NationStates Jolt Archive

The new M-12 "Battlefortress" tank is a highly mobile and efficiant tank it's quality worth the price. It is a fairly long tank to incorporate the 2 30. m.m. GAU turrets that sit infront of the main turret but beside the driver and co-driver. A 50. caliber machine gun sits on the turret for the co-gunner. On the back of the turret, there is a platform with a mounted 7.62 M240 machine gun. With the small but excedingly powerful and fuel efficiant hydrogen fuel cell engine, it allows for more room int the tank for more equipment and fuel. The armour is equal on all sides for added protection. With the light but strong Titanium alloy armour, most rounds will bounce off the tank. With all that in mind, it lives up to its name.

Armament:
1 155 m.m. howitzer, 2 30 m.m. "AA" GAU turret cannons, 1 50. caliber coaxial machinegun, 3x6 smoke dischargers.

Ammuntition
45 155 m.m., 2000 30 m.m. GAU (each), 1500 50. caliber.

length:21.76 meters
width:10.423 meters
height (to Turretroof):4 meters
ground clearance:0.563 meters
weight:59,234 Kg.
power to weight ratio: 35 HP/tonne
Engine:1 GGE Hydrogen fuel cell engine, electric turbine, 1600 HP at 30,000 RPM
Maximum road speed:65 Km. (hour)
Maximum range: 500 KM.
Fuel capacity: 2000 Lit.
Armour type: steel reinforced Titanium alloy
armour: 145 m.m.
NBC system: Air purifying unit
Night vision: Infared for all gunners and drivers
Price:8,000$ (If this is too high or low please tell me)

A. Its to high. Try around 7-8 million with the current setup.
B. its implausible. 155mm cannons arent used in tanks. To get an efficient one for an MBT, the weight of the gun, and hence the weight of the tank, goes up. Two 30mm guns take it over the top, not that the 155mm wasn't already showboating. Your tank would more likely be around 85 tons, and 60 kph speed max, assuming the armour is at least decent. You could use ERA to make the weight less, but you get much less protecting against ATGM's and APFSDS weapons.

Titanium alloy....is that the best you could come up with...... ;)

Use the stuff used on the Abrams. Rounds actually DO bounce of of that

About the armour, It is actually has a higher tensil strength than whats on the Abrahms tank, and it's one hell of a lot lighter. The only reason that most rounds bounce off of the Abrahms armour is because the Depleted Uranium is so dence. And because it is light, it can use the 155 m.m. gun. It has been installed on a self-proppelled gun before, which is practicly a tank with a howitzer on it. The hydrogen fuel cell engine is more powerful than a diesel engine.

We are looking to modernize our armored divisions. Send us a tank so we may give it a spin, if we like it you will be in for making a lot of money.

-General Bob Patton, 2 Army Corps

$8,000
Damn.
I'll take 1 million for 8 billion USD.

GHA!! How my times to I need to explain that hydrogen fuel cells make LOUSY engines for vehicles!!! Fuel cells are alright, but bloody expencive and produce a lot of waste heat. Hydrogen fuel cells run on hydrogen, a terrible fuel. Why? Because to get any kind of reasonable energy dencity by volume, you need to presurize it to 700 atmospheres. And if the tanks is punctured, boom. It'll rip appart the vehicle. And even so, it takes about 3 times as much volume to store an equivelent energy of hydrogen. So unless you want really highly explosive tanks three times the normal size of diesel tanks on your armored vehicles, don't use hydrogen fuel cells!

Aditionally, the tank is far to light to be carrying a 155mm gun. The 155mm guns carried on SPAs are low-velocity cannon with next to no penetration and slow traverse. The vehicles also need to be heavily braced before firing, can not fire off axis, travel with the barrel locked in the forward position, and have next to no armor. They also do NOT have two extremely heavy chainguns tacked onto them, take an entire minute to set up for firing, and have a sustained rate of fire of one shell every three minutes. (this is the data used for the american paladin SPA, one of the heavier entirely enclosed SPAs in service. The british braveheart has a better rate of fire and can fire off axis but is only armored against assault rifle fire. The MSTA-S 2S19 is similar, as is the PzH 2000)

As I said before, It has light but strong Titanium alloy armour, and it has got a long frame so it doesn't tip over. The hydrogen fuel cell engine is more fuel efficiant and has a lot more horsepower than a normal armoured vehicle diesel engine. It does not have a chain gun it has a rotary gatline type GAU. It's the same gun on the A-10 that shoots 2000 rounds per minute.


Lame Bums, you've got your prototype. MassPwnage your order is confirmed.

You're simply wrong there... hydrogen isn't an effective fuel, titanium not an effective armor, and a long axis doesn't help with off axis firing. I also believe, though may be mistaken that the GAU-8 is a chaingun, as well as being a rotory fed gattling gun. If I'm wrong there, I apologise, but there's simply no room in a hull that big for all three weapons, let alone the ammunition.

I no what I'm doing. Hydrogen fuel is effective if you've been seeing the reports from the car manufacturers who are making concept cars. But if you haven't I suggest you stay silent.

I have indeed. Hydrogen has an energy density by mass of 39 000 kWh/kg. However, it's energy density by volime is only 2.7kWh/L, compared to gasoline's 9000kWh/l. Even pressurized to 700btu, hydrogen only approaches an energy density of about 3000kwh/l, or one third of gasoline. Meaning you need three times the volume of hydrogen to equal the energy in gasoline, and the fuel tank needs to be designed to take an pressure 700times that of a gasline tank AND not be corroded by the hydrogen (hydrogen tends to corrode metals).

The major energy savings in the concept cars have been aerodynamic, and those changed could be made to gas powered cars too. Admitedly, fuel cells do operate at a higher efficiency, but hybrid gas/electric engines can almost match it, and it doesn't make up for the inconvenience of the fuel.

However, if you want me to stop critiquing your design, I will.

Just some information for future reference, the M1096 Paladin is 24,948 Kg. with the same gun. That is not half the weight of the M-12.

It can't be the same gun, because the paladin has a 30 something caliber gun that fires very low velocity artillery rounds, probably around 600m/s while your tank needs to approach 1600m/s to make any impression on a modern AFV.

THe paladin also is very lightly armored, doesn't need to carry two very heavy gattling guns, 2000 rounds of 30mm ammo, or have a decent rate of fire.

YOu should also increase the price of your tank to about 6 million dollars.

And I'm sorry if I've offended your sence of craftsmenship, my first post was much more agressive than I usually am. Apart from the armor, gun, and powerpack it's a very nice vehicle =)

We are impressed with the results. The tank was tested in a straight battle situation, but with a few improvisations (depending on the duty), it could do almost anything from battle to cross country to crowd control.

We would like to place an order of 100,000 of these vehicles.

Money wired on confirmation.

I'm talking about the main gun. It is a 155 m.m. howitzer. Thanks for the complement and I would appreciate it if you stopped critiqing it.

Lame Bums, your order is confirmed.