Remove ads

Strategic Arms Quest 3/2: Armor Edition

Reader mode
To those complaining about the 25 ton weight limit and generally my plan being too heavy for a good light tank: that's exactly the point. This won't be a light tank that does scouting and harassment while big fights are done by a mainline combat tank. This tank is the low of a high-low mix, with the high being the SkW-1. This will be our mainline combat tank, and more so in the future than right now. Our current setup is 1 SkW-1 with 4 W-5s forming a platoon, I would like to see us move towards a force structure of four of these new tanks per platoon and the heavies being a detachment that gets handed down to where its needed. This calls for a tank that can be shot at by enemy weapons and survive - not all of them, the enemies might have an 8.8cm truck or something like that, but it is possible for us to make a tank that has decent mobility while also resisting the more common tank-guns/anti-tank weapons. Thus, I'm going to stick to my 25 ton weight limit. I also consider all the other requirements I laid out to be achievable with that weight.

However, I'm going slightly alter my previous plan and put it under a new name:

[X]Plan Mainline Combat Tank
-[X]Dimensional limits: 25 tons max, at least 30km/h top road speed, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
-[X]Internal fuel must be enough for 150km on dirt road
-[X]An easy to maintain engine transmission and suspension is encouraged
-[X]Must use either the 5.5cm Field Gun or Skoda gun, in an armored turret, as well as at least one machine gun. The main gun should be supplied with at least 40 rounds, 10 of which should be accessible by the loader at all times
-[X]Loader must be separate from Gunner and both be in a turret basket
-[X]Must be protected against nearby detonation of large artillery shells from all directions, as well as against the 5.5cm gun in the frontal 60° arc for both turret and hull (two hits at 300m) and against the 2cm autocannons all-around at 200m
-[X]Equipped for, but not with, a radio
[X]Determine rough penetration characteristics of equivalent foreign guns, for calibrating armor designs.
[X]Continue engine research

Compared to the last vote:
-Added suspension to "pls make it easy to repair"
-Condensed down some items into less lines
-Reduced endurance requirement from 200km to 150km
-Added requirement for a turret basket

Now, the justifications for some of these decisions:
-For, but not with, radio, is mostly because radios are expensive. I would like a radio in every tank, but I currently see it as absolutely mandatory only in the platoon lead tanks right now. Which those currently aren't because our platoon is led by a heavy, but as I said I wish to move away from that
-The 40 round minimum count, @Rukia, is mostly there to prevent tanks from getting in that are drastically underequipped.
-I'm specifying the Skoda or the 5.5 because I see the Skoda gun also as a viable tank gun. It smashes current tanks just fine, is good for delivering shells, and it can be easily made even better by lengthening the currently very stubby barrel (which is shorter than the stubby gun of the early IV).
Dwergar said:
Early- to mid-thirties design; It's likely that the anti-tank capabilities of this tank are going to become marginal regardless of the cannon chosen, so I'd prefer if it could be used for infantry support role. Thus request for HE round.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Our 5.5cm gun is easily superior to the 5cm KwK 38 of the III, and the 9cm Skoda too is no slouch for armor penetration - and, as I mentioned, easily upgradable by going to a /40, hell even a /30 barrel.
 
Winged_One² said:
To those complaining about the 25 ton weight limit and generally my plan being too heavy for a good light tank: that's exactly the point. This won't be a light tank that does scouting and harassment while big fights are done by a mainline combat tank. This tank is the low of a high-low mix, with the high being the SkW-1. This will be our mainline combat tank, and more so in the future than right now. Our current setup is 1 SkW-1 with 4 W-5s forming a platoon, I would like to see us move towards a force structure of four of these new tanks per platoon and the heavies being a detachment that gets handed down to where its needed. This calls for a tank that can be shot at by enemy weapons and survive - not all of them, the enemies might have an 8.8cm truck or something like that, but it is possible for us to make a tank that has decent mobility while also resisting the more common tank-guns/anti-tank weapons. Thus, I'm going to stick to my 25 ton weight limit. I also consider all the other requirements I laid out to be achievable with that weight.

