NationStates Jolt Archive

The T113

http://img93.exs.cx/img93/1357/t1139ea.png

Curb Weight (lbs): 20,310
Combat Weight (lbs): 24,520
Top Speed (mph): 41
Cruising Range: (miles) 200
Feul Type: Gasoline
Engine HP: 320
HP/Ton: 18
Acceleration (0-20 mph): sec 11.0

Socialist Serbia, for the last few months, has been working on an upgraded M113, attempting to create a varient more suited to our needs.

Firstly, the engine has been altered to give more power, from 309 to 320 HP. The tracks have been made wider to achieve a stronger grip on icy terrain, and are being given a stronger grip. It weighs marginally more that the original design, due to the larger weapon attached. The original machinegun armament has been replaced with a 25mm HE cannon, giving it a more powerful punch, even allowing it to face some light tanks, something the M113 never could do. The T113 can carry 8 men in the rear compartment, with openable slits through which passengers may fire whatever weapons they might be carrying. It has a crew of three men, a driver, gunner and commander.

Now these may seem small improvements, but the M113 is fatally flawed in its lack of high-calibur weaponry. Its current range of armaments renders it a large target, with all the destructive power of a regular soldier with an M60 and a far greater price. The T113 can defend itself against such vehicles as the M60 and M2A2, at least until some help can be found in the form of heavier armour. The T113 looks a great deal like the M113, and this can decieve potential targets into an attack on a far more efficient killing-machine than they had predicted.

We would add more powerful armour and weaponry to this design (Designs featuring a TOW launcher are already being drawn up) but we are hoping for a cheap, easily produced combat APC, but without the fatal weaknesses of the M113.

Price: 1,000,000 USD per unit

OOC: This is the first thingy like this i've ever done, so I probably got the specs all wrong, as with the price. CONSTRUCTIVE Critisism will be appreciated.

ooc: Lol, my Heavy MBT Drone Tank is called the DT-113

Lol...

I called it T113 mainly because its Russian-made type, and most American designs are M-something (M60, M113, M2A2, M2 etc.) and then theres the Russian T-something series (T-26, T-55, T-80 etc.) So I just named it T113.

bump

I wish to purchase 100,000 of these tanks for $200,000,000,000. Money will be wired upon confirmation. Thanks!

Order confirmed.

The order should be arriving within this year (1 RL day).

Thanks!

bump

OOC: Looks fine to me, I'll stick to using my own Light Tank though.

OOC: Although I would dispute the idea that it could take on an M60 or an M1A2, that is remarkably ungodmodded stat-wise. Good job :)

OOC:
Thanks.

IC:

Now available, the T113-A

Now equipped with one TOW missile launcher, attached to the turrets side (as seen in above picture). It carries a payload of 8 missiles, capable of doing some damage to heavy armour. This design costs substantially more to maintain and construct, so only 300 have been put into our own service, with 200 on sale. We will construct more, were the prospective buyer willing to pay an excess.

T113-A price: 1,500,000 USD per unit.

bump

Prices have been lowered to 1,000,000 USD for the T113, and 1,500,000 USD for the T113-A

Hate burst your bubble, they already have this in real life, it's called the M113A4 Wildcat

EDIT: also known as the Infantry Fighting Vehicle, Light (IFVL)

OOC: nope, see, this design is suited to icy terrain. I looked at the Wildcat, and the engine specs are completely differant. The only possible similarity is the tracks... The weapons systems are differant, the seating capacity is differant, and the engine is differant.

There are about 18 updated M113s, and I took care not to replicate any of them. If anything, the T113 bears more similarity to the "Bradley".


I see very few similarities.

M113A4
http://img159.exs.cx/img159/3183/113a32ze.gif

T113
http://img159.exs.cx/img159/3310/t113a0pf.png

underpowered, 18 tons should be hauled around by more than 300HP if it is to be an effective light tank - its greatest advantage would be its agility and its main armament. Is the rocket launcher autoloaded? try getting the topspeed upto 70MPH and we'd conceder buying a few of these.

whats the rate of fire and armour piercing capablity of the new gun?

OOC: nope, see, this design is suited to icy terrain. I looked at the Wildcat, and the engine specs are completely differant. The only possible similarity is the tracks... The weapons systems are differant, the seating capacity is differant, and the engine is differant.

There are about 18 updated M113s, and I took care not to replicate any of them. If anything, the T113 bears more similarity to the "Bradley".


I see very few similarities.

M113A4
http://img159.exs.cx/img159/3183/113a32ze.gif

T113
http://img159.exs.cx/img159/3310/t113a0pf.png


you are obviously looking at the M113A3 Wildcat not the M113A4 Wildcat IFVL

here is a link
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m113a4-ifvl.htm

:upyours:

OOC: Please, this forum is relatively peacful, so don't come in here swearing and flaming.

Differances:

25mm CHAINGUN- not 25mm HE machinegun
400HP Engine- again, completely differant
No TOW launchers
No expanded tracks
Crew of 2, not 3
can carry 10 men, not 8

Beijing: The TOW is indeed autoloaded. Later versions of the T113 will be created later, we will work on the speed, but we need to keep it cheap.

Please note: The M113 has a 300HP engine, and weighs 18 tons. It has a top speed of 40-50mph.

400HP is better - still underpowered in my opinion though - and I dont like the way the M113A4 looks - like a box on trax with a lil gun on the top. Easy target for a MBT, especially being underpowered.

Exactly. And with only machineguns available, it is a sitting duck to a T113s TOW, despite the increased seating capacity and engine force. Again, the M113s fatal weakness is unearthed.

OOC: Please, this forum is relatively peacful, so don't come in here swearing and flaming.

Differances:

25mm CHAINGUN- not 25mm HE machinegun
400HP Engine- again, completely differant
No TOW launchers
No expanded tracks
Crew of 2, not 3
can carry 10 men, not 8

Beijing: The TOW is indeed autoloaded. Later versions of the T113 will be created later, we will work on the speed, but we need to keep it cheap.

Please note: The M113 has a 300HP engine, and weighs 18 tons. It has a top speed of 40-50mph.
Just because you tweaked the numbers a bit doesn't mean they are diffrent vehicles. In that pic you show it sure as hell looks like a bushmaster 25mm chaingun to me whats the big diffrence between yur gun and the real gun??, please do tell?.
So you got a "better" version of it but u put a engine that has 80 less horsepower, how wonderrful you have proved to be supieror.
And you can mount a TOW launcher on a donkey, and if the M113A4 ever got deployed you betcha it would have TOWs on it.
That site I gave you is a civillian site which has outdated info all over it anyway.

And I didnt fucking swear god damn it i used one of those god damn icons that u can pic from and they come with this forum so boo to you!

400HP is better - still underpowered in my opinion though - and I dont like the way the M113A4 looks - like a box on trax with a lil gun on the top. Easy target for a MBT, especially being underpowered.
you know the pics he is using for the T113 are probably just pics of the M113A4 and they have the SAME SIZE GUN and the SAME chassis.

Firstly, the images used are that of the M2A2 "Bradley".

25mm HE machineguns fire an explosive charge. They are primarily used for clearing an area of infantry. It comes with 550 rounds, rather than 200-300.

TOW missiles mounted on a donkey would
a) Injure the donkey when fired.
B) need manual loading.

It can also be argued that the M60 medium battle tank looks similar to the M1A1 "Abrahms" battle tank. They are very differant.

And yes, if i say that my vehicle seats 1,750,473 men, it would need to be a kilometre long, making it a very differant vehicle. by altering numbers. Not to mention new fuel, weapons, crew, seating compartment etc.

bump.

bump

bump