Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 542
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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

Comrades! The time of your waiting is over! I introduce to you the Sierra Nevada VagonZavod AFV-50 Gun Tank   Frontal Dimensions Frontal Armor Turret Cheek Armor Array (n

Report from Lt. Col. [REDACTED] People's Auditory Forces Directorate of Political-Moral Reliability, Auditory and Political Officer for SNVZ and Military-Industry Liaison Officer for RFP "New Battle T

So I have been working on a schematic for my hydrostatic transmission.
tFiZkbs.jpg

 

In short, its a hydraulic open circuit. A swash plate pump delivers the power to the system.  A over pressure valve makes sure excess pressure and pressure spikes are vented into the reservoir. The power is split by a distributor valve, acting as a sort of differential lock in the case of a track slipping.  The flow is then regulated by a flow valve  that feeds into a direction changer valve. It feeds the hydraulic motor, also a swash plate motor. In parallel, it has a freewheel valve for when you simply want the vehicle to rotate freely. Both feed back into the reservoir.  A accumulator is also hooked into the high pressure side of the system, providing regenerative breaking and smoothing out the power delivered to and from the motors. 

 

This is just a first draft, I will most likely add more safety features and refine the system. Also it lacks the auxiliary equipment like the suspension.  I am also researching ways of making the pump more efficient past simply running constantly and the excess pressure being vented into the reservoir, wasted. Maybe also making the pump into a starter for the engine.  I also lack the oil cooler. 

 

I have been pondering on using two engines to power the system, one for each motor, or two pumps. The issue would be that power could not be shared between the motors and same with regenerative breaks. 

 

 

 

sI55s5F.jpg

 

I am also working on the hydropneumatic suspension. This is a schematic for the front and rear most road wheels.  Pressure is feed into a 3/4 valve which is used elevate the roadwheel, a over pressure valve is used to regulate the amount it elevates. Outside of that, the pressure is fed though a over pressure valve that regulates the height of the suspension.  Then a accumulator is coupled in parallel to provide the "springyness". Before the hydraulic cylinder is a flow valve, which regulates the amount of flow, that is used to modify the stiffness of the suspension. 

 

This system is feed by the open circuit shown above in the first picture. 

 

 

And yes, everything is written in Norwegian, because diversity, a core principle of the most supreme state. 
And yes, it was all hand written while cutting steel, because I lack proper schematic software. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks very nice, very competently done.

If you want more efficiency, put a limit switch on the reservoir that declutches the main pump and locks it, while at the same time throttling down the prime mover. Will require a reservoir large enough to provide propulsion effort while the prime mover throttles up and the pump reconnects, but that gives you good idle efficiency.

 

You seem to have forgotten the out line from the second motor block to the reservoir, but thats just overly pedantic details.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, N-L-M said:

Looks very nice, very competently done.

If you want more efficiency, put a limit switch on the reservoir that declutches the main pump and locks it, while at the same time throttling down the prime mover. Will require a reservoir large enough to provide propulsion effort while the prime mover throttles up and the pump reconnects, but that gives you good idle efficiency.

 

You seem to have forgotten the out line from the second motor block to the reservoir, but thats just overly pedantic details.

 

 

Taking your idea, I came up with something like this. 

2Wbn09D.jpg

 

A pressure sensor sits on the accumulator. When the accumulator compresses, it compresses a hydraulic fluid which controls the engine throttle, the more the accumulator is compressed, the less throttle the engine gets. Also, when at the dead bottom, it activates a valve which decouples the prime mover from the pump and locks it hydraulically, while also bypassing it with a check valve. 

 

I could add a hydraulic/pneumatic PID for more precise control. Also note that the control lines are simplified, and probably will be changed to better reflect their behavior later. 

 

And thanks, I almost flipped my table when I noticed the missing line. Luckily it is too heavy. 

 

 

EDIT:
Updated my schematic with a PID, am wondering if I should use a electric PID instead of a hydraulic. A worry would be lack of pressure could stop the system. 
vj2zf7Y.jpg

 

I think I might need a separate flow chart for the control engineering.  One schematic for the main hydraulics, and one for the control scheme. 

 

Edit:

Damn, the spring in the clutch cylinder is on the wrong side. Please ignore. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the engine model I'll be going with:
 

h3XbQg8.png

 

That is 3 V-55AM2s stretched out so that their cylinders each have a 1-cylinder sized gap between them, and then the center engine is mounted upside down, and the outer two are mounted right-side up and interleaved with them

It weighs 3500 kg and produces a net of 2,340 hp.

 

Current hull cross-section looks like this:

SUzR7xb.png

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So this week I did my usual 'run hard with the first idea that pops into your head' approach. This is what I came up with:

 

1FiV2JM.jpg

This is Brick junior. It fulfils the objective requirements for firepower and armour protection, and the threshold requirements for specific power (I don't know about the rest yet).

