Gravtank Idea

Post by **Graham Kennedy** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:16 am

I've been playing with a gravtank idea off and on. I'm at a point where I'm not quite sure that I like it, but I can't think of anything to do other than fiddle with details...

Post by **Mikey** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:59 pm

I think you did this one backwards. It looks nice, but it's "just" a tread-less tank. Normally, your Coalition designs look like they've been built around a purpose and engineering philosophy first, and then the design reflects an organic extension of those facets. This looks like you just wanted to make a tank, without having an underlying idea of Coalition armor usage or engineering.

Post by **Graham Kennedy** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:04 pm

I figured that tanks are built pretty much as simply as they could be - box on the bottom, turret on the top. I can't think of any way to improve on that...

Post by **Mikey** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:17 pm

GrahamKennedy wrote:I figured that tanks are built pretty much as simply as they could be - box on the bottom, turret on the top. I can't think of any way to improve on that...

I'm not saying that there is, nor that any design process wouldn't end up with some convergent evolution arriving at this type of scheme. Please don't think I'm shitting on your idea, either. It's just that with your ship designs, you've set a damned high standard for yourself.

Tyyr · Post by **Tyyr** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:22 pm

Well, maybe starting with a more modern base than a King Tiger.

Just from taking a look at it your grav engines are awfully exposed. If you can they should be under your armor. What kind of weapons would be used against it? If the sloped armor would be helpful then I'd slope the sides more. With tanks height is important. The taller you are the harder it is to use cover. Most modern tanks have very flattened hulls and reduce turret height as much as possible. On most modern tanks you can't see the hull sides because they're little taller than the treads themselves.

Take a look at the M60A2. They made the turret as small as possible.

One thing you can do is a similar small turret containing nothing but the weapons with the crew down in the hull. It allows for a much smaller turret and potentially a safer crew.

A better place to start with your concept might be the Russian T95 concept:

Post by **Graham Kennedy** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:30 pm

Not bad, I like the slimmed down turret idea.

Yes the side paddle things are exposed... But I can't really see a way not to make them exposed except by basically making them the same shape as normal tank tracks, in which case you have something that looks exactly like a present day tank!

Tyyr · Post by **Tyyr** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:33 pm

Do they have to be exposed? I don't know how your anti-grav works but would they still function if the side armor was angled to cover them? Your motive system being exposed isn't that horrible, modern tanks have to put up with it, but those things would be horrific shot traps.

Post by **Graham Kennedy** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:37 pm

Well I am thinking that they could slant in instead of slanting out... kinda like how the front ones do. I'll play around with it and try a different turret. Might keep this one for a multi barrel flak tank though

Tyyr · Post by **Tyyr** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:38 pm

Post by **Graham Kennedy** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:44 pm

Kinda, but not so high on the sides; as it turns out an exact copy of the front ones will fit on the sides quite nicely, which is handy as it means a simplified design; here's a quick and dirty version to test the layout :

Tyyr · Post by **Tyyr** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:45 pm

That avoids the shot trap issue for certain.

Another thing you can do is avoid the old slab glacis design and go with a prow like the Ioseph Stalin 3 had.

Post by **Graham Kennedy** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:57 pm

First pass at a low profile turret.

Tyyr · Post by **Tyyr** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:47 pm

I've got some ideas for the shape of the hull if you're interested. The turret looks pretty good. The only issue is with the size of that gun and how low the turret is it'll have almost no ability to depress making it hard for the tank to take advantage of reverse slope positions.

Post by **Graham Kennedy** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:26 pm

Actually I sized it so that it could depress quite comfortably; that's why the central turret box is so high. It will do a 10 degree down angle like so :

Which I believe is at the upper end of the depression existing and past tanks have been capable of.

I do need to lower the hull height a bit.... I'm thinking crew being in reclined seats. Since it's presumably going to be some sort of energy cannon, there's no real need for a loader or space to move around a lot. Any suggestions appreciated.

Lighthawk · Post by **Lighthawk** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:15 pm

As for the turret depressing...it's a grav tank, if you need to aim a bit lower, just raise the rear end, right?

Gravtank Idea

Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea

Re: Gravtank Idea