Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 338
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

3ds Max isn't very nice for telling you how much something will weigh and all that jazz, so I'm probably just going submit eye candy with backstory tacked on.  That was pretty much my original goal an

FINAL VERSION CARACAL MMEV A MEDIUM TANK FOR THE MODERN AGE THE HONDENAAIER INDUSTRIES, LTD. CARACAL MEDIUM MULTIPURPOSE EXPEDITIONARY VEHICLE Hondenaaier Ind., Ltd. is proud to present its new

Thanks for the welcome.     The name "Stormpanser" means something close to "Assault armor" when translated from Norwegian into English.   And:   Germanic languages: German: Panzer Swedish: P

I just did a armor weight estimate on the hull, it came out at around 5 ton, which is means I will probably make the C-130J requirement.

 

And some redesign of the composite arrays:

oatPDj6.png

I say this as someone who habitually designs tanks for dwarves, but damn that thing is short.

 

What does the crew compartment look like in there?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I say this as someone who habitually designs tanks for dwarves, but damn that thing is short.

 

What does the crew compartment look like in there?

Here is a image of when I was figuring out the layout:

k3rTwFs.png

 

Note that the crew capsule has been raised afterwards since the engine needed more height to fit. 

 

And yes, I made this vehicle as small as possible, if I switched the engine and turret I could probably make it even lower, but I see no need to. 

 

Ground clearance is 480mm by the way.

 

Total height 1,814m

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a image of when I was figuring out the layout:

k3rTwFs.png

 

Note that the crew capsule has been raised afterwards since the engine needed more height to fit. 

 

And yes, I made this vehicle as small as possible, if I switched the engine and turret I could probably make it even lower, but I see no need to. 

 

Ground clearance is 480mm by the way.

 

Total height 1,814m

This doesn't give the height of the crew compartment though.

 

For reference, the compartment height in a modern hatchback is about 2.5m long, 1.3m wide and 1.2m high for 4-5 people. So a minimalist crew compartment for one should be something like 1.2x0.65x1.1 metres. If your crew is prone and doesn't mind the wheel resting on their knees, then you can maybe get it down to 1.4x0.6x1.0 metres. Any lower than 1 metre in height and you're down to firing up the Peter Dinklage cloning program.

 

Edit: again, I'm known for specifying crew compartments more suitable for clown cars than AFVs, so don't take this as blanket criticism. Just check that your dudes can all, you know, fit in the thing without having to lose appendages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't give the height of the crew compartment though.

 

For reference, the compartment height in a modern hatchback is about 2.5m long, 1.3m wide and 1.2m high for 4-5 people. So a minimalist crew compartment for one should be something like 1.2x0.65x1.1 metres If your crew is prone and doesn't mind the wheel resting on their knees, then you can maybe get it down to 1.4x0.6x1.0 metres. Any lower than 1 metre in height and you're down to firing up the Peter Dinklage cloning program.

 

Edit: again, I'm known for specifying crew compartments more suitable for clown cars than AFVs, so don't take this as blanket criticism. Just check that your dudes can all, you know, fit in the thing without having to lose appendages.

I know dude, lol, relax, they do fit. I use 3D models to check the dimensions. It is defiantly cramped, but they do fit. 

 

If you really really want I could give you the dimensions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know dude, lol, relax, they do fit. I use 3D models to check the dimensions. It is defiantly cramped, but they do fit. 

 

If you really really want I could give you the dimensions. 

Nah, I'm happy if you're happy.

 

Have fun with the rest of the modelling!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, here is my non-eligible submission:

 

FINAL VERSION

 

AFV-M 4 "Switchblade"

 

JF2qgLj.jpg

 

Statistics

 

Switchblade 1:

  • Length - 4.9m (hull); 5.6m (gun forward)
  • Width - 3m (compact config); 3.4m (suspension extended)
  • Height - 2.4m (stowed)
  • Weight - 15mt (bare); 18.5mt (fully loaded + addon armour)
  • Ground clearance - 0.57m (suspension extended)
  • Speed - 110km/h (on road), 20km/h (off road)
  • Armour: 100mm RHA + 250mm NERA on cab front, 50mm RHA + 200mm NERA on cab sides, 50mm RHA on cab top and bottom; 15mm RHA otherwise
  • Weapons: 75mm L40 Autoloader (45 rounds), 7.62mm MG coax
  • Ammunition (75mm L40) - APBC, HE (including programmable air burst), HEDP, HEAT, various other (training, smoke, canister, illumination etc)
  • Main gun elevation/depression - +45/-10 degrees
  • Main gun rate of fire: 40 RPM
  • Other: 2 x smoke dischargers in turret, 4 X hard kill units (mongoose) 

