NationStates Jolt Archive

Blub-designed Weapons of War.

M5 Blub Tank

http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/8493/blubtank2eu3.png

M5 has been unveiled as the new mainstay of the Colonial Defense Force of Blubland. Unique to Blubland, the M5 is a mag-hover light tank equipped with heavy armor and a 135mm main gun. The top-mounted 25mm chaingun has its own sensor package for automated ATGM defense. Lightweight and packing a strong punch, the M5's long range and high speed make it perfect for the highly mobile Blub Colonial Defense Force.

The engine, being smaller than many other types of engine that generate similar amounts of power, allowed the designers to fit a small gas-turbine engine capable of outputting 100 horsepower, into the space that was left over, which will act as an auxiliary power unit for the tank to power its onboard systems even when its main engines are turned off. It will allow the tank to conserve fuel when idling and reduce the vehicle's overall thermal and acoustic signatures.

The new autoloader enables the tank to fire up to 20 rounds per minute, or one round every three seconds, without being affected by the gun's angle. The autoloader's design is original and designed much like a revolver. 5 rounds at a time are held in an armored cylinder, with four cylinders total. Once 10 rounds have been exhausted, the system recycles the two empty cylinders, refilling them automaticly.

The vehicle can fire a variety of munitions using its main gun including, but not limited to, an indigenously developed and improved tungsten APFSDS kinetic energy penetrators, which offer significantly better penetration than the previous generation tungsten rounds, and multi-purpose HEAT chemical energy rounds similar to the M830A1 HEAT MP-T that can be used against personnel, unarmored and lightly armored vehicles on the ground as well as low-flying helicopters.

Another munition for the tank's main gun is the BSTAM (Blub Smart Top-Attack Munition) rounds designed specifically for use with the M5. It is basically a top-attack anti-tank munition that is launched from the tank's main gun, launched in similar fashion that one expects from a mortar or long-range artillery with curved trajectory. It should not to be confused with an anti-tank missile—it does not contain any rocket propellants or motors, and travels through the air solely with the energy applied to it during the firing from the main gun. The munition has its own guidance and obstacle-avoidance systems, small millimeter band RADAR, IR, radiometer sensors and EFP. After being fired, the munition will follow its firing trajectory, aided by four fins to stabilize its flight, and travel over to its designated target area, whereupon a parachute will deploy to slow its fall, giving the onboard RADAR system and sensors enough time to seek and acquire stationary or moving targets and fire away its EFP at the top of the target. During the whole time, the launch vehicle does not need to reveal itself at all and can attack its targets while hiding behind cover while firing off multiple munitions, as they are fire-and-forget and attack targets completely independent of input, providing an effective indirect-fire support or countermeasures against targets hidden behind obstacles and structures. The munition can also be manually controlled in a limited fashion by live data link connection with the launch vehicle. The minimum range of the munition is 2 km, while the maximum range is 8 km.

The turret is driven by electrical motors.

The tank will also be equipped with a millimeter band RADAR system, along with the traditional LASER range-finder and crosswind sensor, combined with next-generation FCS, that will allow it to track and engage low-flying aircraft with the main gun quickly and accurately as well as detect incoming projectiles fired at the tank. A "lock-on" mode will be available for the tank's FCS to keep its target locked on to the targeting system, with the system calculating, adjusting and updating the target's information constantly, allowing the tank to fire while moving without any loss of accuracy. The lock-on mode can acquire and track its target using thermal optics wired to the FCS up to 9.8 km away

An onboard GPS uplink allows the crew to be highly aware of its surroundings. Also included in the package is an environmental sensor that can detect if the tank has entered a hazardous environment.

The tank also has the ability to link up with C4I.