 

The Brick series of vehicles are all built around the idea of the essential crew (see below) being housed in the hull/turret ring under the hull line. The turret superstructure, in turn, is thinly armoured except for the mantlet, although the addition of lightweight armour panels to the turret periphery can readily increase the protection provided to the gun and its associated equipment. As a result, Brick junior weighs 49 tonnes fully loaded and can run on a stretched T-72 derived suspension (Basically one extra road wheel). The engine is an AVDS-series derived unit running to a rear transmission assembly (again, T-72 derived).

 

The gun is a 150mm L/45 piece designed primarily to sling HEAT-FS and HE-FS. It also has an emergency supercharge APFSDS round which can penetrate a base-model Norman from the front out to 2000m if needed. The range of HEAT-FS ammunition (steel-coned HEDP,  copper-coned and improved copper-coned tandem charge) means that no practical level of up-armouring will save the existing models of Cascadian tanks.

 

The gun is fed by an autoloader unit running from an ammunition compartment in the left side of the turret. The compartment holds up to 20 charges and 20 shells, and feeds them to a loading rail in the turret rear. The ammunition compartment can be topped up from a secondary 20+20 compartment left of the driver when the turret is locked forwards. Both compartments have blow-off panels on top. 

 

The M-model Brick would use a more simple autoloader unit, so it would have to level the gun between shots. The more sophisticated version would be able to follow the gun through most of it's elevation and depression range. The gun itself and elevate/depress 30/-10 degrees. The coax is a 12.7mm piece.

 

The most unusual feature of the Brick is the armoured pulpit mounted to the rear of the turret superstructure. This acts as a counterweight, and also houses the observer-gunner. Xis job is to observe and operate the rangefinder, freeing up some work from the commander and gunner. This crewmember is, however, not necessary to operate the tank and so only enjoys base levels of protection. A 12.7mm pintle-mounted gun may be provided for particularly trusted observer-gunners to operate.

 

Brick junior identifies as gender-fluid demisexual polyamorous, and xer preferred greeting  is 'please, oh god no'. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LostCosmonaut said:

@N-L-M What is the average / 95th percentile shoulder width of Californian soldiers?

 

In other news, I think I've finished my armor array. ~3.1 tons/m2 and ~650 mm thickness.

Is the base armour included?

 

Edit: hmmm... thats either very light (and a typo) or remarkably heavy.

 

My calculations have the base armour (4.5cm RHA) as 4.5x7.8x(100×100÷1000)= 351kg/m2. So at 3100kg/m2 your array is about equivalent to 40cm of RHA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so my turret spec

1. 155 mm main gun - anti armour (kill Norman)

2. 75 mm coax - general purpose (HE, Frag etc.)

3. 8mm coax - anti-personnel

3. 15 mm remote with 8 mm coax = light vehicles and anti-personnel

 

Auto loader for 155 operates over plus minus 10 degrees elevation, auto loader for 75 operates over 0 to 30 degrees elevation.

 

This combo covers all threats at an ideal level.  It packages nicely (in my head) so now to the modeling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly it was overloaded and underbuilt.

It was a very small and light engine, running very fast to achieve the rated power. That combined with Kharkovite QC leads to... interesting things.

Being a 5 cylinder engine and therefore unbalanced and suffering from excessive vibration didn't exactly help either.

 

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

Is the base armour included?

 

Edit: hmmm... thats either very light (and a typo) or remarkably heavy.

 

My calculations have the base armour (4.5cm RHA) as 4.5x7.8x(100×100÷1000)= 351kg/m2. So at 3100kg/m2 your array is about equivalent to 40cm of RHA.

 

 

The base armor is included, I'll check my spreadsheet again to make sure I didn't mess up anything but I'm fairly certain it's correct.

 

This whole exercise has provided a nice illustration of how annoying tandem charges are.

 

edit: heh, if I put my NERA on the flimsiest brackets allowed it goes under 2.9 tons/m2.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, N-L-M said:

Mostly it was overloaded and underbuilt.

It was a very small and light engine, running very fast to achieve the rated power. That combined with Kharkovite QC leads to... interesting things.

Being a 5 cylinder engine and therefore unbalanced and suffering from excessive vibration didn't exactly help either.

 

So simply down rating it would solve that problem? 

 

Also, how is a opposed piston unbalanced? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dowrating would solve a lot of the issues, yes.

Opposed pistons have one shaft with a 13-17 deg lead angle to allow good axial scavenging, so they aren't perfectly inherently balanced; at the same time, the individual crankshafts cannot be perfectly balanced in a "straight 5" config, so you have both shafts badly vibrating inside the engine.