Switchblade 2:

  • Length - 6.0m (hull); 6.4m (gun forward)
  • Width - 3m (compact config); 3.4m (suspension extended)
  • Height - 2.4m (stowed)
  • Weight - 16mt (bare); 19mt (fully loaded + addon armour)
  • Ground clearance - 0.57m (suspension extended)
  • Speed - 110km/h (on road), 20km/h (off road)
  • Armour: 50mm RHA cab top front, 50mm RHA + 200mm NERA on cab sides, 50mm RHA on cab top and bottom; 15mm RHA otherwise
  • Weapons: 75mm L40 Autoloader (40 rounds), 7.62mm MG coax
  • Ammunition (75mm L40) - APBC, HE (including programmable air burst), HEDP, HEAT, various other (training, smoke, canister, illumination etc)
  • Main gun elevation/depression - +45/-10 degrees
  • Main gun rate of fire: 40 RPM
  • Other: 2 x smoke dischargers in turret, 4 X hard kill units (mongoose), 1.4m x 1,4m x 1m modular bay, drone launch rail, provision for ERA over crew compartment

 

Description

 

The Switchblade project was undertaken by our internal design unit as a response to the general project tender issued by exco. Here, our intent was to satisfy the stringent weight and dimensional requirements needed for air-deployability, while still providing enough firepower and protection to deal with any battlefield threats short of heavy AFVs.

 

The initial study made use of cutting-edge automation and visualisation approaches and resulted in a small, wheeled vehicle operated by two crew members inside a heavily-armoured capsule. Here a combination of conventional steel armour, add-on arrays and an integrated active protection suite was chosen in order to protect the crew. Specifically, the thickness of steel was chosen to provide full protection against heavy autocannons frontally, with side/top protection being capable of protecting against lighter autocannon firing AP or HEDP. Protection against ATGMs was provided by the add-on NERA arrays and the APS suite; which included both passive laser detection, active radar detection and hard-kill units. Mine and IED protection was provided by the double-layered hull floor, armoured seats, seat suspension system and water-filling of the tires.

 

The proposed armament was a 30-40mm autocannon (preferably in the CTA configuration), but this was later changed to a 75mm gun capable of using conventional 75x350mmR ammunition at the insistence of exco; who also authorised immediate initial low-rate production of new AP and training rounds. The penny dropped when we discovered that Terry had recently acquired a refurbished M24 Chaffee, with the upshot being that a number of live-fire tests for the new rounds were conducted by exco themselves during their monthly retreat. 

 

esBSxOz.jpg

 

Having made the initial changes to the design, we found ourselves making peace with the odd choice of armament. Although deeply unsuitable for development of an APFSDS variant (a lengthened case designed to allow for the same overall dimensions was eventually proposed to partially rectify this), the venerable 75mm had a number of distinct advantages for our project. Firstly, the existing APC and HEAT ammunition developed for the gun, although over 70 years old, was still more than enough to deal with any currently existing AFV not based on an MBT chassis. Here the APC proved especially interesting, as it was found to be almost unaffected by modern active protection systems, ERA and NERA in testing. The existing HE was also more than adequate for the purpose of infantry support, with the mount being very suitable for indirect fire and high-angle fire into buildings. The compact nature of the round also allowed for the use of a simple carousel-type autoloader, which fed the gun through a swinging feed tube assembly in the turret bustle. Finally, there was no issue of IP or licencing of the gun or ammunition technology, as any patents had long since expired. The gun, when added to a conventional coaxial machinegun, was thus felt to be more than adequate for the tasks the vehicle would face.

 

With the basic armament selected, we pressed on with more detailed changes. The gun tube was fitted with a thermal sleeve, laser alignment system, sights and 2-axis stabilization gear. A bore extractor was unnecessary, as the entire turret was unmanned. Instead, all of the systems (main gun sight, coaxial sight/wide angle sight and stowable commander's sight) were linked to the crew capsule and displayed on high-resolution displays. For the commander's sight and driver's sight, a single design was used incorporating two stabilized cameras linked to a 3-D display. This was felt to improve the spatial perception of the crew when interacting with using the system. For the driver, three viewing blocks were provided as a backup in the event that his sight was damaged or obscured.

