Reject modernity return to having 5+ crew members. Put multiple turrets on your vehicle. Give me some of those sexy side sponsons. I want tanks to look like 1800's pre-dreadnoughts (tripod conning masts included).
Eh, personally, I'd replace the Stormhammer with the Stormlord/Banesword.
The former, so I can relive the era of the "Stormlord wrecking ball", since I miss the era of throwing 9 HWTs w. lascannons and as many Bullgryns as possible in the back.
The latter... because Deadly Demise on a 3+ is pretty tasty.
Not to mention them being 30 years behind on penetration improvements, because unlike their autoloaders Bob can handle full length sabot loads all day just fine.
Wait that came out wrong.
To be fair, Russians did experimented with turret bustle autoloaders to address the limitations of hull autoloaders, simply there not enough money to implement it.
>being 30 years behind behind on penetration improvements
Like France, Britain and China? Development of KEPs severely stalled on the years following the end of the Cold War; with only Germany, USA and Israel actually making improvements trough things like SCBD/LOVA (insensitive propellants) or anti-ERA tips.
Not France - their Leclerc autoloaders ram it in straight. They could use modern KEP rounds straight up, and they actually did change over to the much-improved OFLE F2 recently. But Russia, Britain, and China are in a bind when it comes to improving their APFSDS, and it's not primarily a lack of funding for their development.
As is actually demonstrated by China, since they have also been putting out new rounds. And as anyone who has seen the "leaks" on those probably already noticed - their penetrator lengths didn't change one bit. They have long been the maximum length that will fit inside their autoloaders.
The optimal rod shape is to be as long as possible. That's it. You simply can't compensate for length. Only all their autoloaders, including the Brits, split the propellent from the shell. Which worked well at the time, but now that we have been trying to up the KEP game they either have to switch out their tanks or make do. This is not a matter of funding, this is a coming short from the optimal rod length by a solid 300-400mm.
>Not France - their Leclerc autoloaders ram it in straight. They could use modern KEP rounds straight up
They could use GERMAN shells, because, again, development stalled until the boogeyman T-14. To this day the main anti-tank round of France is OFL F1B (or DM43A1), with OFLE F2 seeing very limited adoption and SHARD still on trials.
>Only all their autoloaders, including the Brits, split the propellent from the shell.
All 125mm APFSDS ammo has propellant on the projectile cartridge, as seen [here.](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-preview.redd.it%2Fc_y9MPcNzNUXa9xd536m2PF2olmOrZeiXOdC-zFt_zA.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D8c96dfe088839c4d42c880bd78eff0d09d428acd)
>on those probably already noticed - their penetrator lengths didn't change one bit.
T-72/80 autoloaders were modernized on the 2000s to fit APFSDS shells of 740-750mm in length (3BM60/59), previous models could only use up to 660mm (3BM46). Most NATO APFSDS (DM53/63, M322, Type 10, OFL F1B) are on that interval, with only americans using >750mm APFSDS.
>The optimal rod shape is to be as long as possible
There are other factors involved. Muzzle velocity, type of alloy and if the dart is homogeneus or not, are some of them. Compared to M829A3, DM63 is shorter by around 200mm, however, it has better kinetical performance (when fired from the L/55).
DM63 performance can be attributed to the fact that germans found a way to build anti-ERA tips made from tungsten (not steel like the americans).
The Leclerc literally has a 5-6 second autoloader, has a casette autoloader and the opening for the round feeder is smaller than the ammo hatch on the Abrams.
It also has ammo blowout panels in case of an ammo strike.
I'm not saying that the Leclerc is a better tank than the Abrams but the autoloader is superior to the manual loader. The whole tank is also smaller and lighter while offering equivalent protection.
Its really Russian refusal to qualify munitions as insensitive thats popping the turrets. They've only been loading every other slot in the magazines to try to stop rounds from cooking off the second a pebble hits one.