However, I'm going slightly alter my previous plan and put it under a new name:

[X]Plan Mainline Combat Tank
-[X]Dimensional limits: 25 tons max, at least 30km/h top road speed, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
-[X]Internal fuel must be enough for 150km on dirt road
-[X]An easy to maintain engine transmission and suspension is encouraged
-[X]Must use either the 5.5cm Field Gun or Skoda gun, in an armored turret, as well as at least one machine gun. The main gun should be supplied with at least 40 rounds, 10 of which should be accessible by the loader at all times
-[X]Loader must be separate from Gunner and both be in a turret basket
-[X]Must be protected against nearby detonation of large artillery shells from all directions, as well as against the 5.5cm gun in the frontal 60° arc for both turret and hull (two hits at 300m) and against the 2cm autocannons all-around at 200m
-[X]Equipped for, but not with, a radio
[X]Determine rough penetration characteristics of equivalent foreign guns, for calibrating armor designs.
[X]Continue engine research

Compared to the last vote:
-Added suspension to "pls make it easy to repair"
-Condensed down some items into less lines
-Reduced endurance requirement from 200km to 150km
-Added requirement for a turret basket

Now, the justifications for some of these decisions:
-For, but not with, radio, is mostly because radios are expensive. I would like a radio in every tank, but I currently see it as absolutely mandatory only in the platoon lead tanks right now. Which those currently aren't because our platoon is led by a heavy, but as I said I wish to move away from that
-The 40 round minimum count, @Rukia, is mostly there to prevent tanks from getting in that are drastically underequipped.
-I'm specifying the Skoda or the 5.5 because I see the Skoda gun also as a viable tank gun. It smashes current tanks just fine, is good for delivering shells, and it can be easily made even better by lengthening the currently very stubby barrel (which is shorter than the stubby gun of the early IV).

Our 5.5cm gun is easily superior to the 5cm KwK 38 of the III, and the 9cm Skoda too is no slouch for armor penetration - and, as I mentioned, easily upgradable by going to a /40, hell even a /30 barrel.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I would suggest you reread this paragraph.

7734 said:
Currently, the expectation was that the W-5 replacement project had to be capable of combating material targets, operating with the existing stocks of W-5 and SkW-1 tanks, and not be some hulking behemoth. Current doctrine suggested a high-low approach to tank design, with several smaller tanks working as a support structure and movement arm of a larger tank. The large tank, presumably an SkW-1, was to be equipped with a 'bunker-breaking weapon' and 'ancillary approach vector defense' weapons. Meanwhile, the lighter side-along companions were to be armored 'against reasonable small-arms and light anti tank weapons' and armed with 'a turreted main weapon to engage a demi-platoon or light material asset, preferably with shell firing ability.'
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

1- Don't be really heavy
2 - Only armoured up to very light anti tank
3 - Gun good against infantry and un/lightly armoured vehicles

They don't want a medium tank, they want a light tank.
And a reminder that the 90mm is going to be incredibly harsh on the chassis of the tank, even as short as it is. Lengthening the barrel would only increase the recoil.
 
Rukia said:
I would suggest you reread this paragraph.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I suggest you reread what I wrote - I am fully aware of our current doctrine. I also think it sucks and we should push for a move away from combined-tanks platoons. We can get a tank that's reasonably armored, has a reasonable speed and carries a good gun now, the old doctrine was born from the inability to get those together. The W-5, which that doctrine was written for, needed frequent help from bigger guns in the form of the SkW-1, and was not that well armored. With the new tank, be it the one I aim for or the one you are aiming for, mixed platoons will be a detriment, because the platoons will have the flaws of both, not covering each others weaknesses: The mixed platoon cannot be as readily committed to an assault on a fortified position because while the SkW (or its replacement) can take the fire, the light tank cannot. And in maneuver combat, the speed of the platoon will be drastically limited by the fact that heavy tanks are so damn slow. The current solution to "the Skoda is holding the other tanks back from doing what they need to do" is to let the light tanks go out and maraud on their own. Which is something I wish to avoid, I want those troops that are pursuing the enemy, or flanking, or wrecking shit behind enemy lines, to be platoons. With a command tank and with a radio to communicate with command, so that they can:
  • Call in artillery
  • Report findings
  • Call for assistance
The tank you desire is better suited for our current doctrine. But our current doctrine is no longer suited for the tanks we're dealing with. The longer we stick to it, the worse the problems will be when we get into the next war.
 