 

QK9LjWI.jpg

 

Along with the innovative vision system, our group also grappled with the issue of automotive components for such a compact vehicle. The engine - a Scania V8 diesel unit producing up to 590kW - was housed in a modular bay and used to power a hybrid drivetrain. However, cost concerns and further design directives from exco (Dion was involved in the development of the Spinnekop mine protected vehicle in the early 1980s) lead to a hydrolic hybrid drivetrain being selected. The new system operated in series, with the reservoir, pump, accumulator and distributor being housed in the engine compartment. The wheels were again directly driven, with the motors being fed from armoured piping (including self-sealing valves in the event of rupture) that ran along steel housings located on the hull sides. The housings also served to house the electrical system, and were constructed from armour plate. The resulting drive system was compact but maintenance-intensive. This issue also plagued the suspension system, which was designed to be retracted and lowered in order to allow the vehicle to squeeze into a C-130. The process of retracting the suspension was time-consuming, and involved shortening each strut and linkage connecting the wheel to the hull. With 8 wheels to service, the process could take hours even for an experienced crew.

 

VGQeUdX.jpg

 

With preliminary design and prototyping done, the first switchblade prototype was sent for testing and evaluation. The results... were not good. Exco, which was again taking an active role in the process, was particularly unhappy with the size of the crew capsule , its resistance to mines and the overworked nature of the crew. During the development process they had also become interested in marketing a family of vehicles based on the same chassis. As such, we were instructed to change the weapon system to fit within a modular bay format.

 

After a frantic redesign process, our group came up with a compromise version of the Switchblade with a four-man crew and W-hull mine protection for the capsule. This increased the capsule size considerably and lengthened the chassis (resulting in a 10X10 drive cofiguration), but a rearrangement of the principle components allowed the overall height to remain the same at the expense of not being able to rotate the turret fully. The new placement of the capsule in the rear of the vehicle also allowed us to dispense with the thick frontal armour array, which kept the overall weight increase to a minimum. Finally, the new arrangement allowed us to solve one of the most pressing issues identified during testing: that the crew had significant difficulty exiting the vehicle in an emergency. Our initial solution had been to make the entire front hull swing forwards (aided by a powder-driven ram), but this was obviously a clunky solution.

 

A troubling aspect of the vehicle that manifestly was not improved by the redesign was the issue of auxillary sights for the driver if his main sight was not functional. Our solution was to place a number of vision ports around the crew capsule, but this did nothing for the view forwards - which was blocked by the turret. To alleviate the issue, we designed a folding periscope, which was mounted in place of the driver's top hatch. Another new issue concerned the ammunition stowage of the main gun, which was reduced somewhat in order to fit the entire mechanism within the modular weapons bay.

 

 

g311RBf.jpg

 

 

The second switchblade prototype, once finalised, was fully assembled and tested at our land developments range. Here it was deemed satisfactory for production and marketing, although a few lingering problems were discovered which we have yet to adequately solve. The most pressing of these concerns the automotive components, which are still maintenance-intensive. Suspension travel is another concern, although the ground clearance was deemed satisfactory for use. The weapons system, on the other hand, performed as expected; with crew workload being eased by the inclusion of a dedicated gunner and C3 crewman.

 

 

During qualification testing, the Switchblade proved capable of rapidly engaging targets while on the move. Provision for airburst fuzing (either programmable or radar-fuzed) allowed hits to be made on attack helicopter and CAS aircraft targets. The commander's sight, which includes provision for position marking and turret override, proved to be a useful system for spotting and handing off targets to the gunner. Protection was deemed to be satisfactory, with the crew capsule being completely isolated from ammunition stowage and other volatiles. In testing, the armour package proved to be capable of protecting the crew against ATGMs and heavy autocannon from the front, with the sides and rear being protected against lighter anti-tank weapons and standard rounds from lighter autocannon.

 

Final modifications before production commences are the inclusion and integration of communications and electronics equipment (including a hull telephone and on-board UAV operated by the C3 crewman), the improvement of automotive and drivetrain components and the development of hull modules for the weapons bay. Module variants being presently developed include a sensor mast and RWS (including a small-calibre autocannon) for scouting and light fire support; an ATGM turret for anti-armour operations; a mortar turret for short-range fire support; a MRL system for long-range fire support; a drone bay for observation and light attack missions; and an engineering suite (including hydrolic crane or digger options) for battlefield support.

 

 

rynTTBQ.jpg

Approximate component weights (Switchblade 2):

  • Hull: 9000kg
  • Addon armour: 2000kg
  • Turret, stowage, autoloading gear, crew equipment and accessories: 3000kg
  • Drivetrain (including wheels, suspension and fuel fraction): 5000kg

 

 

 

qPBBcKi.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, why does your submission only show up in the first of those set of images?

I still need to actually write the text. Hence the thousand-and-one filler tags.