Weight 45 tonnes
Length: 6.5 m (5.5m chassis)
Width: 2.8 m
Height: 1.9 m
Crew: 3 (commander, gunner, driver)

Armor: Layers consisting of soft- and hard-kill anti-missile defense systems, ERA, NERA, modular & classified composite armor
Primary armament: 135 mm, 55 caliber smoothbore gun (60 rounds)
Secondary armament: 1× 25 mm chaingun (2,200 rounds)
1x .50cal coaxial machine gun (9,000 rounds)
Engine: 4-cycle, 12-cylinder water-cooled diesel 1,500 hp
Drive: DUR IT HAV TRAKS
Power/weight: 37.2 hp/tonne
Suspension: In-arm Suspension Unit
Operational range: 650 miles
Speed: 110 km/h (acceleration of 0-52 km/h with in 7 seconds)


Export price: $10 million dollars

BDV (Blub Deployment Vehicle)

http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/1725/blubdeploymentvehiclehm6.png

The BDV has been in use with the Colonial Defense Force for years. The design is simple. A low-slung, powerful all-terrain APC with air catapults built into the armored crew compartment. It can fling a 100lb object (Such as a Blub) about 20 meters into the air and 150 meters horiziontally.

This dangerous method of infantry dismounting gave rise to the 13D MOS. Jump Infantry (13 Delta). Jump Infantry are trained to use lightweight, but powerful jetpacks to slow their descent to a safe level. The jetpacks are very inefficient for lifting a trooper's weight, but are extremely useful for enhancing a jump. Typically the packs are jettisoned once a trooper is in the fight.

Recently the BDV has been redesigned. Instead of 9 air catapults, there are now 5. This reduction in weight allowed the BDV to be effectively 'up-armored'.


Weight 6 tonnes
Length: 4.5 m
Width: 2.8 m
Height: 1.7 m
Crew: 12 (commander, driver + 10 passengers)

Armor: Soft- and hard-kill anti-missile defense systems, NERA, modular & classified composite armor
Primary armament: x2 ATGM launcher
Engine: 4-cycle, 12-cylinder water-cooled diesel 1,000 hp
Drive: Tracked
Power/weight: 27.2 hp/tonne
Suspension: In-arm Suspension Unit
Operational range: 750 miles
Speed: 180 km/h (acceleration of 0-63 km/h with in 8 seconds)


Export price: $5 million dollars

The Blubnought

http://www.savvycenter.com/explorer/areas/infopages/battleship.jpg

History
The Blubnought began life during the days of the first Blub Colony in the Pacific. It was one of the three 'Super Battleships' fielded by the Blubs during their war with Hataria in Leyte. Classified as a heavily modifed Montana class, Blubnought originally bore the name Peacemaker and was in charge of covering starboard side anti-capital ship missions for the main 1st Fleet of the navy.

At Leyte, Peacemaker and her crew distinguished themselves many times. After her sister ship Fury was destroyed, and the 1st Fleet flagship Avenge crippled, Peacemaker had become the only Super Battleship available to the fighting at Leyte.

Weathering no less than eleven seperate air strikes and taking hits from sixteen anti-shipping missiles, Peacemaker suffered the loss of nearly 350 of her crew, yet stayed in the fight. Peacemaker was personally responsible for destroying four Hatarian cruisers with her anti-shipping missiles, and two Hatarian battleships by cannonade. Multiple smaller opponents were engaged and destroyed.

During the third week of combat at Leyte, Peacemaker was struck in the bridge by a fusilade of shells and her command corp decimated. With steerage nearly knocked out at this point and the ship taking on water, Peacemaker was beached and abandoned. When the tides came in, she was swept further out to sea and sank in the shallows.

Under strict secrecy, Peacemaker was raised by salvage crew and repaired enough to be towed back to Blubland. She was placed into drydock and over the course of six years refitted and upgraded.

The bow was extended greatly and the weapon systems further modernized. Effectively starting at scratch with the hull, Colonial Navy rebuilt her to the point where she is no longer recognized as a Montana class and has been redesignated as the 'Victory Class Super Dreadnought'.

Although light for a 'Super Dreadnought', the Colonial Navy insists on this designation.