Winged_One² said:
I suggest you reread what I wrote - I am fully aware of our current doctrine. I also think it sucks and we should push for a move away from combined-tanks platoons. We can get a tank that's reasonably armored, has a reasonable speed and carries a good gun now, the old doctrine was born from the inability to get those together. The W-5, which that doctrine was written for, needed frequent help from bigger guns in the form of the SkW-1, and was not that well armored. With the new tank, be it the one I aim for or the one you are aiming for, mixed platoons will be a detriment, because the platoons will have the flaws of both, not covering each others weaknesses: The mixed platoon cannot be as readily committed to an assault on a fortified position because while the SkW (or its replacement) can take the fire, the light tank cannot. And in maneuver combat, the speed of the platoon will be drastically limited by the fact that heavy tanks are so damn slow. The current solution to "the Skoda is holding the other tanks back from doing what they need to do" is to let the light tanks go out and maraud on their own. Which is something I wish to avoid, I want those troops that are pursuing the enemy, or flanking, or wrecking shit behind enemy lines, to be platoons. With a command tank and with a radio to communicate with command, so that they can:
  • Call in artillery
  • Report findings
  • Call for assistance
The tank you desire is better suited for our current doctrine. But our current doctrine is no longer suited for the tanks we're dealing with. The longer we stick to it, the worse the problems will be when we get into the next war.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I agree with what you've said, but I'm pretty sure we'd be in deep shit if we delivered a medium tank when they ask for a light tank.
 
Rukia said:
I agree with what you've said, but I'm pretty sure we'd be in deep shit if we delivered a medium tank when they ask for a light tank.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
A light tank was never specified. The Irromic Empire doesn't operate on a light/medium/heavy split, it operates on a high/low split. The Centurion + Conqueror of the early cold war Royal Army for example is a high/low split, and along the line of what I'm aiming for (at least on the low side of the split, my goals for the high/heavy side are somewhat different).

Also, given the extreme inertia the Irromic forces have, I want to adopt a tank that (with upgrades) can last us at least until we can adopt an actual Centurion.
 
Winged_One² said:
Our 5.5cm gun is easily superior to the 5cm KwK 38 of the III, and the 9cm Skoda too is no slouch for armor penetration - and, as I mentioned, easily upgradable by going to a /40, hell even a /30 barrel.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Being better than Pzkpf. III is hardly a reason to go for 5.5 cm gun when most everyone in WWII for some (Probably good) reason went with 76mm, 85mm or bigger for their tanks.
Hell, Germans themselves used IIIs as basis for assault cannons, which traded a turret for the bigger gun - and they probably did so for a damn good reason.

The tank we would commission is unlikely to be as good as M4/T-34, but I would like at the very least for it to have a gun that wouldn't become useless in a decade.
 
Remove ads
Discord Link 3
  • Threadmarks


    • NOO LINKS

    Hey all new Discord link so that when I don't have time to make a conversational post y'all can follow along anyway.

    Winged_One² said:
    Also, given the extreme inertia the Irromic forces have, I want to adopt a tank that (with upgrades) can last us at least until we can adopt an actual Centurion.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Current plans for the SkW-1 only expect it to be in use until 865~ ish, so call it fifty years of service? That's perfectly normal for a tank, right?

    (Seriously though, y'all can't really overstate the institutional inertia that the Irromics have. The J.Gew 48 (the Gerbsjaeger rifle) was originally built in 778, and is slated to get replaced at current growth rates in 850-ish. It's 834 or thereabouts, and there's currently trials going on for a selbstladergewher going on. There's not even a doctrinal SMG yet; for most work of that nature they just build an oversize C96 with a longer barrel, detachable stick mag, and fixed stock. Heck, there's still a debate going strong over adding 15cm artillery to the standard artillery park, and not tying it on as a corps level asset.)
     
    Last edited:
  • Threadmarks
    • Dwergar said:
    The tank we would commission is unlikely to be as good as M4/T-34, but I would like at the very least for it to have a gun that wouldn't become useless in a decade.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    In the following decade, we'll see analogues to the 90mm Gun M3, the 8.8cm KwK 43, the D-10 and similar, with tanks that have a reasonable chance of defeating those. No matter what we do, within the two decades this tank will have to be up-armored, up-gunned and re-engined. Less if there's a war we get involved in.
     
