Maybe tell the Seebatalion to piss off until they actually know what they're asking for?

I mean, they're throwing a not insignificant chunk of money at this. By doing it at their own proving ground, you're dodging a lot of costs- which is part of why you can afford to consider a brief halt in the testing procedure. Going on with testing or doing a downselect is certainly an option, but it's not a surefire path to victory. This contest had the most money at your disposal, but also the most political minefields.

Well, that's a thing.

Not sure how to beat resolve it, but it does suggest we'd be a lot better off in the future if we had some way to better clarify requirements before the RFQ stage. Does anyone have thoughts on that?

I mean, you're not required to put out an RFQ right after doing your Commission. Surveying them for ideas, looking into the market, doing reaserch- those are all options. I give you guys plenty of latitude in your voting, so you might want to use it.
 
I mean, you're not required to put out an RFQ right after doing your Commission. Surveying them for ideas, looking into the market, doing reaserch- those are all options. I give you guys plenty of latitude in your voting, so you might want to use it.
I litterally didn't know that was a thing we could do. I thought we had more fixed phases than that. Something to remember for next time.
 
[x] Stop Testing
-[x] New RFQ
--[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.
---[x] properly sized Escape hatches must be placed near every crew position to reduce losses in the event the tank floods. Failure to do so will result in immediate disqualification.

As it is, thirty tons is plenty of space to play with, and if stuck to will give us a decent vehicle that can also ease logistics a lot. As it is, wanderer makes tanks light enough for this, and everyone else can downsize. We shouldn't be looking at anything with a main gun over an 8cm mortar, and nothing needs to have a secondary armament that is more than a heavy machine gun.
 
[x] Stop Testing
-[x] New RFQ
--[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.
---[x] properly sized Escape hatches must be placed near every crew position to reduce losses in the event the tank floods. Failure to do so will result in immediate disqualification.

All the existing options are kind of a shit sandwich. This time we at least have the luxury of a mulligan. We should use it.
 
[x] Stop Testing
-[x] New RFQ
--[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.
---[x] properly sized Escape hatches must be placed near every crew position to reduce losses in the event the tank floods. Failure to do so will result in immediate disqualification.
 
So I'm getting the sense that the Seebatalion actually wants a slightly floaty cavalry tank. Does Wanderer have any amphibious models at all that we should be looking at?
 
[x] Stop Testing
-[x] New RFQ
--[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.

Honestly, they care less about amphibious capabilities than we have been acting like they do. I see no pressing need enforce arbitrary escape hatch requirements of this sort that absolutely. Eliminating otherwise good designs and weakening the armor will be the main result, at least if they expect these things to cross rivers with bridges or fording shallow points, not playing submarine in deep water.
 
[x] Stop Testing
-[x] New RFQ
--[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.
 
[x] Stop Testing
-[x] New RFQ
--[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.
 
As a side note, do any tank-nerds in this thread know of amphibious AFV designs from this time period IRL?
 
As a side note, do any tank-nerds in this thread know of amphibious AFV designs from this time period IRL?
Not that early. The Vickers-Carden-Loyd A4E11/12 wasn't produced until 1931. This is like 1922 at the latest. No reason you couldn't do it earlier if you were clever and/or willing to resort to floats and had an already light design though.
 
What about bilge pumps? How efficient could we hope for them to be given the current level of technology?
 
VOTES CLOSED

EDIT: TIE VOTE, VOTE OPEN!
Adhoc vote count started by 7734 on Jul 7, 2018 at 11:01 AM, finished with 21 posts and 6 votes.

  • [x] Stop Testing
    -[x] New RFQ
    --[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
    ---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.
    ---[x] properly sized Escape hatches must be placed near every crew position to reduce losses in the event the tank floods. Failure to do so will result in immediate disqualification.
    [x] Stop Testing
    -[x] New RFQ
    --[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
    ---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.

Adhoc vote count started by 7734 on Jul 8, 2018 at 11:08 AM, finished with 25 posts and 8 votes.

  • [x] Stop Testing
    -[x] New RFQ
    --[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
    ---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.
    ---[x] properly sized Escape hatches must be placed near every crew position to reduce losses in the event the tank floods. Failure to do so will result in immediate disqualification.
    [x] Stop Testing
    -[x] New RFQ
    --[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
    ---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.
 
Last edited:
You sure you don't want to open that up long enough to resolve the tie? The plans agree in principle, so it should be pretty trivial to resolve.
 
[x] Stop Testing
-[x] New RFQ
--[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.
---[x] properly sized Escape hatches must be placed near every crew position to reduce losses in the event the tank floods. Failure to do so will result in immediate disqualification.
 