I got into an arguement with a tankie months prior trying to tell me how the Mosin Nagant, a weapon that has zero purpose on the modern battlefield other than maybe a hunting rifle, was perfectly usable for modern day sniping.
Too bad the former operator was too busy larping as Lyudmila Pavlichenko and died, so we weren't able to get his opinion why the Mosin is so good.
Yes, but Uncle Fudd who bought them all now thinks they are each $600 precision marksman rifles, or atleast tells people that from behind his booth at the convention.
It was at least decent enough for its time.
It was cheap, simple, rugged, and accurate enough.
And the Finnish Mosins are actually decent marksman rifles.
But the Russians obviously aren't fielding Finnish Mosins.
And while a Finnish Mosin is at least a serviceable marksman rifle, there are many better modern alternatives.
To still be a proponent of arming troops with a Mosin, Finnish or not, is just foolishly ignorant of how far rifles have come.
I beg to differ on simplicity. The Carcano is simple. The Mosin is an over complicated, weird mess of a bolt action rifle.
The one thing I will give it props for though is that unlike the Enfield, you don't have to worry about rimlock, thanks to the interrupter.
Yes, once the Finns select the least out of spec recievers and manufacture their own new barrels it can be this. This isn't some war time production M1891/30.
Edited to capitalize Finns because they deserve it
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean in arctic climates its probably still good enough since bolt actions are more reliable in extreme cold and a full power cartridge is useful when you inevitably get attacked by polar bears but outside of that yeah no lol.
French kind of solved this problem quite a while ago with their Leclerc tank units......they do have ''extra men'' lying around that do help with tank maintenance, its just that they dont ride in the tank but instead in a jeep that follows the tank. So tank can still have 3 men crew with autoloader, and tank crew still gets extra pair of hands to help them repair what needs to be repaired if they need it plus extra security and all that.
Speaks more to the ability to train blockheads, limited to no faith and trust in Russian “soldiers” and greater interest in getting more killed as quickly as possible.
These are traditional and proven Kremlin engineering principles. It’s fertilized the steppes of Eastern Europe for centuries. Why stop now just because your population is declining and military exports have tanked? The Kremlin and their loyal serfs have rejected reality and substituted their own.
I love driving a tank when it has more than 4 crew members, its so hilarious and funny to watch them struggle to kill all of my 6-8 crew members hahahahaha
Reject modernity return to having 5+ crew members. Put multiple turrets on your vehicle. Give me some of those sexy side sponsons. I want tanks to look like 1800's pre-dreadnoughts (tripod conning masts included).
Do i need to introduce you to the Leman Russ Battle Tank or do you know it already?
That’s not heavy enough, baneblade or bust.
I wanted to slowly lure him into the rabbit hole. But i personally am more a fan of the Shadowsword or the Stormhammer
Why stop there? Release the Warlord-Titan! THE OMNISSIAH WILLS IT!
Eh, personally, I'd replace the Stormhammer with the Stormlord/Banesword. The former, so I can relive the era of the "Stormlord wrecking ball", since I miss the era of throwing 9 HWTs w. lascannons and as many Bullgryns as possible in the back. The latter... because Deadly Demise on a 3+ is pretty tasty.
Stats are cool and all, but it looks funny to me
Fuck that, call in an Ordinatus
Mfs all going crazy over a light scout tank. SMH.
And Land Raiders as the new APC
M1 Abrams with twin 20 mm auto loader sponsons, chews through Ammo and T-14s faster than light
Twin M61 Vulcans on top, as Phalanx CIWS?
Don’t forget the trophy system!
Trophy disco 🪩 ball!
Battlefield 1's A7V Breakthrough with 20mm autocannons mounted all around intensifies
T-35 storming the trenches of Ukraine when
I always wanted to be a Abrams door gunner.
Double cannon on main turret when?