Displacement: 93,550 tons
Length: 1279.53 ft (390 m)
Beam: 121 ft 0 in (36.9 m)
Draft: 45 ft 1 in (13.0 m)
Speed: 39 knot (59 km/h) maximum
Complement: 3,050
Power: 2 × 103,000 hp (228 MW) nuclear steam turbines
Drive: 4 screws; geared turbines
Armament:
9 × 20 in (508 mm) / 50 Mark 7 caliber guns in three triple turrets
30 × 5 in (127 mm) / 54 caliber guns in ten twin mountings (ten guns on each side of the ship)
12 x RAM air defense in four three tube mounts
40 x 30mm Red Arrow CIWS in 20 dual mounts
x96 VLS in rear
Aircraft: Space for two helicopters
Armor Belt: 32 in (812.8mm)
Bulkheads: 32 in (812.8mm)
Barbettes: 40 in (1016mm)
Torpedo Bulge 60 in (1524mm)
Turrets: 32 in (812.8mm)
Decks: 13 in (330.2)

OOC: Before anyone yells at me for lack of detail, please remember this is a public information release. Blubland won't go into detail about specific hardware, and simply wanted public domain to be known about what they can do if given the chance.

Sorry man, but the first two are not MT at all. PMT at best. I didn't bother to read the third

ooc: 's blubtech. MT is defined as within a 25-ish year period. We already have hovercraft way heavier than my tank today. ^.^ And the only thing 'weird' on the BDV is the air catapults. Which.. >.> We have today. So. Erm. Please don't post stupid crap in my thread anymore?

OOC: The only things I really have a problem with are the weight and speed of the tank. Russian tanks are considered light by modern standards, and they're usually about 45+ tons. Speed's too high.

OOC: The only things I really have a problem with are the weight and speed of the tank. Russian tanks are considered light by modern standards, and they're usually about 45+ tons. Speed's too high.

ooc: That's pretty reasonable. Of course, that's top speed on a perfectly flat surface. Since it's effectively hovering, (With rollers on the bottom and sides) it'll go much slower. This is a pretty small vehicle. Hmm. Lemme send in my 'customer service' rep to fix it.

http://img501.imageshack.us/img501/8752/warblub2vh3.png

mag-hover light tank

Something tells me that even in 25 years we wont be seeing magnetic hover tanks. And ealier in the post there was something about a chain gun capable of shooting down ATGM's. That's a bit iffy for the next 25 years, but at least that's better than a magnetically driven tank that doesn't fry it's electronics.

I'm not clear on what you mean by "mag-hover." Does it use a magnetic field to hold in an air cushion? Or does it produce a magnetic force so strong that it physically pushes the vehicle away from Earth's geomagnetic field?

If the latter, size is the main concern that comes to mind (and with it, weight). Cost is another. The coolant for the superconducting magnets to create the force would be hazardous to work with in a combat environment, as well, and the superconductor would be conceivably really temperamental about when, exactly, it wants to lift the vehicle...or turn on, or what-have-you. This is also the reason I plan to steer well away from omgetc guns until they've been combat-tested and all the bugs worked out. That aside, there's also variation in Earth's magnetic field (a visual representation for 2002 (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/IGRF_2000_magnetic_declination.gif)), which means that you'd need to constantly adjust your settings so that they wouldn't crash into the ground for being too weak or be repulsed far too high and get smashed in their underbelly for being too strong. You might solve this with a control system of some sort, but you'd still not be able to air-drop them in unless you were to set it on full-out max power and slowly lower it down, which I would imagine would take more care than a parachute or two, and therefore more time. Then mines, EFPs, shrapnel and other debris can also damage the undercarriage, as always, and send a tank going conceivably two hundred km/h running into the ground. For the first two, there's not much you can do, but for the last two, especially at high speeds, the vehicle would be whacked (I can't think of a way the undercarriage would be armored and still project the magnetic field, because the chassis itself would then be in contact with the superconductor and thus be magnetized...which could be a bad thing, although I'd like it if someone could tell me I'm mistaken ).

