Voting is open
So domestic production is a no go, how feasible would it be to buy surplus tanks from a sympathetic nation?
Not much of a chance until Russia gets sufficiently cowed.

We'd be better off maintaining a fleet of technicals and APCs to complement our rapidly deteriorating Abrams tanks.
 
Not much of a chance until Russia gets sufficiently cowed.

We'd be better off maintaining a fleet of technicals and APCs to complement our rapidly deteriorating Abrams tanks.
Nah. We can most likely get surplus stuff from Europe. After all, we've got diplomatic recognition (plus embassies to various Russia aligned nations) from Russia thanks to the deal. Russia can't really object to a transaction without looking like its trying to back track.

Honestly, what I want the most is to see if Europe or Australia managed to store away from old US equipment like M1s and Bradleys. We need to recharge the OWE charges we've used up with the 1st Division and build up a supply just in case we need to go break Shawnee or some other state over our knees. Hopefully Europe or Australia has a boneyard they can strip to ship shit to us.

I'm hoping that we'll be able to get Leopard 2s if we are lucky. Which should be good enough against the Cold War era stuff that Victoria will be armed with once they are done with their civil war.
 
...Wow. I knew it took a lot to build a tank but... wow. If we don't have anything to build a tank with already (and according to Poptart, we don't), we're probably not going to be able to build a tank, much less a decent one, until the 2090s, maybe even the 22nd century.
Pretty much.
It's going to be easier to build MRAPs, wheeled APCs and wheeled IFVs than full-up tanks, because those often share a lot of the same parts as heavy duty vehicles and we'll need tens of thousands of trucks anyway, for both military and civilian use.

But even there I would prefer to get a license of a proven, working, reliable design and have someone hold our hand as we figure it out.
So domestic production is a no go, how feasible would it be to buy surplus tanks from a sympathetic nation?
Fairly straightforward, actually.
If California doesn't have the excess capacity to sell, I suspect somewhere like Poland or France or China does.

Not much of a chance until Russia gets sufficiently cowed.
We'd be better off maintaining a fleet of technicals and APCs to complement our rapidly deteriorating Abrams tanks.
Black market arms dealers have always been willing to sell at an appropriate markup.
Back when the Soviets were in Afghanistan, when the IRA were fighting the British in Northern Ireland, in Ukraine today, they've always been in play.
I don't doubt that if we have the money, we'll find someone willing to sell.

OTOH, we probably don't have to wait very long anyway.

Victoria is currently occupying a French island off the coast of Canada, after invading and expelling its French citizens back when France was having domestic issues and didnt have the effort to spare. This is in addition to the whole Quebecois cultural genocide thing. Add to this the fact that Rumford deliberately fucked over a bunch of Chinese govt sponsored corporations when building the Fundy Bay megaproject.

Then there is the fact that if/when news of conditions of the black people in Victoria gets outside into the more prosperous parts of Africa, the reaction is not likely to be especially amused.

Im not especially worried about where arms will come from.
Victoria made a LONG list of enemies. And more or less neutral countries who won't cross Imperial Russia will happily piss in Victoria's teacup; see what happened when we sent out diplomatic envoys and the majority of people accepted our credentials. Even India.

Turns out that doing things like executing professors on TV while wearing cosplay set to music leaves an impression.

I will note that there are probably enough Abrams tank hulls in the area that can be refurbished enough to fill out the Big Red One's ToE.
Engines and transmission may be trashed and electricals fucked up, but the hull intact. Get spare parts, and make it a proper mechanized division again with 90-120 tanks representing a tank brigade supported by two infantry brigades.

But beyond that, we'll have to wait to import.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, what I want the most is to see if Europe or Australia managed to store away from old US equipment like M1s and Bradleys. We need to recharge the OWE charges we've used up with the 1st Division and build up a supply just in case we need to go break Shawnee or some other state over our knees. Hopefully Europe or Australia has a boneyard they can strip to ship shit to us.
On that topic, we know that California has the most intact remnants of the former US military industrial complex. If we can't salvage enough from the remnants present in our region, does anyone think that a successful Cali post-insurrection would be able to help the commonwealth resupply their stocks of OWE? While they would need to deal with the Imperial Japanese territories in Cascadia, the drawdown of Japanese troops there in favour of the East Asian theatres closer to China would suggest that any conflict would be primarily one fought in the air and sea, so dealing with the primary Russian proxy on the continent via energizing a different might be an attractive prospect.
 