    Would it be resonable to include a notes in our RFQ that any tank we select might see requests for upgrades to weapons, armor and or engines during the course of its service life?
     
    khang said:
    Would it be resonable to include a notes in our RFQ that any tank we select might see requests for upgrades to weapons, armor and or engines during the course of its service life?
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    That's pretty expected, honestly. The SkW-1 is up to the ausf. J variant, which is a complete swap of the radio suite, a new engine set, a new wiring harness, a new instrument panel, an electric turret traverse, and a nifty set of headlights and turn signals. It also deleted the engineer and a forty liter fuel tank in exchange for an additional ten shells and a crew rest station (read: hanging cot and water heater) for extended deployment.
     
    Winged_One² said:
    Also, given the extreme inertia the Irromic forces have, I want to adopt a tank that (with upgrades) can last us at least until we can adopt an actual Centurion.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    W...What? You want to take an interwar-era tank built at a time when a single turret with one main gun and a coaxial MG would be considered the height of avant-garde design all the way until the end of the Second World War?
     
    The problem with building medium tanks in the WW1-WW2 era is that you either armour them enough to face down heavy tanks and have them be prohibitively expensive, or you don't bother and have a tank that will be obsolete in a few years. It's always easier to stick a bigger gun onto something than to armour it better, this only changed with the discovery of composite/reactive armour.

    All of this is irrelevant anyway, as of right now they want a light tank, their doctrine specifically specifies lighter tanks accompanying the heavy tanks. And since 7734 has been commenting quite frequently about the establishment's inertia, I imagine that they'll probably tell us to fuck off if we try to break current doctrine.

    7734 said:
    That's pretty expected, honestly. The SkW-1 is up to the ausf. J variant, which is a complete swap of the radio suite, a new engine set, a new wiring harness, a new instrument panel, an electric turret traverse, and a nifty set of headlights and turn signals. It also deleted the engineer and a forty liter fuel tank in exchange for an additional ten shells and a crew rest station (read: hanging cot and water heater) for extended deployment.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    What is their plan when the enemy starts rolling out 75+mm anti tank weaponry?
    You can only up armour something so much.

    Also @7734, the discord link has expired already...
     
    Last edited:
    Rukia said:
    What is their plan when the enemy starts rolling out 75+mm anti tank weaponry?
    You can only up armour something so much.

    Also @7734, the discord link has expired already...
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Laugh loudly, since the only thing that's cracked the armor in testing is a HE round from a 12cm test gun. The 7,5cm piece didn't phase it after twenty rounds with sixteen riccochets and four shell failures. I'll check the discord link, too.
     
    7734 said:
    Laugh loudly, since the only thing that's cracked the armor in testing is a HE round from a 12cm test gun. The 7,5cm piece didn't phase it after twenty rounds with sixteen riccochets and four shell failures. I'll check the discord link, too.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    >HE round
    Well there's your problem.

    EDIT
     
    Last edited:
    There's still a few votes for the explicitly-a-bad-idea original Actually A Light Tank plan floating around though.
    Dwergar said:
    Being better than Pzkpf. III is hardly a reason to go for 5.5 cm gun when most everyone in WWII for some (Probably good) reason went with 76mm, 85mm or bigger for their tanks.
    Hell, Germans themselves used IIIs as basis for assault cannons, which traded a turret for the bigger gun - and they probably did so for a damn good reason.

    The tank we would commission is unlikely to be as good as M4/T-34, but I would like at the very least for it to have a gun that wouldn't become useless in a decade.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Part of the reason for big guns is that kicking up the velocity for more penetration works but the higher pressure does horrible things to barrel life and involves considerable engineering challenges, so AFAIK after a point it's easier to keep velocity the same but fling a bigger shell. Or to fire subcalibre shells, but then you need a reliable supply of tungsten because steel alone can't take those impacts.

    The main reason, though, is that tank-on-tank combat is fairly rare - 90% of the time a tank is going to be flinging HE around, and small-bore HE is almost useless.
     
