NationStates Jolt Archive

SE-T-main battle tank:
Crew: 3, gunner, commander, driver/navigator
Cannons: 1, front
Engine: AGT-1500 turbine engine
Weight: (pounds) 41 ton
Lenght: 9 meters
Height: 2.1 meters
Armor: 1/2 inch of Steel Plate, 1/2 inch of iron plate, 1/2 bulletproof armor
Speed: 51 mph
Fuel: 261 gallons
main gun: 152mm gun, 35 sabot rounds, 25 piercing rounds
missiles: 9 heavy missiles
Commanders gun: m2- 68 cal
price: 2,700,000 dollar

(OOC: This is kinda a replacer for the SE-46 main battle tank, but this is a nicer name, and a bit difrent...)

Send question to:

Sergeant Jolha, head of M.H.T.G war vehicle's
John ferky, head of SE-T11-main battle tank design and production
Colonel Johnsen, head of The Fat People Republic of Roef

Feel free to say some advice.

the size is better[functional], but the 152mm is more of an artillery piece then for tank combat. I would replace it with something in the 115mm - 125mm range [note that the total caliber effects HEAT and HE rounds more then Sabot rounds] This would also decrease the weight. Since I see you're using 3 crew members, I would assume you're using an autoloader. Unless you're going for the old tank chaser type thing, again, I would use a regular turret, with a 7.62 coaxle gun. You could have a bigger one, but this keeps the total weight down.


The armor is still pretty thin, and I would use composite armor instead of steel. This would lower the effect of HEAT rounds, especially if it's sloped. I would have the frontal armor increased to 150mm at a 30 degree angle, which would make it at about 300mm total. I would also put some type of ERA on the front such as Kontakt-5, which is effective against HEAT and APFDS rounds. There are better types, but K-5 is cheaper. As for the side armor, increase it to 70mm, and add NERA or Slat armor to the sides. To save the crew from APFDS impacts, I would add a spall liner [Kevlar and the like]

Does your tank have Nuclear-Biological-Chemical protection? This would save the crew from fallout and nerve agents. A coating of lead will be sufficient for radiation, and cheap too. For the nerve agents and radioactive dust, an air purification system and an overpressure system will keep contaminants out of the crew compartment.





When all else fails, make a T-62 (http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2-62) clone. With the money you'll save, you can train your crews, and the tank will be able to take on modern MBT.

Again, similar to Falkasia and the old design? I'm hoping that you had help from Falkasia with this one.

Come on! This is a total changed model!

OOC: It's still pretty bad so no, it really hasn't changed a lot.

Yes it did!

OOC: The fact that it costs almost four million USD yet it can beaten by a T-55 says something.

OOC: It's still pretty bad so no, it really hasn't changed a lot.

It actually did, slightly.



It's no longer the size of a clown car, and gained a bunch of weight[for reasons unknown, since this seems to be less armored then the last one O.o]



Whatever, I tried to help.

OOC: The fact that it costs almost four million USD yet it can beaten by a T-34 says something.




fix'd :)

It cant be beaten by a t-34! You are such a stupid (***)!

I'm simply going to reiterate my previous post here:

OOC: Good Lord, this is getting ridiculous.

Firstly, I'm no tank expert - in fact, the only thing I'm even close to an expert in is organic chemistry, and since I left college, that's been a little sketchy.

However, a look on wikipedia should tell you that the armour on your tanks...isn't great - no-one will buy it, not even friendly nations! And as for giving them to an enemy: my nation would not accept a gift of war vehicles that a) we don't use, and therefore would be a logistical nightmare to cater for, and b) that are coming from a nation we are at war with - we don't know what you've done to them. Plus, unless you're planning to transport them in lead boxes, the radiation those things would give off would be detected before the ship made port - most nations here employ radiation checks through their customs, and uranium tankettes would be picked up...rather quickly.

Now, most of the guys here are happy to give you some pointers - and a lot of them know more than most, especially over at the Draftroom (one in fact adds to wikipedia articles, writing about tanks I never even knew existed). If you can't take the criticism here, then the guys there will dissect your tank to the last bolt and tear it to shreds - it'd be better if you cooled off a little, took some time to think about it and then came back with a design that's got it's basis at least on a real-life tank - take a look at their statistics, and see how different they are to your tank, then amend as necessary to bring it in line. Hell, look at other tanks, ask people like Lyras, Macabees, and other tank designers for help - there's no shortage of them on NS.

And they're not going to invade you over a poor tank design - they know better (or at least should) than that.

Also - the flaming and cursing don't endear people to your cause, along with the general belligerence. We've (or most of us) have been in this situation - take the help that comes and be grateful for it!

*sigh*

Roef, learn to accept constructive criticism or be prepared to become known the most hated and n00bish nation on NS. Remember that Volzgrad has been on NS for almost 2 years, myself for almost a year and Pan-Arab-Barronia almost 4 years, we do actually know what we're talking about.

oh my..


your tank has a total armor thickness of 25mm.