Last edited:
On that topic, we know that California has the most intact remnants of the former US military industrial complex. If we can't salvage enough from the remnants present in our region, does anyone think that a successful Cali post-insurrection would be able to help the commonwealth resupply their stocks of OWE? While they would need to deal with the Imperial Japanese territories in Cascadia, the drawdown of Japanese troops there in favour of the East Asian theatres closer to China would suggest that any conflict would be primarily one fought in the air and sea, so dealing with the primary Russian proxy on the continent via energizing a different might be an attractive prospect.
Potentially. But California will have to secure their north first before doing anything else though.

A potential path would be California smuggling schematics and design data on whatever they are willing to give us and the CFC going to Europe to get the expertise and machinery needed to start production in the Commonwealth.
 
Potentially. But California will have to secure their north first before doing anything else though.

A potential path would be California smuggling schematics and design data on whatever they are willing to give us and the CFC going to Europe to get the expertise and machinery needed to start production in the Commonwealth.
Sure, but like I said said war would more likely be fought primarily at sea, given Japan has resorted to drones to maintain their tenuous grip over Cascadia with rising tensions with China. Remember, along with the occupation forces needed in their Asian colonies they share a land border with China via occupied South Korea, an occupation subject to a vicious insurgency that would probably have a lot of commonalities with the CGP-Direct Action Committee terrorism campaign but much closer to home, coupled with the possibility of remnant military forces of the South Korean government akin the the Cascadian Blue Army hiding out in the mountains or near the border and receiving Chinese aid.
 
Honestly, what I want the most is to see if Europe or Australia managed to store away from old US equipment like M1s and Bradleys. We need to recharge the OWE charges we've used up with the 1st Division and build up a supply just in case we need to go break Shawnee or some other state over our knees. Hopefully Europe or Australia has a boneyard they can strip to ship shit to us.
Nope.
Australia operates the Abrams, but it has never operated the Bradley, and it's been forty years anyway. Besides Saudi Arabia and (I think)Lebanon, noone else operates the Bradley outside the US. They may have a couple hundred in storage, but their frontline equipment is going to be more modern, because it's cheaper and easier to replace land vehicles.

If anyone has old US equipment, it's California. And even California will have changed somewhat in forty years.
Besides, with access to the outside international markets, OWE is going to lose it's importance.
When you can buy spare parts off the international market....
I'm hoping that we'll be able to get Leopard 2s if we are lucky. Which should be good enough against the Cold War era stuff that Victoria will be armed with once they are done with their civil war.
I'm frankly hoping for Leopard 3s.
The Leopard 2 entered service in 1979; by now in 2076 CE it's coming up on it's hundred year anniversary in three years time. There's been a cold war in Europe for the last thirty years or so, and those things have always spurred military spending.

The tank that's supposed to replace the tank that replaced the Leopard 2, the Leopard 4s, should be in either advanced testing or service by now. At best, it should represent an opportunity to load up on lastgen Leopard 3s for free cheap. At worst, someone has a couple thousand Leopard 2s(ask the Swedes and Finns) or K2 Black Panthers(probably Poland) in storage.

Potentially. But California will have to secure their north first before doing anything else though.
A potential path would be California smuggling schematics and design data on whatever they are willing to give us and the CFC going to Europe to get the expertise and machinery needed to start production in the Commonwealth.
Actually, if a First World nation had the money to spare, and the inclination to fuck with everyone in the Russosphere?
The path it would take would be to pay California to build and ship weapons or industrial equipment to the Midwest.

California's currency being weak means that you get more bang for your buck by buying from them and paying in euros or rinminbi or Australian dollars, and you simultaneously support their economy, strengthen the Commonwealth, and buy diplomatic favor with both nations.
While fucking over both Japan and Russia with the same move.
 
Last edited:
Commonwealth foundational myth even makes it clear that tank weight is not a dealbreaker in disgoverned America's shitty infrastructure. The Abrams, at 66.8 metric tons for the current model, is still the heaviest MBT I am aware of in service. But Hellfire Burns spent the last two decades running around this country with a battalion-strength unit of armor, composed of Abrams and Strykers, and assaulted across the river into the Vic lines around Leamington.
Nitpick: He didn't so much assault across the river as he drove over a bridge, both ends of which had been comfortably secured by the Commonwealth. The actual assault was at Essex, miles inland.

So domestic production is a no go, how feasible would it be to buy surplus tanks from a sympathetic nation?
Historically, the list of nations that have been able to find a way to do this is:

"Yes."

The feasibility of doing this is, realistically, "yes."
 
...Wow. I knew it took a lot to build a tank but... wow. If we don't have anything to build a tank with already (and according to Poptart, we don't), we're probably not going to be able to build a tank, much less a decent one, until the 2090s, maybe even the 22nd century.