Hatches are good.

[x] Stop Testing
-[x] New RFQ
--[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.
---[x] properly sized Escape hatches mustbe placed near every crew position to reduce losses in the event the tank floods. Failure to do so will result in immediate disqualification.
 
[x] Stop Testing
-[x] New RFQ
--[x] Wait for Mair & Co to get you Seebatalion spec sheets?
---[x] Set maximum weight requirement to 30 tons wet.
---[x] properly sized Escape hatches must be placed near every crew position to reduce losses in the event the tank floods. Failure to do so will result in immediate disqualification.
 
Contest 4: New RFQ
After hacking out a rough draft of your future RFQ, you decided on a few things. First off, no more than thirty tons, wet. That would give you some wiggle room in case you needed to change things up, and possibly modify anything large. While the topic of ambphibious crossing was under debate, you needed a way to prevent the accidental murder of 3/4 of a test crew. As such, the answer was obviously escape hatches. Lots of escape hatches.

Until then, you didn't have much to do except to talk to the bevy of company suppliers bumming around the island. First up was a talk with Skoda, to see if they had anything that would actually meet the new weight limits. The answer was no, of course, but they did have data on the new SkW-2. Since a 10,5cm turreted cannon obviously wasn't getting the job done (how they came to that conclusion you have no idea) a decision was made to widen the chassis and up-gun. The new SkW-2 mounted a 12,7cm naval rifle in a large casement, four self-defense autocannons, and was provisioned to mount a one and a half meter rangefinder on an optional targeting mast behind the gun housing if one wanted to use it for indirect fire. Total weight was about eighty tons wet, and seventy three dry, with a crew of ten. It could be made to float easier than previous models, though, and was guaranteed proof against any anti-tank weapons or counterbattery artillery short of a 15,5cm naval rifle's direct hit.

Your response was to back out of the room slowly, turn around, and go for the flask. Next up was Commorate, and their odd duck. The Ukw-1 you'd gotten was a far cry from a modified W-8, and you were dying to figure out how it happened.

The answer, it turned out, was Wanderer overpromising their production and ending up head over heels in trouble. After Thryssenwerke Koln, where Wanderer cast most of their hull forms, had to shut down a furnace due to a bad batch of steel, Wanderer couldn't keep production up. While they were scrambling for plate to resume using rolled and welded hull pieces, the production downtick made them have to renegotiate several contracts, incuding Commorate's. As such, they'd been snap-kicked into designing their own hull, and at that point it had been cheaper to license the Ghermain suspension than try and get their hands on good enough leaf springs. Once that happened, the up-gunning was pretty simple, as well as getting a redesigned transmission for the Wanderer-Jumo power plant. The switch to the YtS-7's flotation system was the result of internal testing finding out that air bladders were insufficient, however.

The Ghermain Brother's representative was equally informative. The starting point had actually been a commercially available steel-hulled boat, onto which tracks were attached and a suitable motor was found. The end design was a compromise on several levels, using armored bulkheads inside the boat hull to provide protection, and the motor was equipped with two separate transmissions- one to drive the propeller, one to serve the tracks. The decision to cut the gun down versus transition to a smaller caliber was an odd one, but the designers felt it would be better to follow the letter of the competition to the maximum. Leaving, you got back to your office to get the revised list of Seebatalion Recommendations.

-At least, but not limited to, one 5,5cm gun or rapid-fire cannon
-At least one weapon in traversing turret mount
-At least protection capable of withstanding sustained rifle and machine gun fire
-At least as fast as leg infantry on tactical scale
-AND/OR
--Ability to cross a river ten meters wide without bridging
--Ability to cross water two meters deep
--(Additional components may be used)
-Tactical endurance for at least 8 hours of operation
-Able to use existing portable bridges and landing craft
-No more than 40 tons full load.

Well, that was better than last time. Looks like you had a new RFQ to write.

(PLAN VOTE: It's a new RFQ. Don't get greedy.)
 
Last edited:
[X] Plan Sanity
-[X] Turreted-mounted main armament consisting of at minimum one 5.5cm gun or rapid fire cannon.
--[X] Between one and three machine guns as secondary weapons encouraged but not required.
-[X] Armor sufficient to withstand sustained rifle and machine gun fire
-[X] Sufficient tactical speed and endurance to keep up with infantry for 8 hours.
-[X] Able to be transported without disassembly using existing portable bridges, landing craft and rail cars.
-[X] Able to cross an unbridged river two meters deep and ten wide under its own power.

How's this look?
 
Last edited:
Change the transportation bullet so that it should be transportable without disassembly, then it looks pretty good to me.
 
Back
Top