NationStates Jolt Archive

The Diamondback infantry fighting vehicle was developed by GAI following the war with Zambistan were the need for an urban fighting vehicle arose

Varients of the diamondback
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l255/rtpayton17/iav-variants.gif

specs:
weight-19.23t 21.22t when fully loaded
24.35t when equipped with 105mm cannon
Length-6.96m
Height-2.65m
Width-2.73m

crew-3+7

Protective features-
GAI-Sanctuary system-Electronic system designed to protect against ATGM and other guided munitions
GAI-Storm system-System designed to locate incoming rounds and destroy them with a "shotgun" like blast before reaching the vehcile..50m coverage..alert system to warn nearbye friendly infantry of activation
Capable of being fitted with Slat armor
GAI-BCF-Biological-Chemical-Filter-provides protection against chemical and bio weapons allowing units to advance through contaminated areas to continue fighting or for rescue operations.
armor-composite armor/capable of being fitted with NERA blocks
front-60mm
sides-55mm
rear-60mm
belly-35mm
top-35mm
Automated fire supression system
ammunition and fuel tanks housed in seperate compartments designed to blow out from the vehcile should it be hit

Armament-
GAI Eagle-system provieds stable gun platform even while moving over rough terrain capable of mounting .50cal machine gun or mk19 gernade launcher

Other varients may mount a TOW missle or anti-air gun platform and a 105mm cannon on the mobile gun platform varient

Features GAI-Tacmap system in order to prevent friendly fire incidents
day/night thermal imaging
laser range finder
GAI-search and destroy system-allows crew to discover where enemy fire is coming from..integrated with eagle system allows the weapon system to auto-engage targets
GPS integrated with tacmap system
periscope cameras with 12x zoom day/night thermal view
all electronics are shielded from EMP and other electronic interference


engine-GAI DX8 Diesel provides 380hp
range-490km
speed-103km/h
suspension-8x8 wheeled
centralized tire pressure system

cost-2.3million USD

Comments? This is my first attempt at designing a vehicle



GAI-Sanctuary System-The Sanctuary system utalizes the use of several sensors designed to pick up the UV or Infared Radar or Sonar signatures used by guided munitions to lock on to a target. The Sanctuary system first alerts the crew that a lock-on has been confirmed, secondly the Sanctuary system then uses a series of Infared jamming pulses to disrupt the incoming munitions tracking device. Further disruption is caused when the Sanctuary system ejects several pods that emmit different frequencies which further disrupt the lock on capability of the incoming munition as well as masking the signature of the protected unit by causing its signature to blend in with that of the background.

GAI-Storm System-The storm system is another counter munition system which uses a series of sensors with doppler radar and infared scanners to pick up on incoming rounds..the system then rapidly process the trajectory of the incoming round and fires a barrageof projectiles towards the round which have been pre-set to detonate infront above and below the incoming round spraying it with several shot gun like blasts causing the incoming round to detonate a safe distance from the protected unit. The storm system also deploys the same pods the sanctuary system does along with several aresol canisters to disrupt incomin munitions should they be guided and add further protection.

GAI-Eagle gun system- The eagle gun system is designed to allow for infantry men to remain within the safety of the vehicle while being able to return accurate fire..the Eagle gun system accomplishes this by the use of a gun cam with night/day thermal imaging as well as laser range finder, also the eagle system utalizes a gyroscopic stablizing system allowing for accurate fire even while moving acorss rough terrain. The system also features an auto-engage feature that allows the system to engage targets via thermal imaging

GAI-Tacmap system-The Tacmap system is a system that allows units in the field to recieve vital intel eg. current enemy/friendly locations terrain features etc etc.

GAI-Search and Destroy system-The search and destroy system is integrated with the tac map system. The S&D system utalizes both acoustic and optical sensors that pick up the shockwave of a round, the system then calculates where the shot came from along with elevation, the system issues both an audio and visual warnining via tacmap system alerting the crew to the shooters location, when integrated with the Eagle gun system if the auto-engage system is active then upon determining the shooters location the Eagle system can then

bump

Certainly looks impressive...would you mind if PAB MoD ordered one of each variant to test alongside our current vehicle of choice? It could mean a nice big order...

PAB MoD

thanks..Im still waiting to get critizied by one of the NS premire engineers lol..in response to your order we accept your request for one of each varient for testing to be delivered in 1 month. We at GAI hope you find the diamondback satisfactory..as these are test units we will not charge you for them.

A decent take on the Stryker, nothing revolutionary but its not bad at all.