What he said.

Bear in mind that he's describing the process in a bloated graft filled defence industry in a time of basically peace. As the US and friends defence industry exists mostly to funnel money into pockets, spread as many jobs into as many congressional districts as possible, and to scream when someone tries to audit it. It isn't terribly efficient or effective because it doesn't need to be.

The *actual* realities of design and deployment for us are entirely different. If we have to go domestic we can go "fuck it, we'll do it live." And have stuff that mostly works in a much shorter time span.

Though I do agree with the point about needing to buy foreign.
 
Last edited:
Bear in mind that he's describing the process in a bloated graft filled defence industry in a time of basically peace. As the US and friends defence industry exists mostly to funnel money into pockets, spread as many jobs into as many congressional districts as possible, and to scream when someone tries to audit it. It isn't terribly efficient or effective because it doesn't need to be.

The *actual* realities of design and deployment for us are entirely different. If we have to go domestic we can go "fuck it, we'll do it live." And have stuff that mostly works in a much shorter time span.

Though I do agree with the point about needing to buy foreign.
Bear in mind you're still working with a lot of engineering, design, and error-finding. I mean, they built the Sherman in a few years, but the original Shermans had weak armor and severe vulnerabilities on top of being a basic WW2 medium tank. A modern day MBT would require much longer in terms of design, planning, and testing, including much of the lessons learned and technology developed. It'll take longer to design a tank that'll face whatever Blackwell throws at us - and he'll most likely ditch the T-34 and get something nasty, like a T-64 or even a T-80 (T-90s were turbine-powered, IIRC, so that makes them problematic for a low-logistics army like Victoria).
 
Bear in mind that he's describing the process in a bloated graft filled defence industry in a time of basically peace. As the US and friends defence industry exists mostly to funnel money into pockets, spread as many jobs into as many congressional districts as possible, and to scream when someone tries to audit it. It isn't terribly efficient or effective because it doesn't need to be.
Most of those tanks were designed during the Cold War, and were ordered by generals who were seriously concerned that they might have to use the things at some point in the next decade or two.

I can believe there was some pork involved, but on the other hand the defense contractors in question had HUGE advantages to speed up the project. Things like "access to large pools of trained engineers" and "having people who had serious experience building, designing, and maintaining previous generations of tanks."

The *actual* realities of design and deployment for us are entirely different. If we have to go domestic we can go "fuck it, we'll do it live." And have stuff that mostly works in a much shorter time span.
I mean yeah, but our standard of "mostly works" might be something like, oh...

The Bolton-Paul Defiant fighter. Or the ill-conceived TOG II tank.

Weapon systems that 'work' in the sense that they can move under their own power, carry armament, and could in theory engage in battle... but that do not 'work' in the sense of being competitive or cost-effective in the face of competent opposition.
 
Bear in mind that he's describing the process in a bloated graft filled defence industry in a time of basically peace. As the US and friends defence industry exists mostly to funnel money into pockets, spread as many jobs into as many congressional districts as possible, and to scream when someone tries to audit it. It isn't terribly efficient or effective because it doesn't need to be.
Counterpoint:
The Cold War was not really a time of peace. The largest arms race known to man was underway; the United States alone at one point was building 5 frigates a year, in addition to cruisers, submarines and carriers while running other weapons programs.

And the Germans were averaging a build rate of 300-400 tanks in a year once the Leopard 2 design was done.

Furthermore, my sample size included Israel, which fought the Six Day War in 1967, the Yom Kippur War in 1973 during the 1970-1979 Merkava development program, and invaded Lebanon in 1982. Then theres South Korea, which has not actually been at peace since the end of the Korean War, and has a fuckton of artillery pointed at its capital city.

None of those defence industries were acting in a time of peace or in a low threat environment.
Weapons development took that long to roll out anyway. Just turns out that when developing complex weapon systems, it takes a lot longer to check your work.
The *actual* realities of design and deployment for us are entirely different. If we have to go domestic we can go "fuck it, we'll do it live." And have stuff that mostly works in a much shorter time span.
If the GM chooses to play the quest not simulation card, or advancements in industrial development option, cool.

But that assertion is not actually true. Our design and deployment realities are not better; our skill base is smaller, we have less resources, and we're under more time pressure. The realities of original weapon development have all those mandatory test and design phases, all that prototype test time, to avoid producing a lemon or doing expensive redesign work down the line.

Or discovering some sort of weird interaction in combat, like temperature differences fucking over explosive stability in a bad winter, or mold growing on your missile seekers in Vietnam. A situation where you lose more units to reliability or accident problems than to the enemy, where units are combat ineffective due to design issues, is not a good thing, and could well lose you the war.