Upping the 5TD to 6 cylinders would go a long way to solving some of these problems. And in fact, this is what the Kharkovites did. The 6TD is a more reliable beast (if still not reliable in absolute terms). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • N-L-M unfeatured this topic

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 Monochromelody
      70 years ago, January the 2nd, 1951. To the North of Seoul, in the mountains and hills near Go-yang-tong(高阳洞), British 1RUR dug in and fought against advancing PVA forces. 1RUR got a task force called Cooperforce to support, this is a tank unit from Royal Tank Regiment and Royal Artillery, equipped with Cromwell tanks. 
      When Matthrew Ridgeway assigned the order of withdraw in this afternoon, the US force covering British force's left flank quickly escaped from their sector, leaving the British were completed unawared and uncovered. 
      When the night falls, was cold and dark in the valley. 1RUR had to withdraw in the darkness. All of a sudden, a US spotter aircraft flew over the valley, drop some illumination flares upon the retreating convoy. 
      Fierce battle broke out when flares fall down, PVA firing from all directions, the cold valley became deadly kill zone. Some PVA soldiers put away their rifles, assaulting with hand grenades, satchel charges and Bangalore torpedoes. They even set up mortars on the hill, laying shells with direct fire. 
      200 British soldiers and artillerymen were killed or captured in one night. 1RUR's Battalion Commander Tony Blake was believed KIA. Cooperforce was completely knocked out, all 12 tanks were destroyed or captured by light infantry. Leader Ashley Cooper were also killed. 


    • 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 SH_MM
      Found a few higher resolution photographs from the recent North Korean military parade. We didn't have a topic for BEST KOREAN armored fighting vehicles, so here it is.
       
      New main battle tank, Abrams-Armata clone based on Ch'ŏnma turret design (welded, box-shaped turret) and Sŏn'gun hull design (i.e. centerline driver's position). The bolts of the armor on the hull front is finally visible given the increased resolution. It might not be ERA given the lack of lines inbetween. Maybe is a NERA module akin to the MEXAS hull add-on armor for the Leopard 2A5?
       
      Other details include an APS with four radar panels (the side-mounted radar panels look a lot different - and a lot more real - than the ones mounted at the turret corners) and twelve countermeasures in four banks (two banks à three launchers each at the turret front, two banks à three launchers on the left and right side of the turret). Thermal imagers for gunner and commander, meteorological mast, two laser warning receivers, 115 mm smoothbore gun without thermal sleeve but with muzze reference system, 30 mm grenade launcher on the turret, six smoke grenade dischargers (three at each turret rear corner)
       


       
      IMO the layout of the roof-mounted ERA is really odd. Either the armor array covering the left turret cheek is significantly thinner than the armor on the right turret cheek or the roof-mounted ERA overlaps with the armor.
       


      The first ERA/armor element of the skirt is connected by hinges and can probably swivel to allow better access to the track. There is a cut-out in the slat armor for the engine exhaust. Also note the actual turret ring - very small diameter compared to the outer dimensions of the turret.
       
      Stryker MGS copy with D-30 field gun clone and mid engine:

      Note there are four crew hatches. Driver (on the left front of the vehicle), commander (on the right front of the vehicle, seat is placed a bit further back), gunner (left side of the gun's overhead mount, next to the gunner's sight) and unknown crew member (right side of gun's overhead mount with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher mounted at the hatch). The vehicle also has a thermal imager and laser rangefinder (gunner's sight is identical to the new tank), but no independent optic for the commander. It also has the same meteorological mast and laser warner receivers as the new MBT.
       
      What is the purpose of the fourth crew member? He cannot realistically load the gun...
       
      The vehicle has a small trim vane for swimming, the side armor is made of very thin spaced steel that is bend on multiple spots, so it clearly is not ceramic armor as fitted to the actual Stryker.

       
      The tank destroyer variant of the same Stryker MGS copy fitted with a Bulsae-3 ATGM launcher.
       

      Note that there is again a third hatch with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher behind the commander's position. Laser warning receivers and trime vane are again stand-out features. The sighting complex for the Bulsae-3 ATGMs is different with a large circular optic (fitted with cover) probably being a thermal imager and two smaller lenses visible on the very right (as seen from the vehicle's point of view) probably containing a day sight and parts of the guidance system.
       

      Non line-of-sight ATGM carrier based on the 6x6 local variant of the BTR, again fitted with laser warning receivers and a trim vane. There are only two hatches and two windows, but there is a three men crew inside.
       
       
      There are a lot more photos here, but most of them are infantry of missile system (MLRS' and ICBMs).
    • 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.

×
×
  • Create New...