 

It will get bulked out with some stats and a suitably sad story soon.

 

 

Wtf were you smoking?

Regarding the design, or the layout of the description?

Link to post
Share on other sites

eSTKgkf.png

 

Starting on the suspension some, changed the internal layout of the guns so it would all fit.  Messing with a lower turret mounting height, but that decreased depression by 1° (-11.5° now).  The gun gets some rangefinder or camera on it now too.

 

 

Edit is for newer layout.  6 bigger wheels instead of 7 smaller ones, internal layout of the guns tweaked so the MG fits properly.  Image of said layout in spoiler

 

Ehgrnxe.png

Edited by ApplesauceBandit
Link to post
Share on other sites

General question to other people making 3D models:

 

Is making a complex curved surface like this wheel a massive pain in the ass in the programs you use too?  Stuff like this and the fat patton cupolas are good examples.

 

M113-tracks-closeup-2.jpg

I generally make the base circle (ie: the widest point), add the major details (spokes and hubs) on the base, extrude out the major portions and then work in the details. For a wheel like that, though, I'd cut it up into slices, make one slice and then copy/paste things together. That wheel looks like it would take 6 slices to make, with the rim and hub being simple extrusions.

 

Sketchup is pretty useful in that you can group objects, slide them together and then ungroup them to produce surfaces which merge into each other. So I'd probably make the rim/hub slice first, group it, make a spoke, stick it in, ungroup and perhaps smooth the result. Then I'd add any detail elements (the bolts, maybe) that I hadn't already put in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I generally make the base circle (ie: the widest point), add the major details (spokes and hubs) on the base, extrude out the major portions and then work in the details. For a wheel like that, though, I'd cut it up into slices, make one slice and then copy/paste things together. That wheel looks like it would take 6 slices to make, with the rim and hub being simple extrusions.

 

Sketchup is pretty useful in that you can group objects, slide them together and then ungroup them to produce surfaces which merge into each other. So I'd probably make the rim/hub slice first, group it, make a spoke, stick it in, ungroup and perhaps smooth the result. Then I'd add any detail elements (the bolts, maybe) that I hadn't already put in.

 

I should probably do it in 6 segments like you said.  I generally go about making drive wheels like that.

 

I suppose what my issue here is that it's a pain in the ass in 3ds max to get those rounded edges on the spokes to both look good and have a topography that doesn't give me cancer.  I'm fine for now with how it came out, and I only got a little cancer, but those complex curve in all 3 dimensions at once it what gets me.  Image below is what I shat out and how it's made.

b2FuYRx.png

 

What I always think of when I think of this sort of evil is the american MG tumor things.  There was one like this I tried to make, except the part where the MG mantlet goes on is part of the same casting.  Getting that extrusion there, the bumps for vision blocks, and the hatch all done without turning the mesh into a clusterfuck still eludes me.  I probably want some fancy plugin for it, since the boolean tools in max are really annoying to use on complex shapes.

 

a_2_99.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

General question to other people making 3D models:

 

Is making a complex curved surface like this wheel a massive pain in the ass in the programs you use too?  Stuff like this and the fat patton cupolas are good examples.

 

 

 

 

No.  As long as the geometry can be described simply, it can be made simply:

tutorialdoohicky.jpg

 

 

This is the part that the Solidworks tutorial has you make as part of babby's first solid model.

 

 

Also, there are plenty of Solidworks gurus on this forum if you get stuck.  Sturgeon uses the program semi-regularly, both for work and for fun, and there's a guy on this forum who has designed a successful, mass-produced product in Solidworks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, the vast majority of what I do is cartridge design, which is literally just Sketch->Revolve.

The Baberams was seriously the first project I'd ever done in SolidWorks that was of anything like that complexity. Now, I've done some actual CNC engineering before, but I used BobCAD for that.

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 Toxn
      This is the competition entry thread.
       
      Please submit your complete entries here (all entries will be judged complete when judging begins in the first week of November) and keep the other competition thread for discussion and chatter.
       
      Once judging is complete I will make a post here to discuss the entries and announce a winner.
       
      Best of luck!
       
      Update: final submissions should be in hand by the 22nd of November 2020.
    • By Toxn
      You are an engineer at an Italian locomotive and tractor-making company in early 1943. The writing is on the wall for the Italian army in North Africa, with a lot of equipment having been lost and the enemy on the brink of kicking the axis out of Tunisia and then heading across the Mediterranean. In short, things are looking more than a little desperate. 
       