    Last edited:
    I don't have clarity about what gun to push for. I know I don't want Thryssen's high pressure thing. The 5.5 feels like a sane, practical choice that benefits from good logistics, but doesn't have as much shell size for utility. Skoda's thing has all the shell size, but I am concerned about range and accuracy, and am having trouble finding a comparable weapon to compare it to that isn't vastly heavier and thus likely quite different. I don't know what to think of the Hannover gun. Could be promising, but the failure to penetrate feel iffy.
    Adhoc vote count started by brmj on Dec 8, 2018 at 2:55 AM, finished with 80 posts and 14 votes.
    • [X] Plan I'm trying to compromise
      -[X]Dimensional limits: 25 tons max, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
      -[X]Must use one of the cannons tested, in an armored turret.
      -[X]Must be protected against nearby explosions and shrapnel from all directions, and hits from light guns from the front if possible.
      --[X]More speed, offroading ability, and better fuel endurance is more important than more armor, though.
      -[X]Some anti-infantry armament such as a coaxial machine gun is encouraged but not required, but no crew should need be dedicated to machine gun operation.
      -[X]Adequate ventilation, good visibility, commander in the turret, turret space to put in a radio, reliability and easy maintenance, and crew ergonomics are all pluses if they don't compromise the design otherwise.
      -[X]Continue engine research.
      [X] Plan Actually A Light Tank
      -[X]Dimensional limits: 20 tons max though ideally as light as reasonable, at least 30km/h top road speed, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
      -[X]Internal fuel must be enough for 100-150km on dirt road.
      -[X]An easy to maintain engine and transmission is encouraged. If possible, place transmission in the back to make room for frontal armour sloping. Good enough suspension and track width for decent off-road mobility.
      -[X]Must use the 5.5cm Field Gun, in an armoured turret, with a turret basket for the gunner and loader. One one turret should be present with a single main gun.
      -[X]Must carry at least 60 rounds, 10 of which should be in reach of the loader at all times.
      -[X]Loader must be separate from Gunner. Ideally room should be made for a commander, but if he cannot fit in the turret then it's not a deal breaker.
      -[X]Must be protected against nearby detonation of large artillery shells from all directions, a sloped upper and lower glacis with enough armour to deflect a 55mm from 100+ metres (thickness should be at least 30mm but no more than 50mm) and thick enough side and read armour to protect against 20mm autocannons from all directions up to 100m.
      -[X]Turret front armour should be heavily sloped backwards, with the goal of providing enough protection to deflect 55mm shots off of the cheeks (No more than 40mm thickness). A flat plate may be used around the gun if it cannot be sloped, but must be thick enough to provide equivalent protection. Turret sides and back only need to be armoured up to resist 20mm from 100m.
      -[X]Equipped with space in the turret for a radio.
      -[X]At least one machine gun should be on the tank, preferably mounted in the turret, next to the main gun.
      -[X]Adequate ventilation and internal communication with good visibility and crew ergonomics. Escape hatches are recommended so long as they stay off of the front or sides of the tank.
      -[X]Determine rough penetration characteristics of equivalent foreign guns, for calibrating armour designs.
      -[X]Continue engine research.
      -[X]Muse on how much more money you could have for testing if tank parts were standardised and easy to replace. Though don't make any serious plans.
      -[X]Consider creating Army Penetration Standards. 10m to 1000m
      [X] Plan More Testing
      -[X] Advice Skoda, Hannover and Thryssen to develop HE round to be tested with the gun.
      -[X] Get in contact with relevant companies and hold a contest for radios in two categories, receivers and transmitter-receivers; Test for weight&volume, reliability, repairability (and tuning), range.
      -[X] Get in contact with field officers (also NCOs and/or veterans) of armour regiments and get their feedback on W-5.
      [X]Plan Actually A Light Tank 3.0
      -[X]Dimensional limits: 15 tons max, at least 30km/h top road speed, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
      -[X]Must use the 75mm Hannover Armoury with a dedicated loader and ideally a commander if there is space.
      -[X]Must be protected against 20mm autocannons from all directions.
      -[X]Equipped with a short range receiver radio, with space space in the turret for a larger two way.
      -[X]Continue engine research.
      [X]Determine rough penetration characteristics of equivalent foreign guns, for calibrating armor designs.
      [X]Continue engine research
      [X]Plan Actually A Light Tank 2.0
      -[X]Dimensional limits: 20 tons max, at least 30km/h top road speed, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
      -[X]Internal fuel must be enough for 100km on dirt road.
      -[X]Must use the 5.5cm Field Gun, in an armoured turret, with a dedicated loader. At least one machine gun should be on the tank, preferably mounted in the turret.
      -[X]Must be protected against nearby detonation of large artillery shells from all directions and armoured to protect against 20mm autocannons from all directions up to 100m.
      -[X]Equipped with space in the turret for a radio.
      -[X]Determine rough penetration characteristics of equivalent foreign guns, for calibrating armour designs.
      -[X]Continue engine research.
      -[X]Suspension that is simple and easily repairable.
      [X] Have Jumo continue research.
      [X] Have Anne-Marie float the idea of yearly, dedicated tech&military expo for various companies to present their developments in to Irmionic and possibly foreign buyers.
      [X]Plan Mainline Combat Tank
      -[X]Dimensional limits: 25 tons max, at least 30km/h top road speed, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
      -[X]Internal fuel must be enough for 150km on dirt road
      -[X]An easy to maintain engine transmission and suspension is encouraged
      -[X]Must use either the 5.5cm Field Gun or Skoda gun, in an armored turret, as well as at least one machine gun. The main gun should be supplied with at least 40 rounds, 10 of which should be accessible by the loader at all times
      -[X]Loader must be separate from Gunner and both be in a turret basket
      -[X]Must be protected against nearby detonation of large artillery shells from all directions, as well as against the 5.5cm gun in the frontal 60° arc for both turret and hull (two hits at 300m) and against the 2cm autocannons all-around at 200m
      -[X]Equipped for, but not with, a radio
    Click to expand...
     