Its basically an integration of all modern infantry fighting vehicles but I wanted it to be more mobile than an M2 bradley and have more protection than a stryker does alone..I think I accomplished my goal..and I didnt want a MBT because those aren't very good in urban situations where as a vehicle like this would be. I haven't thought of anything overly revolutionary yet and I figured I would use this project to "get my feet wet"

It's beautiful.

I don't get it.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/images/armor-comp.gif

The Stryker is a TERRIBLE combat vehicle. The MGS variant being my most HATED type. The Stryker can NOT take the damage you are saying. Seriously this has been proven and I'll give one source that will basically make all my comments about this known.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/989214/posts

Protection

The most obvious area to measure from a protection standpoint is the vehicle’s armor. The Bradley provides 65mm of protection on the sides compared to the Stryker’s 14.5mm.[2] These figures are provided by the respective manufacturers. Bradley armor is supposed to offer protection against everything short of direct hits by artillery or tank main gun rounds. However, this writer (an Armor officer with 15 years of experience, to include combat in Desert Storm) personally witnessed the effects of .50 caliber, 25 millimeter (both American), and 12.7 mm (Soviet) machine gun fire against a Bradley. All calibers easily penetrated the front, sides and rear of the Bradley, killing the crew.[3]

As stated above, the Stryker protection level should be better than the Bradley’s; but is it? It appears that the Stryker’s armor is no better than the Bradley’s, and may be worse. During a rigorous field test of the Stryker (Millenium Challenge 2002) conducted in August 2002, “thirteen of fourteen Strykers were destroyed by small arms fire, grenades and guns mounted on enemy vehicles, during ambushes and other encounters on one of the exercise’s missions.”[4] Such performance does not outshine the Bradley’s; but perhaps the Stryker is more lethal?



Deployability
The Bradley weighs approximately 25 tons. It can be transported by any mean, to include transport aircraft, but must utilize aircraft larger than the C-130 which is only capable of transporting 13 tons when it is fully fueled and outfitted for combat operations.[12]

The original requirement for an interim armored vehicle stated that it must be easily transportable by C-130. At 19 tons the basic version of the Stryker is lighter than the Bradley, yet it is still too heavy and too tall to be deployed by C-130.[13] The Stryker is not yet certified for C-130 transport. While Strykers were transported by C-130 for their field test during Millenium Challenge 2002, they required a special one-time waiver from the Air Force. In addition, the C-130s lightened their load by using as little fuel as possible, and by discarding additional armor protection normally required for combat operations.[14]

The Strykers do not meet the “easily transportable” test because they must be modified for flight. The crew must disassemble and remove the remote weapon station (40mm grenade launcher, or .50 caliber machine gun), as well as externally mounted ammunition and racks, so that the Stryker can fit into a C-130.[15]

I know you put some work into this, but seriously the base is a really bad system and the MGS puts too much strain on the hull. The vehicle is too heavy and pays too much for losing its tracks. This kind of lack of understanding and using of light vehicles is obviously never understood in the military and they cannot face the facts the Bradley is still a better option over this 'thing' that they promote.

Edit: I forgot to mention, the version in Iraq is 16 inches wider for the ERA protection...which sadly does little to note the underlying weakness of the armor that lays right next to it.

I am aware of the strykers armor flaws etc and I based the armor off of some soviet vehicles I chose the stryker chasis simply because I liked it however I could change the chasis more towards a soviet BMP or Bradley and add tracks... but the only real thing taken from the stryker is the chasis design/looks basically

Very nice job. I am impressed with it. I think that the last time the US used the same system for multiple applications was the M-113 APC.

Vic

The multiple platform system just made sense..why have 12 different vehicles when I can use one and just modify it a little plus is cost and production effective...I hope my explanation for the thicker armor made sense I can edit them if I really need to.

I am aware of the strykers armor flaws etc and I based the armor off of some soviet vehicles I chose the stryker chasis simply because I liked it however I could change the chasis more towards a soviet BMP or Bradley and add tracks... but the only real thing taken from the stryker is the chasis design/looks basically

I'm still afraid it exists. Even with the applique armor upgrade (which actually is better then the original bolted on armor) your composite armor is in the dumpster. I'd at least consider doubling or even tripling the thickness. Just because the Stryker has a terrible set of armour doesn't mean you have to give this flaw over to yours. As long as your gun is not in excess of 3 tons I doubt you'll have a support issue with the vehicle base. The Stryker CAN support 23 tons, but the problem is when it is fully loaded it is pushing the limit. The additional armor would help protect it, seeing as you removed some lesser features of the Stryker that served only to weigh it down.