      However, all is not lost. Il Duce himself has stepped in and, with the assistance of the Germans, procured both some of their finest captured vehicles for use in the upcoming defense of the homeland. Since many of these vehicles have been... gently used, and the existing firms like Ansaldo are flooded with orders, your firm has been asked to work on them in order to bring them up to the standards demanded by modern warfare. 
       
      In addition to these vehicles, the Germans have also graciously agreed to sell weapons from their existing stock of captured equipment, as well as providing production licenses for some of their more modern equipment. You have also been given permission to work with local weapons manufacturers in order to modify existing artillery to suit your needs. Italian automotive and engine manufacturers are similarly available to help. Finally; your firm's experience in locomotives and tractors means that you can modify hulls and put together turrets and turret rings. You can also produce castings (although not very large ones) and weld armour plates.
       
      Your job, which you have no choice but to accept, is to choose a vehicle from among the captured stock being offered for sale, and propose a series of plausible fixes in order to give it a fighting chance against the American and British equipment currently in the field (specifically light tanks and light anti-tank weapons).
       
      It is not foreseen that any of these vehicles will be able to plausibly take on modern medium or heavy designs head-on. Instead, what is wanted are general, implementable improvements to the characteristics of the chosen vehicle. These improvements should be aimed at making these vehicles more useful in the initial battles which are foreseen taking place against airborne and landing forces, in general cooperation with infantry, and as scouts.
       
      The submission should include one or more drawings or blueprints (at least a side view of the vehicle, but preferably a 3-point view and isometric view), a description of the modified vehicle, a description of how the modifications would be accomplished and a description of how the modifications would improve the design overall. The text of the submission should short and descriptive rather than long and exhaustive, and should not exceed 1000 words in total. Images may be photoshopped using existing pictures.
       
      Judging will be done on the basis of plausibility and effectiveness, with innovative solutions being encouraged in order to get the most bang for buck out of the base vehicle. Beyond implementation, the fixes should prioritise combat effectiveness while also improving reliability, crew ergonomics, communication, mobility and protection as much as possible.
       
      The foreign vehicles available for modification are:
      Renault R35 (already in service) Hotchkiss H35/39 Somua S35 (already in use for training purposes) T-26 BT-5 T-28 (only available in very small numbers, so need to be extremely effective) Panzer II Ausf.C  
      The foreign weapons immediately available for purchase are:
      15mm ZB-60 25mm Puteaux and Hotchkiss 3.7cm KPÚV vz. 34/Pak 34 (t) 3.7cm ÚV vz. 38/KwK 38(t)
      3.7cm Pak 36 4.0 cm Pak 192 (e) 45mm M1937 (53-K) 4.7cm KPÚV vz. 38/Pak 38 (t) 47mm APX 7.5cm Pak 97/38 7.62 cm F.K.297(r) and  7.62 cm PaK 39(r) 8.8cm Raketenwerfer 43  
      Licenses are also available for the manufacture of foreign engines (Maybach HL62 TRM, Maybach HL120 TRM and Praga Typ TNHPS/II), periscopes, sights, radios, cupolas and automotive subassemblies. All foreign vehicle weapons, subassemblies and components are available for reverse engineering and manufacture.
       
      IMPORTANT NOTE: This competition hasn't been finalised, and is waiting on your input! Vote to participate by giving this topic a 'controversial' (grapefruit-induced tears being the only currency of value), and if we get enough participants we'll pull the trigger. Ask any questions you want below, and when/if the competition goes forwards I will make a new thread for entries.
       
      Edit: thanks to excellent feedback, the competition proposal has been somewhat edited. If you want an idea of what my mindset is here, read up on the battle of Gela (bearing in mind that the wikipedia entry is shite) and ask how much better the counter-attack could have gone if the Italian vehicles had been equipped with radios and had the ability to move faster than jogging speed.
       
      Edit 2: since I failed to mention this above - this is not a one-man, one-entry sort of competition (although I'm not keen on the ten-men, one entry approach either).
      If you have two good ideas then you can submit twice. The only rules are not to test my patience and to keep it within the bounds of good taste.
    • By Toxn
      So I got a request recently from {NAME REDACTED} as to whether we have a how-to guide or something for competitions. After a few moments of bitter, bitter laughter at the decade-plus of my life that I've spent cobbling together things that can maybe, sort-of, squint-your-eyes produce a facsimile of a realistic vehicle, I thought I'd share my process:
       
       
      Note: I was half-right - we definitely have supplementary info for aspiring pretend tank designers pinned to this very board.
       
      Finally, I'm inviting our forum grognards and past winners to share their process for folk that haven't been here since before the last ice age, so that all can benefit.
    • 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.

×
×
  • Create New...