    khang said:
    Whats the speed of the skw-1 any ways?
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    It breaks 25kph going downhill if you pray really hard.

    brmj said:
    I don't know what to think of the Hannover gun. Could be promising, but the failure to penetrate feel iffy.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Remember, shell design does advance indipendantly of you guys, and shells are an easy fix for when something has issues.

    Pyrelight said:
    Or to fire subcalibre shells, but then you need a reliable supply of tungsten because steel alone can't take those impacts.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    This is not an option. You don't have sabot yet, and probably won't get it in this quest.
     
    [X]Plan Actually A Light Tank 3.0
    -[X]Dimensional limits: 17 tons maximum, at least 30km/h top road speed, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
    -[X]Must mount a single turreted 75mm Hannover Armoury cannon, ideally with a coaxial machine gun, with a dedicated loader and ideally a dedicated commander.
    -[X]Must be protected against 37mm from the front and 20mm autocannons from all directions.
    -[X]Equipped with a short range receiver radio, with space space in the turret for a larger two way.
    -[X]Continue engine research.

    Not a Chaffee is not a Chaffee.
     
    Last edited:
    [X]Plan Actually A Light Tank 3.0

    Not sold on this, but not entirely not sold either. Handling 3.5 from the front would be nice. The gun and 3-man turret may be ambitious at that weight, which could push for either higher weight or moving down to the 5.5. A few wording quibbles as well maybe. At the core, though, this is something I can support.
    Adhoc vote count started by brmj on Dec 8, 2018 at 3:00 AM, finished with 81 posts and 15 votes.
    • [X] Plan I'm trying to compromise
      -[X]Dimensional limits: 25 tons max, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
      -[X]Must use one of the cannons tested, in an armored turret.
      -[X]Must be protected against nearby explosions and shrapnel from all directions, and hits from light guns from the front if possible.
      --[X]More speed, offroading ability, and better fuel endurance is more important than more armor, though.
      -[X]Some anti-infantry armament such as a coaxial machine gun is encouraged but not required, but no crew should need be dedicated to machine gun operation.
      -[X]Adequate ventilation, good visibility, commander in the turret, turret space to put in a radio, reliability and easy maintenance, and crew ergonomics are all pluses if they don't compromise the design otherwise.
      -[X]Continue engine research.
      [X] Plan Actually A Light Tank
      -[X]Dimensional limits: 20 tons max though ideally as light as reasonable, at least 30km/h top road speed, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
      -[X]Internal fuel must be enough for 100-150km on dirt road.
      -[X]An easy to maintain engine and transmission is encouraged. If possible, place transmission in the back to make room for frontal armour sloping. Good enough suspension and track width for decent off-road mobility.
      -[X]Must use the 5.5cm Field Gun, in an armoured turret, with a turret basket for the gunner and loader. One one turret should be present with a single main gun.
      -[X]Must carry at least 60 rounds, 10 of which should be in reach of the loader at all times.
      -[X]Loader must be separate from Gunner. Ideally room should be made for a commander, but if he cannot fit in the turret then it's not a deal breaker.
      -[X]Must be protected against nearby detonation of large artillery shells from all directions, a sloped upper and lower glacis with enough armour to deflect a 55mm from 100+ metres (thickness should be at least 30mm but no more than 50mm) and thick enough side and read armour to protect against 20mm autocannons from all directions up to 100m.