If the former, size, cost and power requirements are still worries, but not to the degree of the aforementioned latter. However, crankiness would still conceivably remain. The field might also carry to the water that the vehicle is traveling on an electromagnetic current, and if it's participating in an amphibious assault, could result in some painful experiences for swimming blubs, [i]a la counting fish with electricity.

There's my piece; hopefully I've explained myself without sounding angry or self-righteous. I didn't want to give a simple knee-jerk reaction (though trust me, I had one). You can choose to accept it or ignore it as you please, or argue it; I merely felt that this needed to be posted...or at any rate I really wanted to.

ooc: You know. I don't remember ever inviting anyone to post in this thread. Seems our versions of FUN greatly differ. My fun: Designing wacky, semi-effective hardware.

You guys fun: Taking a huge steaming shit all over my fun.

Screw you all, seriously. I'll just put tracks on it, then it will be EXACTLY like EVERY other tank in NS.

Sod off. *pissed*

OOC: Just to say that anti-missile chainguns are currently in use aboard naval vessels, and it wouldn't take 25 years worth of development to make a tank-borne one. It's perfectly MT.

ooc: You know. I don't remember ever inviting anyone to post in this thread. Seems our versions of FUN greatly differ. My fun: Designing wacky, semi-effective hardware.

You guys fun: Taking a huge steaming shit all over my fun.

Screw you all, seriously. I'll just put tracks on it, then it will be EXACTLY like EVERY other tank in NS.

Sod off. *pissed*

I'm not sure why you're so upset—I was merely commenting, as I tend to do in other threads of this nature (using other accounts, true, but that aside); certainly I didn't intend for you to take so much offense.

However, given that you asked, I'll gladly go.

ooc: That's pretty reasonable. Of course, that's top speed on a perfectly flat surface. Since it's effectively hovering, (With rollers on the bottom and sides) it'll go much slower. This is a pretty small vehicle. Hmm. Lemme send in my 'customer service' rep to fix it.

http://img501.imageshack.us/img501/8752/warblub2vh3.png

He is so cute.

I'm not sure why you're so upset—I was merely commenting, as I tend to do in other threads of this nature (using other accounts, true, but that aside); certainly I didn't intend for you to take so much offense.

Same here. I was just pointing out that it isn't entirely MT.

And granted, there are ship mounted chain guns that shoot down missiles, but an anti tank missile is not only a lot smaller, it's a bit less predictable.

Take a Harpoon missile. It's 15 feet long, about a foot in diameter. Now a TOW missile is 3.80577428ft long and .498687664ft in diameter. Further more, the TOW can come in at any angle, while a harpoon usually just comes from above. A fully automated chain gun mounted on a tank is theoretically possible, but we probably wont see an effective one in the next 25 years, especially since missiles get smaller, faster, and stronger.

Now, I am not trying to be mean, I am not bashing anyone, I am simply stating facts. It's blub's decision on how to take it, and obviously he is taking it badly. I'm simply pointing out that this is PMT at best, and that even 25 years isn't enough for these kinds of things. A simple addition of a P to the MT would be enough to make this whole discussion moot.

OOC: I said it would be possible, not especially effective. Blub's choice to add it.

Same here. I was just pointing out that it isn't entirely MT.

And granted, there are ship mounted chain guns that shoot down missiles, but an anti tank missile is not only a lot smaller, it's a bit less predictable.

Take a Harpoon missile. It's 15 feet long, about a foot in diameter. Now a TOW missile is 3.80577428ft long and .498687664ft in diameter. Further more, the TOW can come in at any angle, while a harpoon usually just comes from above. A fully automated chain gun mounted on a tank is theoretically possible, but we probably wont see an effective one in the next 25 years, especially since missiles get smaller, faster, and stronger.

Now, I am not trying to be mean, I am not bashing anyone, I am simply stating facts. It's blub's decision on how to take it, and obviously he is taking it badly. I'm simply pointing out that this is PMT at best, and that even 25 years isn't enough for these kinds of things. A simple addition of a P to the MT would be enough to make this whole discussion moot.

The question is why even use inefficient Tank-CIWS when Active Protection Systems do and even better job?