For particularly notable snafus in the Western defense industry:
  • The magnetic fuzes in US Mark 14 torpedoes in WW2 which would not detonate on impacting enemy ships
  • The performance issues with the original Sidewinder and Sparrow missiles in the Vietnam War, which came as an unpleasant surprise to pilots only armed with missiles. Between 1965 and 1968, USAF Phantoms launched 175 Sidewinders and killed only 28 MiGs, a success rate of 16%.
  • The Lockheed Martin F-104 Starfighter, which in Luftwaffe service killed 116 West German pilots and 292 out of 916 aircraft between 1961 and 1989. In peacetime.
  • The original engine options for the Abrams, both the diesel and the gas turbine, both had significant reliability problems.
  • The Patriot missiles in Gulf War 1 had a terrible success rate against 1950s era Scud missiles because of a radar flaw; the US Army claimed 40% success, but the Israelis called it useless.
  • The F-35 program had pilots losing consciousness randomly a couple years back due to a lack of oxygen.

That's why, when we eventually have the domestic industry to consider some of this, license-building an established design, which has had it's kinks worked out, is going to be both safer and more effective than trying to do your own development from scratch when you're a Third World country. You're piggybacking off work that other people have done, including avoiding problems you don't even realize might be problems until they happen to you.
 
Last edited:
Good news :) we should have a decade after the civil war since the Vicks like the ideological dumbasses they are will probably decide to waste AP on setting up domestic production :rofl:
from discord
PoptartProdigy14.10.2020
And one thing you're pretty sure of is that Victoria will want their primary MBT to be something they can domestically manufacture. Self-reliance is worn so deep into their idealized culture that even Alexander's Inquisitor loyalists hold it in esteem. Assuming Alexander's continued and eager support, they can get whatever, but they're unlikely to take something they couldn't manage themselves. Thus, you would expect their first impulse to be some model of T-72. It's reasonable that they'd purchase something up to T-90s or even Armatas, but their primary tank by numbers is likely to be something they could lunge their way to production capability for within a decade.
 
Last edited:
There's been a cold war in Europe for the last thirty years or so, and those things have always spurred military spending.
also from discord
PoptartProdigy13.10.2020
Y'all can expect that the world has had time for a single advancement in tank technology, in and around the absolute nightmare of the Collapse.

PoptartProdigy13.10.2020
The Army is optimistic that foreign purchases (and massive reindustrialization) would let you manufacture stuff up to roughly 1980s vintage, although they aren't strictly planning for it. As for what you can do now, it, uh...not great.
 
Good news :) we should have a decade after the civil war since the Vicks like the ideological dumbasses they are will probably decide to waste AP on setting up domestic production :rofl:

PoptartProdigy14.10.2020
And one thing you're pretty sure of is that Victoria will want their primary MBT to be something they can domestically manufacture. Self-reliance is worn so deep into their idealized culture that even Alexander's Inquisitor loyalists hold it in esteem. Assuming Alexander's continued and eager support, they can get whatever, but they're unlikely to take something they couldn't manage themselves. Thus, you would expect their first impulse to be some model of T-72. It's reasonable that they'd purchase something up to T-90s or even Armatas, but their primary tank by numbers is likely to be something they could lunge their way to production capability for within a decade.
Two points worth making here:
1)Remember that they have more infrastructure at the beginning, a better foreign exchange inflow and a sugar daddy.
Yes, its going to be inefficient from the PoV of a brutally efficient self-replicating mechanism of war to throw all that AP at domestic production, especially given the general quality of their education system. But they can afford a certain degree of inefficiency.

Not too much, mind; that civil war is going to HURT them, and they need a surplus to keep all the black and brown people down on the plantations. But Quebec was rich before the Collapse, and most of the factors that made it rich remain available for Victorian exploitation.
And frankly, we'll need to squeeze the most we can out of every suboptimal decision they make.

2) The T-90 is essentially a spruced up T-72B with a more powerful engine, better electronics, and a more easily produced turret(welded not cast).
In fact, it was initially called the T-72BU, and was renamed for marketing reasons.
 
1)Remember that they have more infrastructure at the beginning, a better foreign exchange inflow and a sugar daddy.
speaking of foreign exchange inflow a reminder from discord of just how much Victoria is Alex's bitch
PoptartProdigy14.10.2020
It's less that Russia likes them and more that the Pine Tree Dollar being a hollow shell wholly dependant on the rouble to give it some cold mockery of life gives Alex that extra bit of leverage over Victoria.