      -[X]Turret front armour should be heavily sloped backwards, with the goal of providing enough protection to deflect 55mm shots off of the cheeks (No more than 40mm thickness). A flat plate may be used around the gun if it cannot be sloped, but must be thick enough to provide equivalent protection. Turret sides and back only need to be armoured up to resist 20mm from 100m.
      -[X]Equipped with space in the turret for a radio.
      -[X]At least one machine gun should be on the tank, preferably mounted in the turret, next to the main gun.
      -[X]Adequate ventilation and internal communication with good visibility and crew ergonomics. Escape hatches are recommended so long as they stay off of the front or sides of the tank.
      -[X]Determine rough penetration characteristics of equivalent foreign guns, for calibrating armour designs.
      -[X]Continue engine research.
      -[X]Muse on how much more money you could have for testing if tank parts were standardised and easy to replace. Though don't make any serious plans.
      -[X]Consider creating Army Penetration Standards. 10m to 1000m
      [X]Plan Actually A Light Tank 3.0
      -[X]Dimensional limits: 15 tons max, at least 30km/h top road speed, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
      -[X]Must use the 75mm Hannover Armoury with a dedicated loader and ideally a commander if there is space.
      -[X]Must be protected against 20mm autocannons from all directions.
      -[X]Equipped with a short range receiver radio, with space space in the turret for a larger two way.
      -[X]Continue engine research.
      [X] Plan More Testing
      -[X] Advice Skoda, Hannover and Thryssen to develop HE round to be tested with the gun.
      -[X] Get in contact with relevant companies and hold a contest for radios in two categories, receivers and transmitter-receivers; Test for weight&volume, reliability, repairability (and tuning), range.
      -[X] Get in contact with field officers (also NCOs and/or veterans) of armour regiments and get their feedback on W-5.
      [X]Determine rough penetration characteristics of equivalent foreign guns, for calibrating armor designs.
      [X]Continue engine research
      [X]Plan Actually A Light Tank 2.0
      -[X]Dimensional limits: 20 tons max, at least 30km/h top road speed, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
      -[X]Internal fuel must be enough for 100km on dirt road.
      -[X]Must use the 5.5cm Field Gun, in an armoured turret, with a dedicated loader. At least one machine gun should be on the tank, preferably mounted in the turret.
      -[X]Must be protected against nearby detonation of large artillery shells from all directions and armoured to protect against 20mm autocannons from all directions up to 100m.
      -[X]Equipped with space in the turret for a radio.
      -[X]Determine rough penetration characteristics of equivalent foreign guns, for calibrating armour designs.
      -[X]Continue engine research.
      -[X]Suspension that is simple and easily repairable.
      [X] Have Jumo continue research.
      [X] Have Anne-Marie float the idea of yearly, dedicated tech&military expo for various companies to present their developments in to Irmionic and possibly foreign buyers.
      [X]Plan Mainline Combat Tank
      -[X]Dimensional limits: 25 tons max, at least 30km/h top road speed, no larger than can fit on a standard rail car.
      -[X]Internal fuel must be enough for 150km on dirt road
      -[X]An easy to maintain engine transmission and suspension is encouraged
      -[X]Must use either the 5.5cm Field Gun or Skoda gun, in an armored turret, as well as at least one machine gun. The main gun should be supplied with at least 40 rounds, 10 of which should be accessible by the loader at all times
      -[X]Loader must be separate from Gunner and both be in a turret basket
      -[X]Must be protected against nearby detonation of large artillery shells from all directions, as well as against the 5.5cm gun in the frontal 60° arc for both turret and hull (two hits at 300m) and against the 2cm autocannons all-around at 200m
      -[X]Equipped for, but not with, a radio
    Click to expand...
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top