The F-34 tank gun from the T-34, firing HEAT rounds has a total penetration of 75mm. T-34 has better armor too.

It cant be beaten by a t-34! You are such a stupid (***)!

Yes, it can. In fact, its armor could be beaten by me punching it. Look at your index finger right now--that's how much armor your tank has.

It has more armor than the Stryker, but yes any modern tank could destroy it in a single hit. Though, with its gun, it could destroy any modern tank with a single hit too. Now just make it lighter to take advantage of the lack in armor and you have something.

It has more armor than the Stryker.

Doesn't the Stryker use composite armor? I've read on wiki that it can withstand 14.5mm rounds over the frontal arc.

Yes and according to his writeup this has a combined total of 38mm of armor, not 25. I would suspect it could handle 15.5mm machine gun strikes, though, not anything much higher. This tank could be useful if he looked at the Sheridan and took more design aspects from that tank.

Dear Mr. John Ferky,
I have noticed some things about your tank that you should change to make it more viable on today's battlefield. You have two options. With the light armor you have listed your tank should not weigh anything over 30 tons. If the armor you listed is correct I suggest that you reduce the total weight by at least 2/3rds, and lower the price by $1,000,000 dollars.

If this is meant to be a MBT, in the 90 ton range, capable of defending against hits from other MBTs, then you have a second option for improvement With the weight listed you have ample room to place more armor. For the wight listed you should be able to replace the current armor with a more effective, yet still low cost option like depleted uranium. With this new heavier armor your listed weight and price would be justified. We hope you take our suggestions to heart.
Signed,
John Dawbson
COD, Phoenix Dynamix

[OOC: 38mm of armour? Steel, iron, and then "bulletproof" armour? I could shoot it with an RPG-7 and the spall would kill everyone inside. That would be rather sad.

Also, never, never, never, never, never ever mix metric and imperial. It looks crappy that way.]

Maybe he's designing it to be a light tank perhaps? He may be getting the Main Battle Tank and Light Tank titles confused.

Doesn't the Stryker use composite armor? I've read on wiki that it can withstand 14.5mm rounds over the frontal arc.

OOC: General Dynamics and the Army say that the Stryker can survive 14.5mm rounds on all aspects. With applique it take larger stuff, but the Stryker is not a tank by any means.

OOC: General Dynamics and the Army say that the Stryker can survive 14.5mm rounds on all aspects. With applique it take larger stuff...
They don't say that anymore, actually.
Add on armor is required for 14.5mm resistance.

~15mm RHA can protect against 7.62mm projectiles (13mm inclined at 60 dgs can protect against 14.5mm API). The Spanish Pizarro ICV is protected by a 25mm appliqué composite armor which protects against 14.5mm at 500m all-around (so, 25+15 = 40mm). This appliqué is probably something similar to LIBA, and contains ceramic.


They don't say that anymore, actually.


Actually, yes they do (http://www.gdls.com/programs/strykers.html).

The Stryker does not protect against 14.5mm machineguns all around without add-on armor.


That page does not seem to have been updated since the Stryker's adoption.

*sigh*

Roef, learn to accept constructive criticism or be prepared to become known the most hated and n00bish nation on NS. Remember that Volzgrad has been on NS for almost 2 years, myself for almost a year and Pan-Arab-Barronia almost 4 years, we do actually know what we're talking about.

5/6. I've been around in various guises since 2003. ;)

The Stryker does not protect against 14.5mm machineguns all around without add-on armor.

General Dynamics claims otherwise. Globalsecurity (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/iav.htm) claims that the crew and engine compartments (which means most of the armored surface area around the vehicle) are protected against 14.5mm API, while an add-on appliqué protect against RPGs. Army-technology (http://www.army-technology.com/projects/stryker/) claims the same thing, while mentioning LIBA as the appliqué.

Roef, learn to accept constructive criticism or be prepared to become known the most hated and n00bish nation on NS. Remember that Volzgrad has been on NS for almost 2 years, myself for almost a year and Pan-Arab-Barronia almost 4 years, we do actually know what we're talking about.

Your time on NationStates has no relationship to your knowledge on armored vehicles.

The currently deployed Stryker can protect against 14.5mm threats now but that is only becasue the original armor was added on to after spot tests found it was ineffective against the claimed level.

Your time on NationStates has no relationship to your knowledge on armored vehicles.

OOC: Well, obviously ;) but in this case, it's just as much constructive criticism RPing-wise as design-wise (which, as to prove your point, I couldn't design a brick, let alone a tank, despite my 5 years here)

Your time on NationStates has no relationship to your knowledge on armored vehicles.

OOC: That is understandable, but I was simply trying to make the point that some people on NS have that experience and do know what they're talking aboutm and that Roef should stop flaming anyone who says a bad word about his designs/threads.