PoptartProdigy14.10.2020
So most likely what you will get in exchange for the privilege of ruining Victoria's economy will be roubles.
[22:26]
Which are an internationally-recognized currency in good standing.
 
So what if instead of building a new tank, we find an established and effective surplus design and while we import it and spare parts we also import people and machinery help to set up a self sufficient domestic manufacturing sector?
 
Good news :) we should have a decade after the civil war since the Vicks like the ideological dumbasses they are will probably decide to waste AP on setting up domestic production :rofl:
from discord
PoptartProdigy14.10.2020
And one thing you're pretty sure of is that Victoria will want their primary MBT to be something they can domestically manufacture. Self-reliance is worn so deep into their idealized culture that even Alexander's Inquisitor loyalists hold it in esteem. Assuming Alexander's continued and eager support, they can get whatever, but they're unlikely to take something they couldn't manage themselves. Thus, you would expect their first impulse to be some model of T-72. It's reasonable that they'd purchase something up to T-90s or even Armatas, but their primary tank by numbers is likely to be something they could lunge their way to production capability for within a decade.
Note: Poptart didn't say they will insist on making it themselves.

Poptart said they will insist on something they could eventually make themselves, after a "lunge" (a focused effort taken at high speed) of a decade.

So what if instead of building a new tank, we find an established and effective surplus design and while we import it and spare parts we also import people and machinery help to set up a self sufficient domestic manufacturing sector?
That's called "buy some, buy a license to make more." Although self-sufficient domestic manufacturing may be counterproductive as a goal. For example, the Commonwealth almost certainly won't be operating its own semiconductor fabricator for making whatever passes for modern computer chips in 2080! Richer, more populous countries will have most of that. But without our own ability to make our own microchips, we can hardly be self-sufficient in producing military hardware, now can we?
 
That's called "buy some, buy a license to make more." Although self-sufficient domestic manufacturing may be counterproductive as a goal. For example, the Commonwealth almost certainly won't be operating its own semiconductor fabricator for making whatever passes for modern computer chips in 2080! Richer, more populous countries will have most of that. But without our own ability to make our own microchips, we can hardly be self-sufficient in producing military hardware, now can we?
This. We're literally at the point where autocannon ammunition is programmable.
Modern smartphones and encrypted military radios, desktop computers and modern software, pharmaceutical biologics and modern power generation equipment, 3D printers and modern radars....all of them are beyond our capability to produce.

If we insist on self-sufficiency, we'll get lapped multiple times by people who are willing to take advantage of international trading markets and the expertise of foreign sellers.
 
What I'd like to know is what our national plan for earning the cash we'll spending internationally is. We've effectively committed at this point to buying a modern-ish navy and a modern-ish armor force from overseas, but running our anti-Victorian war machine purely off of foreign aid is incredibly dubious - and then there's all the non-military stuff we want to buy like infrastructure expansion (Russian money covers our existing stuff only), assorted civilian electronics, or improvements to our minimalistic pharm industry.

There's a pretty steep limit on what we can pay for off of the proceeds of transhipment fees on stuff moving through the Seaway and our relatively anemic consumer economy, so taking the time to spitball ideas of how to expand how much of our shopping list we can actually afford to buy is much more useful than patting each other on the back for concluding we'd be better off buying [insert item here] than making it ourselves.
 
found this on discord man we really live or die on opening up the Mis:cry:
PoptartProdigy13.10.2020
Outright purchasing a foreign-made tank force is an utter non-starter from a fiscal perspective, and also a legitimately shit idea until you have a line of supply that Victoria doesn't own.
 
Last edited:
Well, we've always known that the St. Lawrence Seaway access was only good for a short 'surge' of imports before the Vicks either cut our supplies off, or at a minimum start insisting on the right to do customs inspections of passing freighters and start blocking any that carry arms. Which would be a problem for importing large volumes of weaponry.

Low-volume stuff such as missiles we could plausibly get air-freighted in from New York or Miami or some enclave on the Gulf Coast that's answerable to the interests of a Latin American country or something... but doing that for tanks gets a bit iffy, since few transport aircraft can carry a tank and the expense of sustaining the force and its spare parts becomes a problem.

But yeah, short term this just amplifies the ways in which it's better for us to develop an armored car or light infantry fighting vehicle infrastructure that runs off heavy truck engines (we need a factory that makes trucks, badly, Stalin was not wrong about how critical giant truck factories are to economic development). We then rely on guided missiles (light and easy to import) to make this force reasonably effective against enemy armor until such time as we can afford to meet them head-to-head.
 
Voting is open
Back
Top