NationStates Jolt Archive

The LRRA has developed the MBT-9 battle tank for use on the broad, flat terrain of European Russia. LRR has always been weak when it comes to tanks, but the MBT-9 has been designed to give divisions a more capable heavy armored vehicle.

http://www.morozov.com.ua/images/oplotl.jpg

The MBT-9 is significantly smaller than, say, the GT-6 main battle tank, and therefore lighter. The most notable difference between the MBT-9 and other MBTs is the position of the engine- in the front of the hull, rather than the back. This engine placement helps protect the crew in the event of a frontal hit.

The engine itself is a standard LRR diesel/electric hybrid, designed to supply high fuel efficency, low thermal and acoustic signature, high reliability, and very low greenhouse gas emissions.

The crew is protected from up to 40mm rounds and modern RPGs with a composite armored hull, and is fully NBC protected. The gunner, commander, and driver are all equipped with thermal imaging sights, and a roomy turret allows either a human loader or autoloader to operate efficently.

The tank itself uses large amounts of composites. Composite bandtracks improve reliability and performance in rough terrain, and are also much lighter than traditional metal-link tracks. The use of composites overall reduces the weight and radar signature of the vehicle, and it is therefore much faster than its potential competitors.

The MBT-9 is armed with a 125mm main gun, which can fire the TM-11B barrel-launched ATGM, which is a version of the Spike-ER missile, with a range of over 8 kilometers. The Spike series ATGM is the LRRMFs standard medium anti-tank weapon. The 125mm main gun offers a very high muzzle velocity and a long range. Some vehicles might even be fitted with ETC weapons, but the standard gas-propelled 125mm cannon is effective out to 2.5 kilometers. A 14.5mm KPVT is slaved to the main gun, and there is a 12.7mm PKT for air defense.

For defense, the MBT-9 is equipped with an EC-13 (liscence-built Soviet Bloc ARENA system), which is capable of defeating wire-guided and beam-riding ATGMs, and can also disrupt radar-guided missiles. There are also 16 decoy launchers on either side of the turret. They can fire IR decoys, chaff rockets, and regular smoke to distances of 200 meters.

Also, a two-man infantry team equipped with a shoulder launched SAM can be carried inside the tank for defense against helicopters and ground-attack aircraft.

The MBT-9 features a very low profile, high speed, heavy firepower, and respectable armor protection in a package much cheaper than other tanks of the day. Admittedly, this much lower production cost is gained at the expense of advanced features, but the tank itself is still a very capable combat vehicle, at home in a variety of terrains.

http://www.morozov.com.ua/images/oplot6l.jpg

An MBT-9 on manouvers in LRR.

The LRRA is also going to upgrade its fleet of T-62 series tanks.

http://www.morozov.com.ua/images/mod-01l.jpg

While most armies today regard the T-55/62 family of tanks as simply cannon fodder, they are very cheap and easy to mass-produce. The T-62T variant is still a very effective medium tank, which can hold its own, when properly deployed, against much modern and larger tanks.

The T variant upgrade package includes thicker armor, and a hybrid diesel/electric drive which offers a very long range, low thermal and acoustic signature, increased torque, and low greenhouse gas emissions. The T-62T's adjustable suspension and light weight allows it to operate effectively in terrain that would be disadvantageous to modern MBTs.

The T-62T is armed with a 105mm smoothbore main gun, capable of firing TM-8 ATGMs, with a maximum range of 7 kilometers. A 30mm grenade launcher is slaved to the main gun, and a 12.7mm PKT is mounted on the turret for AA protection.

The driver, gunner, and commander are all equipped with thermal sights, and there are ten decoy launchers, five on either side of the turret, which can fire IR decoys, chaff rockets, and plain smoke.

bump (expect it to be finished by morning).

We are curious in this and would like to purchase ten of these tanks.

We would also like to purchase 10 of these tanks.

General Gary Leiderson, Axarian Minister of Defense

The MBT-9 isn't even in service in significant numbers with the LRRA yet!

Upgradin' '50s MBTs, that's real cheap!

http://www.sinodefence.com/army/tank/type59_1.jpg
Above: Type 59-125 (T-55) variant with 125mm smoothbore gun with ERA and NBC protection. Still a piece of turd on the battlefield.

Less greenhouse emissions? What's next, a Toyota Prius hybrid with a cannon?

(OOC: Could you please be as kind as to resize those images of yours?)

(Hm. The Drapoel T-62-alike, the Type D-18, has some similar features, mainly as regards off-road mobility as dictated by the fact that it will almost certainly only ever be deployed in Korea. It was decided not to bother trying to change the long barrel 115mm gun entirely, as it just seemed too heavily integrated for the CPRD's limited technological base to waste time altering, what with the ejection system and all. There's a great demand to have the thing replaced with something that can better operate under NBC conditions, given that our enemies have demonstrated a preparedness to use nuclear weapons, but developing an entirely new design from scratch and replacing several thousand forty tonne tanks isn't something the CPRD can currently do. The solution is instead (I say, 'solution' but mean the bone that Da'Khiem has thrown to its officer corps) to begin planning a new tactical doctrine for dealing with all these damn LRR long-range ATGMs in offensive and defensive operations. We'll get back to you, later. Hm.)

Less greenhouse emissions? What's next, a Toyota Prius hybrid with a cannon?

The civvies must go hybrid as gas guzzling is best left only to the military.

