Jump to content

Competition: A modern medium AFV


Toxn
 Share

Recommended Posts

I savagely slashed armor off the thing until I got it to 35.4 tonnes "fully" loaded (at least with all the stuff I've accounted for, anyway).

That number is still missing random doodads like drive sprockets and return rollers, but it's close.

 

Current to-do list:

 

1. Lower the turret roof or something. It's still too big.

 

2. Finish the turret. It's currently just a box; it needs details like rangefinders, cupolas, etc.

3. Add a driver's hatch.

4. Add ERA.

 

5. Add drive sprockets and idlers, model fuel tanks and bulkheads.


6. ????

7. Profit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toxn notes here that some requirements were meant to be impossible to meet just to see what you'd do with it.

In light of that, I threw out the C-130 req't entirely and instead mandated for myself that a C-17 had to be able to carry two. I like those parameters, because then you're neither talking about an MBT nor something like a Stingray or Buford, but something truly "medium"

IMPORTANT OOC NOTE:

The in-character post is sort of supposed to be maddening, as it reflects the tendency to propose a lightweight expeditionary vehicle (the absolute requirements) and then have everyone shove more and more stuff in until it turns into an MBT with an autocannon on top. The absolute versus optional requirements (some of which simply cannot be reconciled) indicate this.

I advise the contestants to look at the trends (including real-life ones that I may not have examined in any detail) and pick their guiding philosophy - bearing in mind that this is supposed to be a vehicle for infantry support and general combat against anything smaller than an MBT. From there you should try to fulfil all of the absolute requirements (some leeway is allowed) and then argue the optional requirements as needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say, weighing 20 ton and filling out the requirements seems to be nearly impossible. 

As others have noted, this is an intentional feature of the competition.

 

I'd of course be very happy if you jumped in and had a go at solving the unsolveable :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have noted, this is an intentional feature of the competition.

 

I'd of course be very happy if you jumped in and had a go at solving the unsolveable :)

That is what I am trying, lightweight above all pretty much, but still filling the requirements. 

 

I did read the post, and I am doing a complete redesign of my vehicle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say, weighing 20 ton and filling out the requirements seems to be nearly impossible. 

 

It doesn't absolutely have to be 20t if you want to try something else, hell, Olifant just posted he's upping his design from 35-40t due to the payload capacity of the C-17.

 

Edit: Olifant is is often to how many of us refer to Sturgeon by the way, a little past background there before SH existed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, I'm bad at drawing, so here's what I'm coming up with so far, and yeah, it's pretty bad I guess..

 

As you know, it's based on the Type-99 Light tank, which weighs around 30-35t depending on modules, I'm mostly focusing on the turret but also looking at improving the hull, my goal was literally what Sturgeon just posted, weight capped at 40t maxed out and 2 being able to fit on a Y-20, possibly with some partial assembly required after they're loaded and unloaded.

 

Now, my ideas are pretty fucking retarded admittingly and may not see the light of day but, fuck it, if Olifant gets his fancy pants 75mm CTA gun, I get to do what I please!

 

Basic design ideals, starting with my choice of main armament.

 

The armament options have been significantly changed, the one I'm focusing on now is, not surprisingly, the 50mm Supershot, and, while the PRC has never used the Bushmaster III (I know they once purchased some Bushmaster I's for testing, which share alot of parts commonality, but that aside,) so, my alternative is basing it on the longer barreled, select rate of fire gun used on the ZBL-09 dual feed 35mm variant designed for dual purpose use and converting that, considering the only realy modifications you need to do to a 35x228mm gun platform is the change out the barrel, this is actually very simple. Olus the much higher and selectable rate of fire (up to around 1,000-1,200 rpm at top rpm setting) of the L/70 derived design would make it ideal for more situations such as potential anti aircraft use (in practice, you could chamber any 35x228mm round into the Supershot aswell, so things like AHEAD or perhaps a fictional proximity burst dart load for this scenario would be ideal for AA), The longer barrel would also not only better suit AA purposes due to better travel time and target prediction due the velocity increase, but also aid in increasing the armor penetration of APFSDS.

 

Speaking of ammunition, one odd thing about the Supershot's APFSDS-T is, despite showing some very impressive numbers (230-250mm of RHA penetration at 1km depending on which source you go with, the US Army is the 250mm figure), it has room for improvement, as, if you actually look at one, it appears to have a relatively short L/D ratio and quite a bit of space in the case to improve that, I'd go with lengthening the rod, maxing out the cartiridges to work at the maximum PSI that's considered safe and won't wear out gun barrels too fast, and changing the alloy used from Tungsten alloy to U-Ti-Mo alloy with a cap better suited for this design, coupled with the increased velocity from going from the Bushmaster's barrel to the L/70 length barrel, I'm looking for a target penetration of 300mm of RHA at 1km while improving after armor effects.This would defeat any current IFV and many other AFVs at combat ranges short of the front and sides of most MBTs and of course discounting modern ERA.

 

Last bit, another reason I'm focusing on the 50mm Supershot over a CTA is design is, while the gun itself is larger (but, considering the Type-99 light is already designed for either a 105mm Type 83-II "Super" L7 or possibly even a 125mm gun, space or weight shouldn't be an issue.) and the HE would be less effective as, unlike a CTA gun, a 50mm supershot and it's HE (among a few other round designs) are limited to the base caliber, I don't see this as a big problem, HE rounds from the 35x228mm (identical in bursting charge and frag liner/shell body size when used in the 50mm supershot) are already a mean son of a bitch that would be more then get the job done, one advantage is that the ammunition is also slimmer and lighter by comparison, which would allow more of it to be carried in a single ammunition belt and in storage. considering the variable rate of fire for different targets and the dual feed use, having more ammunition to actually use is actually important to the design I'm going for.

 

I could write more about this, but fuck, I already feel like I've lost and my ideas are shit, I'll keep trying to improve them though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2S37 so far;

 

 

 

Solidworks says the hull weighs about 14 tons right now, which is a bit concerning, since it doesn't have any of the other bits in it yet.

 

14 tonnes was what mine weighed before I did a lot of trimming. What's your armor look like? Mine is steel and was 40mm all around, initially.

If you're using aluminum armor, then it should be way lighter and your tank is probably too big. What's your weight goal?

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...