Using your own systems are good, but if you are really serious you might want to add a description in of those. The Stryker is difficult to use in a combat situation and has a lot of bugs. Though its trivial until the armor issue is fixed. Your price will still be fine, but remember to add 3 mm of steel on the BACK of the composite armor. This layer is part of the upgrade that is cheap and will provide additional protection for VERY low cost. Consider ERA then, the Stryker's original armor is actually dangerous to use with ERA on the sides, but I am not sure the layering process they did to make it safe...though it doesn't really matter. Fact is...upgrade the armor and save yourself the hassle. It'll be worth another $50,000 to make sure it is done right.

so your saying increase the thickness of the armor and give a better discription of the electronic systems?

so your saying increase the thickness of the armor and give a better discription of the electronic systems?

(Wonders if what I said didn't get through...)

In short yes. The armor can really easily be updated and for cheap. Double the armor thickness at least.

Since you are using your own systems you might want to give them a description on how they work. Though any system would be assumed to be better then the Stryker's currently terrible combat systems. If you want the Diamondback to be good take the base, but not the armor, communications or electronics.

Use thicker armor, more expensive and tested electronics (or your own with a description) and make sure you give a slight bump in price. Would it hurt to see a weight projection to? I figured 23 tons (based off of a fully loaded Stryker, but 19 tons light).

Bubabalu, The last time the US used the same system for multiple applications was the Stryker, it has not just has not completely been fielded yet.

The armor thickness of the Diamondback is fine for small arms fire and already greater than the stryker, and the GAI-Storm system should negate anything big like rpgs or missiles.

And if you raise the price you will be undersold by other NS manufacturers.

I really have my doubts though. In testing 13 of the 14 Strykers were destroyed by small arms fire (Millineum 2002 test) what makes you think composite of this thickness would be a cheaper and stronger solution? The ability to produce armor of this thickness costs more then aluminium at this point. Well...it does in any case though.
http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/3553/compxc5.jpg

It might be right, but all the RL testing has proven its armor is too light to actually save it from anything higher then a 7.62 mm small arms round.

Also I do not know about this GAI stuff on how it will save something like this from an RPG. (Seriously, what is it/how does it work?)

I really have my doubts though. In testing 13 of the 14 Strykers were destroyed by small arms fire (Millineum 2002 test) what makes you think composite of this thickness would be a cheaper and stronger solution? The ability to produce armor of this thickness costs more then aluminium at this point. Well...it does in any case though.


It might be right, but all the RL testing has proven its armor is too light to actually save it from anything higher then a 7.62 mm small arms round.

Also I do not know about this GAI stuff on how it will save something like this from an RPG. (Seriously, what is it/how does it work?)
I am assuming it is similar to the FCLAS system in development IRL. basically detects incoming fast moving projectile by radar, and fires a cloud of frag at the right moment and the rpg explodes when it hits the cloud.]


Also I don't understand your point on the armor, from the outset he has listed it as 30% thicker than the real life stryker...

I am assuming it is similar to the FCLAS system in development IRL. basically detects incoming fast moving projectile by radar, and fires a cloud of frag at the right moment and the rpg explodes when it hits the cloud.]


Also I don't understand your point on the armor, from the outset he has listed it as 30% thicker than the real life stryker...

Does the FCLAS have a terrible effectiveness on high velocity non-explosive rounds? I'm thinking more like depleted uranium or hell...even T rounds. The problem is the flak may alter the course a little, but it should prove ultimately ineffective against the round.

However for the armor issue, FCLAS clearly won't work when faced with 14.5mm rounds which will puncture and kill the crew. The way to defeat this with small arms fire is still present and a clear threat. Slapping on FCLAS is just another way to counter a SPECIFIC threat, but never the most common threats in most wars.

lol yes it got through thats why I was asking to make sure I didn't miss anything..

hows this
front-60mm
sides-55mm
rear-60mm
belly-35mm
top-35mm

weight-19.23t 21.22t when fully loaded
24.35t when equipped with 105mm cannon

GAI-Sanctuary System-The Sanctuary system utalizes the use of several sensors designed to pick up the UV or Infared Radar or Sonar signatures used by guided munitions to lock on to a target. The Sanctuary system first alerts the crew that a lock-on has been confirmed, secondly the Sanctuary system then uses a series of Infared jamming pulses to disrupt the incoming munitions tracking device. Further disruption is caused when the Sanctuary system ejects several pods that emmit different frequencies which further disrupt the lock on capability of the incoming munition as well as masking the signature of the protected unit by causing its signature to blend in with that of the background.

