collimatrix included with the posts; was much more layman friendly.

That engine sounds like hell.

What are those twin launchers on the turret top? Some new APS?

Interesting that it’s mounted on the curved side, with the flat side facing the projectile.

More like US troops in Vietnam. Could probably put a grainy filter over it and most people couldn’t tell the difference.

Should be easily, they have the Puma and her decoupled running gear. They could easily slot in a chassis that can accept boxer modules and still have it somewhat compatible with existing products.

Previously posted on Israeli AFV thread:

What’s that rod /tube thing on the last 2 photo’s?

@Laviduce, that’s your hobby, IIRC.

I may have misunderstood what @SH_MM was trying to argue. If I did, I’m sorry. You may now return to your regularly scheduled armored-kielbasa-carrier discourse.

I disagree. Tanks (and specifically MBTs) are still exceptionally useful assets on a battlefield for pier vs. pier engagements. Unlike counter-insurgency, the enemy is (or is nearly) equal to you, and probably has the same capabilities, which would make having tanks necessary for success. Let me elaborate: Let’s say 2 first world, pier nations hate each other enough to actually wage war. Each deploys it’s armies to fight on the front, in essentially the same combined arms format that everyone is familiar with. Well, how do you counter their armored divisions? With your aircraft? No, they’re your pier, and probably have their own aircraft loaded to shoot your aircraft down because they know it’s a threat. Helicopters? No, again they’re your pier and probably have manpads or shorad close to their armored divisions to counter such threats. ATGMs and ATGM launch vehicles (M1134 or Shturm-S)? Maybe, but both are nullified somewhat by APS, ERA, and other such countermeasures, if not by the brute force of the MBT’s base armor. Ok, so how are you to route an opponents tanks? With your own! In a similar fashion to using a shield, a tank is a necessary piece of equipment for a well equipped military and adds another capability to your force that the enemy MUST account for if they even want to hope to be successful. I took a lot of liberties with my argument, for the sake of brevity and because I don’t want to derail this topic more, but I’m open to continuing it somewhere else.

Did you miss the SNCA section?

You’re embarrassing yourself

“What does Armata add to justify the added expense of retraining and changing the stock of spare parts when it’s about to be rendered obsolete by new NATO 130/140mm guns?”

Is the Freccia not amphibious?

I'm not sure where the "racism" came from, unless Nazi's are a race? Highly doubt it, but if you think any of us are being racist towards Germans, we're not. Anyway, I added pictures and some more data on the Brahman. She's overweight and underpowered, but the armor is amazing. Dont know how much I can get done: never got this far so I dont know what I'm doing and I am disorganized.

Tracked Combat Vehicle 2247 (TCV-47) "Brahman" Table of basic statistics: Parameter Value Mass, combat (armor) 110 tons (59.1 tons) Length, combat (transport) 10.4 yards Width, combat (transport) 4.6 yards (4.5 yards) Height, combat (transport) 4.4 yards Ground Pressure, zero penetration Estimated Speed Estimated range Crew, number (roles) 4 (Commander, Gunner, Loader, Driver) Main armament, caliber (ammo count ready/stowed) 6.1 inch L/34 (36 in mechanized turret bustle / 36 protected hull rack) Secondary armament, caliber (ammo count ready/stowed) 20mm coaxial, 4x .30 cal GPMG (100x 20mm ready + 800 stored / 1300x .30 cal ready + 1200 stored*) * 2 of the .30 MGs are placed in the hull sponsons as "Docings" (Driver Operated Close IN Gun System), with 500 rounds each. 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- V-12 diesel (based on MB 838), displacement, 1100 hp, liquid cooling, forced air over the cooling surface 3. Transmission - 5-speed automatic, arrangement, "flip gear" allows for using all 5 gears in forward or reverse 4. Fuel - diesel, volume available, stored in engine bay (2 tanks) and hull sponsons (2 tanks) , estimated range, neat features. 5. Upper front plate flips up (via hydraulic pistons) to provide normal access to the engine and transmission. Entire upper plate can be lifted off the tank (7+ ton crane required) to lift engine and transmission out of the engine bay. 6. Suspension - Torsion bar, Travel, ground clearance, neat features. Survivability: 1. Link to Appendix 1 - RFP spreadsheet, colored to reflect achieved performance. 2. Link to Appendix 2 - Turret front: 72.9 inches LoS (66.6 inches at 66*) Upper front plate: 49.1 inches LoS (8.9 inches at 10.44*) Lower front plate: 28 inches LoS (25.4 inches at 65*) 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 1960s tech work, and expand to your heart’s content on estimated 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 a big yeehaw to impress the world with your design swagger! Kindly spoiler this section if it’s very long. Work in progress

Merkava? Never heard of it

The full name of this combat vehicle is: TCV-47 "Brahman" (Tracked Combat Vehicle) No, it's not done, i took a very long break; burned myself out. But since then, I have added commander's and loaders cupolas', vision slits, drivers hatch, turret roof applique, 12.4 tons of hull armor, and 7 tons of turret armor plus a 4.6 ton turret wedge a la Leopard 2A5. Still needs turret storage boxes, hull roof applique, and side skirts. Ammunition and velocity is going to be similar to that used on the M551 of yore, including a gun launched ATGM based on the BGM-71.

Ahh! I see metric units! My poor American eyes!

This looks interesting https://www.dreadnoughts.ultimateadmiral.com Build your own navy, from torpedo boats to battleships. Won’t be surprised if you see a lot of G3, Super Yamato, and Montana like ships (or stuff from the ship bucket alternate universe page).

Oh I know it’s highly unlikely they will make a sensible option, but it is important to give a suggestion that is on-the-mark so as to gauge how far off-the-mark they choose to go. Not only, the lightweight and amphibious nature of the BMP-3 would also be a benefit when crossing rivers and poorly constructed bridges/ roads. Sprut or Dragun 125 might still be a good choice, considering China does have that Type / ZTQ-15 (or whatever it’s called), which it would most definitely see in the mountains.