(Hm. The Drapoel T-62-alike, the Type D-18, has some similar features, mainly as regards off-road mobility as dictated by the fact that it will almost certainly only ever be deployed in Korea. It was decided not to bother trying to change the long barrel 115mm gun entirely, as it just seemed too heavily integrated for the CPRD's limited technological base to waste time altering, what with the ejection system and all. There's a great demand to have the thing replaced with something that can better operate under NBC conditions, given that our enemies have demonstrated a preparedness to use nuclear weapons, but developing an entirely new design from scratch and replacing several thousand forty tonne tanks isn't something the CPRD can currently do. The solution is instead (I say, 'solution' but mean the bone that Da'Khiem has thrown to its officer corps) to begin planning a new tactical doctrine for dealing with all these damn LRR long-range ATGMs in offensive and defensive operations. We'll get back to you, later. Hm.)


Yeah, I've never been very serious about tanks. The LRRA only has a few...even only a few T-62 variants, compared to the number of APCs and light tanks, and APC ATGM carriers, etc.

But I think the MBT-9 is an o.k. vehicle. I mean, it is pretty cheap.

OOC: Upgraded but still outdated, looks like not many are interested, LRR.

[Might as well go with one of the Polish PT-91 variants and upgrade from there, cause right now you're variant isn't much better than that. No offense, but I don't like tanks that use vanilla Soviet tanks as a template, it's been done IRL.]

The act of upgrading 50-year-old systems with new technologies is undoubtedly a trait of the 3rd world economies.

(Now now, it would be more proper to call Dra-pol's a second world economy, since we're clearly communist-bloc. In LRR's case, it could just be a trait of a relatively peace-minded state, or one that doesn't see one given aspect of warfare as highly relevant to its situation. Plenty of wealthy European nations have hung on to old equipment for decades, and often made good use of it (or not needed to).)

Yeowch! 56K'ers beware. GIANT IMAGE ALERT.

The act of upgrading 50-year-old systems with new technologies is undoubtedly a trait of the 3rd world economies.

Eh...I think not.

You overlook the fact that the LRRMFs operate some of the best anti-tank and support forces in the world. Mabye LRR doesn't need bagillions of tanks to roll over whoever has a conflicting political ideology.

And what few tanks the LRRA does operate, they are generally pretty good.

And the T-SEP is probably one of the world's best APCs. In the LRRA, it can be found mounting a CV-90-style 40mm turret+Hellfire II ATGMs as an IFV, an MG and a Spike-ER missile as a plain APC, an R-112SF2 MRL in the fire support role, or a battery of SAMs.

In fact, I would think that LRR has significantly better capabilities, especially in the way of land vehicles, naval vessels in the missile boat-light frigate range, aircraft, and weaponry than Russia.

[Dra-pol is right, it's a trait of second world countries. However, since you have no desire for a modern MBT, here's what I'd do: Take the Polish PZ-91, convert the ERA into NERA/NxRA, make sure the main armour is something like Chobham (layers of metel mesh, dense metal, and superstrong ceramics), make the main gun an ETC, swap out the 850HP engine for something in the 1,000+HP range, and then upgrade every bit of electronics on the tanks. Also, if you can afford it, swap out whatever metal bit you can with something like Carbon Fiber. Obviously this won't work for things like the engine and transmission, but I would think everything else is fair game. In the end you'll come up with a very modern, very capable medium battle tank that could take on almost all comers.]

I actually use several (mabye, like, 200 or so) PT-91s, contained under the 'modified T-72s' category of LRR tanks.

The upgrade looks pretty good. I'll have to do it. Say, how are those MLV-2s and MT-Ts working out for you?

[They're working out well. Certainly better than the standard fair American stuff I wan using.]

That's good.

You know, I actually used PT-91s during the first war for reunification with Dra-pol. In the final stages of the allied counteroffensive, they were used, along with T-SEP IFVs and APCs, to recapture the city of Andong.

Nice tank.

Will there be an Airdrop capable version available soon?

If so, the M-15 in the Kazkastanian army would be almost totally fased out, unless we can seriously upggrade it.

Which one, the MBT-9?

I dunno, possibly. I think it currently can really only be slid out the back.

The LRRA uses the Ikv-91 as its airborne tank. Its amphibious, too, and swedish.

The MBT-9 was really meant to be the LRRA tank muscle, to supplement the tons of upgraded and basic T-72s and Leopard series vehicles. Since the military budget does not really allow for massive tank procurements, the army has always relied on ATGMs, based on APCs and IFVs, and artillery. There's a 112mm anti-tank MRL that the LRRA uses, which is often mounted on APCs. It can disperse submunitions, or go straight into the target. Very high impact velocity, too.

One of the things I also do is use ATGMs and artillery rockets combined. The artillery rockets confuse tank defense systems and mabye hit a few while the ATGMs head for their targets. The only problem so far has been with missiles targeting the rocket motors instead of the tank motors, but this can usually be avoided by using radar guidance. Sometimes, because of the radar frequencies used, missiles fly into trees on their way towards the target, but you figure every T-SEP IFV has three fire-and-forget ATGMs and one guided, one would expect at least nine or twelve missiles aimed towards the lead ranks minimum, a lot more during a pitched battle, and a good deal more infantry-fired weapons plus tanks.

So I guess it all works out to my advantage in the end. Good thing for mountains, that's all I can say. Keeps those pesky tanks contained to the Steppe.

But I dunno...recently I've been looking into some more advanced tanks to at least distract GT-6s and Iron Blood's hordes while anti-tank teams do their work. I know you've got some good ones, and I recently bought 100 tanks fro' Soviet Bloc.