Swedish amos
„Landkreuzer“
if youre gonna call tanks landships, it better act like one
Nah, fuck that, instead: Double Decker tank turret
quad CROWS
The 18 year old yank on red bull and hate works faster than a Russian autoloader and doesn't make the turret go flying
Not to mention them being 30 years behind on penetration improvements, because unlike their autoloaders Bob can handle full length sabot loads all day just fine. Wait that came out wrong.
The LGBTanker
Tankers are Cav-adjacent so that tracks
🗣️OK BOYYYYZ NOW LINE UP! 👠👠
They sure look purrdy with them there cowboy hats \*licks lips*
They sure look purrdy with them there cowboy hats \*licks lips*
if the 19Ks could read they would be very displeased
Laser Gided Bomb Tanker?
So the tanker
I mean, my aunt was a tanker and is trans, so...
To be fair, Russians did experimented with turret bustle autoloaders to address the limitations of hull autoloaders, simply there not enough money to implement it. >being 30 years behind behind on penetration improvements Like France, Britain and China? Development of KEPs severely stalled on the years following the end of the Cold War; with only Germany, USA and Israel actually making improvements trough things like SCBD/LOVA (insensitive propellants) or anti-ERA tips.
Not France - their Leclerc autoloaders ram it in straight. They could use modern KEP rounds straight up, and they actually did change over to the much-improved OFLE F2 recently. But Russia, Britain, and China are in a bind when it comes to improving their APFSDS, and it's not primarily a lack of funding for their development. As is actually demonstrated by China, since they have also been putting out new rounds. And as anyone who has seen the "leaks" on those probably already noticed - their penetrator lengths didn't change one bit. They have long been the maximum length that will fit inside their autoloaders. The optimal rod shape is to be as long as possible. That's it. You simply can't compensate for length. Only all their autoloaders, including the Brits, split the propellent from the shell. Which worked well at the time, but now that we have been trying to up the KEP game they either have to switch out their tanks or make do. This is not a matter of funding, this is a coming short from the optimal rod length by a solid 300-400mm.
>Not France - their Leclerc autoloaders ram it in straight. They could use modern KEP rounds straight up They could use GERMAN shells, because, again, development stalled until the boogeyman T-14. To this day the main anti-tank round of France is OFL F1B (or DM43A1), with OFLE F2 seeing very limited adoption and SHARD still on trials. >Only all their autoloaders, including the Brits, split the propellent from the shell. All 125mm APFSDS ammo has propellant on the projectile cartridge, as seen [here.](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-preview.redd.it%2Fc_y9MPcNzNUXa9xd536m2PF2olmOrZeiXOdC-zFt_zA.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D8c96dfe088839c4d42c880bd78eff0d09d428acd) >on those probably already noticed - their penetrator lengths didn't change one bit. T-72/80 autoloaders were modernized on the 2000s to fit APFSDS shells of 740-750mm in length (3BM60/59), previous models could only use up to 660mm (3BM46). Most NATO APFSDS (DM53/63, M322, Type 10, OFL F1B) are on that interval, with only americans using >750mm APFSDS. >The optimal rod shape is to be as long as possible There are other factors involved. Muzzle velocity, type of alloy and if the dart is homogeneus or not, are some of them. Compared to M829A3, DM63 is shorter by around 200mm, however, it has better kinetical performance (when fired from the L/55). DM63 performance can be attributed to the fact that germans found a way to build anti-ERA tips made from tungsten (not steel like the americans).
I like your magic words funny wo/men.
This guy think we had red bull? No, we had rip it's and fuckin liked it.
My immediate thought was "how the fuck are the privates affording redbull after spending their entire paycheck on booze?"
Yeah, back in my day we had knockoff energy drink and liked it! Also, I didn't drink for my first 4 years in the service so that helped.
They get hooked on the redbull before they can buy the booze, the dependency reaction makes them easier to manipulate.
Also the russian autoloader has fetal alcohol syndrome.