GAI-Storm System-The storm system is another counter munition system which uses a series of sensors with doppler radar and infared scanners to pick up on incoming rounds..the system then rapidly process the trajectory of the incoming round and fires a barrageof projectiles towards the round which have been pre-set to detonate infront above and below the incoming round spraying it with several shot gun like blasts causing the incoming round to detonate a safe distance from the protected unit. The storm system also deploys the same pods the sanctuary system does along with several aresol canisters to disrupt incomin munitions should they be guided and add further protection.

GAI-Eagle gun system- The eagle gun system is designed to allow for infantry men to remain within the safety of the vehicle while being able to return accurate fire..the Eagle gun system accomplishes this by the use of a gun cam with night/day thermal imaging as well as laser range finder, also the eagle system utalizes a gyroscopic stablizing system allowing for accurate fire even while moving acorss rough terrain. The system also features an auto-engage feature that allows the system to engage targets via thermal imaging

GAI-Tacmap system-The Tacmap system is a system that allows units in the field to recieve vital intel eg. current enemy/friendly locations terrain features etc etc.

GAI-Search and Destroy system-The search and destroy system is integrated with the tac map system. The S&D system utalizes both acoustic and optical sensors that pick up the shockwave of a round, the system then calculates where the shot came from along with elevation, the system issues both an audio and visual warnining via tacmap system alerting the crew to the shooters location, when integrated with the Eagle gun system if the auto-engage system is active then upon determining the shooters location the Eagle system can then automatically engage the target.

I am not sure about this technology. The armor looks better, but is it a decent trade off.

GAI-Sanctuary System
Impractical. Definately so for close range. Would be ineffective on smart bombs from planes and other fast moving targets. They align too quickly to be disrupted. The threat of dummy weapons (the main choice for ground warfare) is completely unaffected by this. Use will be...low.

Definately like FCLAS.
However the range and projectile limitation is a clear issue, but the sensitive technology is another matter. However, again aside from HEAT and RPGs this will largely be not an issue. The mainstay of the weaponry will be unaffected. In the case of missiles. The armor is too thin and will more then likely penetrate still even in the event of an unsuccessful attack. Though I am more wonder about the ability to use them effectively against enemy rounds and not near-by friendly rounds.

The Eagle gun and auto-fire system work. Tac too.

the sanctuary system would be more for use against an infantrymen whose using a laser designator to call in other ordance..and as for better rpg shaped charge defence ihe addition of slat armor..the sanctuary and storm systems are derived from FCLAS and the russin shtora system and the ARENA system

OK then. That does work. :)

then im glad my first development project went well with only minor changes..:)..

Bump

I am aware of the strykers armor flaws etc and I based the armor off of some soviet vehicles I chose the stryker chasis simply because I liked it however I could change the chasis more towards a soviet BMP or Bradley and add tracks... but the only real thing taken from the stryker is the chasis design/looks basically
Or the MCV 80 Warrior, witch is known for breaking speed limits in Germany.

that 2..now how bout someone buy the damn thing! lol jk im happy with the praise

Silvasnian Arms Corp


It is the view of the SAC executives that this vehicle would serve excellently in our nations armed forces and having confirmed government approval we wish to purchase 25,000 of the Diamondback fighting vehicles particularly the mobile gun system and recon variants..payment shall be wired in advance

Your order is confirmed shipment within the next 2-4 months

I don't get it.
The Stryker is a TERRIBLE combat vehicle. The MGS variant being my most HATED type. The Stryker can NOT take the damage you are saying. Seriously this has been proven and I'll give one source that will basically make all my comments about this known.


The Stryker's armor is soon to be upgraded with an Israeli armor produced by General Dynamics Land Systems which will increase armor protection. The Stryker is not a 'horrible' vehicle, and certainly can be redesigned to be quite a good wheeled combat vehicle.

The Stryker's armor is soon to be upgraded with an Israeli armor produced by General Dynamics Land Systems which will increase armor protection. The Stryker is not a 'horrible' vehicle, and certainly can be redesigned to be quite a good wheeled combat vehicle.

Thats basically what I just did here with my Diamondback vehicle :)

The MoD is very much pleased with the performance of the Diamondback, and will be most pleased to order a complete replacement of our current vehicle of choice with the Diamondback.

Details to follow soon.

I'd suggest to take more look around RL vehicles, and make it closer to them. Many of RL things are better than NS ones, due to greatly different skill level of designers, not offset even by wanking. Particularly I'd suggest to put more focus into ERA, if you want serious protection. Frontal ERA will give safety from 30mm. Also, composites might be not the best choice in this case. There are no good or bad materials, among the RL used ones, there are good or bad applications.

We thank you for your business and look forward to your order..




I appreciate your advice and thank you for your constructive criticism