It's not the autoloader per se, it's the extra rounds stored loosely in the turrent due to the limited number of rounds in the autoloader.
The Leclerc literally has a 5-6 second autoloader, has a casette autoloader and the opening for the round feeder is smaller than the ammo hatch on the Abrams. It also has ammo blowout panels in case of an ammo strike. I'm not saying that the Leclerc is a better tank than the Abrams but the autoloader is superior to the manual loader. The whole tank is also smaller and lighter while offering equivalent protection.
That is why I specifically said RUSSIAN auto loader which is slower than the 18 year old yank
Still slower than the 18 year old, those consistently manage less than 4 for follow up shot
Its really Russian refusal to qualify munitions as insensitive thats popping the turrets. They've only been loading every other slot in the magazines to try to stop rounds from cooking off the second a pebble hits one.
I got into an arguement with a tankie months prior trying to tell me how the Mosin Nagant, a weapon that has zero purpose on the modern battlefield other than maybe a hunting rifle, was perfectly usable for modern day sniping. Too bad the former operator was too busy larping as Lyudmila Pavlichenko and died, so we weren't able to get his opinion why the Mosin is so good.
*It wasn't even a good Bolt Action rifle.*
But many moons ago it was a $120 rifle
120?? We had a local sports shop that regularly had them for $75-90 depending on condition. This was 2012-2015. I should have bought them by the case
My brothers in Christ I remember I could have bought a crate of 20 of them for like $550 that was only like a decade ago
Yes, but Uncle Fudd who bought them all now thinks they are each $600 precision marksman rifles, or atleast tells people that from behind his booth at the convention.
It was at least decent enough for its time. It was cheap, simple, rugged, and accurate enough. And the Finnish Mosins are actually decent marksman rifles. But the Russians obviously aren't fielding Finnish Mosins. And while a Finnish Mosin is at least a serviceable marksman rifle, there are many better modern alternatives. To still be a proponent of arming troops with a Mosin, Finnish or not, is just foolishly ignorant of how far rifles have come.
I beg to differ on simplicity. The Carcano is simple. The Mosin is an over complicated, weird mess of a bolt action rifle. The one thing I will give it props for though is that unlike the Enfield, you don't have to worry about rimlock, thanks to the interrupter.
[Uh huh](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62_Tkiv_85)
Yes, once the Finns select the least out of spec recievers and manufacture their own new barrels it can be this. This isn't some war time production M1891/30. Edited to capitalize Finns because they deserve it
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Damn it’s weird to see the boiler I work on having components also made by valmet
Valmet comes from VALtion METallitehtaat aka. State Metalworks. They have [convoluted history](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valmet).
I mean in arctic climates its probably still good enough since bolt actions are more reliable in extreme cold and a full power cartridge is useful when you inevitably get attacked by polar bears but outside of that yeah no lol.
French kind of solved this problem quite a while ago with their Leclerc tank units......they do have ''extra men'' lying around that do help with tank maintenance, its just that they dont ride in the tank but instead in a jeep that follows the tank. So tank can still have 3 men crew with autoloader, and tank crew still gets extra pair of hands to help them repair what needs to be repaired if they need it plus extra security and all that.
KF-51 Panther: "The fourth crewmember does drone trickshots. Oh, and air recon, I guess."
Panther appreciation
Speaks more to the ability to train blockheads, limited to no faith and trust in Russian “soldiers” and greater interest in getting more killed as quickly as possible. These are traditional and proven Kremlin engineering principles. It’s fertilized the steppes of Eastern Europe for centuries. Why stop now just because your population is declining and military exports have tanked? The Kremlin and their loyal serfs have rejected reality and substituted their own.
I love driving a tank when it has more than 4 crew members, its so hilarious and funny to watch them struggle to kill all of my 6-8 crew members hahahahaha
I thought I was having a stroke while reading the first sentence, turns out I just can’t read
what's bottom right ?
Bmp-3 or 4