WesWorld

This self propelled artillery was called Stormartillerivagn m/43. Here is a link to it, wit some good pics.
It´s only in swedish. But it is in working condition by the P5 community.
http://www.foreningenp5.com/sv/fordon/sav_m43/sav_m43.htm

So it looks like I stand corrected on the issue of weight... but now I see the date. 1943. It doesn't look advanced enough to condemn it on those grounds, but I am a bit wary...

As Johan said its the SAV (Stormartillerivagn) or Assualt artillery vehichle built on the LT vz.38 chassis (already being built by China) and a development of the PAV (w 75mm gun)


From pansarmuseum

Hey, as I said, I'm not outright condemning it. But if China can introduce a 1943 SPG in 1937, why can't Russia introduce, oh, an IS-2 in 1938, hm? After all, if even China can introduce a 1943-dated AFV, then Russia should be able to do so as well. And maybe the Brits can introduce the Black Prince and the Comet, and the US can introduce the Pershing, and... You see what I'm saying? Just because it's not a gamebreaker doesn't mean I'm prepared to accept an earlier introduction date...

But what do all the others say? My one concern about weight was answered, so...

Since the Germans are introducing Panthers and Tigers....
And for China it makes sense to use a chassi that is in production and that was introduce elsewhere in 1933.

China =\= Germany. And as I keep saying, it doesn't look to me like, in spite of the date issue, this SPG is out of line with the realm of possibility, so you don't need to act like I'm on a witchhunt.

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
Since the Germans are introducing Panthers and Tigers....
And for China it makes sense to use a chassi that is in production and that was introduce elsewhere in 1933.

Wesworld German equipment is quite different than historical equipment, so when you say Tiger and Panther I muse about the historical tank and then muse about what the wesworld version looks like.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

But what do all the others say? My one concern about weight was answered, so...

My opinion :

As to the general tech date issue, yes I care.
I used to argue these things but have tried to reduce it to commentary and leave it. Albeit things like shoulder fired rockets...argh.

Generally speaking, the slippery slope bit cited is the reason to care. Not everyone wants or has time to write storylines pushing their tech far and above timeline (not trying to pick on anyone with that) or research the rare advanced items. We *should* be able to pick a historical vehicle/plane out of a book and have it be fairly competitive.

Certain assets push the tech envelope- gun bore/ armor slope/ etc. Those should be called. However it's primarily the duty of the player to police their own contributions (again, general), and explain how they fit the timeline.

Cutting edge things are expected to cost more and break more, modified by how much backstory is put into it to clarify development.

The ability to design own tanks/planes is to both customize your assets, play with storylines and use neat pictures. I find it fun. The Dutch marines need an amphibious tank, I find a pic of a prototype, I use tanksharp, bingo I have a amphibious tank I can feel good about thats not just a copy of a period soviet model. Thats a positive and , IMHO, as it should be.

I am now(1) generally against picking on pictures meant to illustrate things as - unbalanced, or 'to modern' (exception-sloped armor), or not to scale. Drawing ability and time varies, I'd rather see an image that isn't quite "right" but illustrates the piece than a page of stats.

However I want those stats to reflect something reasonable for that time period. In this case 1937-38. Remember, one can always roll it out later, when it better fits timewise, and that also gives a better development timeline.

Well said!

So you think it's too early for this vehicle ?

Quoted

Originally posted by parador
So you think it's too early for this vehicle ?

IMO yes. I think we are pushing the weapons envelope a little bit, me being guilty also sometimes. I try to restrain myself sometimes but you know.

If you're using the lessons of Hammer 36 it should be late 1939 at the latest. Is not like Bharat's initial approach of just welding more armor to the Arguns; it took a year for Bharat just to implement that decision. Bharat got another response and will not be seeing until 1939.

There is not a war going on so research can follow a more leasured pace. I think the vehicle is perfect for China and in their capabilities, it just the way they reached the decision and the development of the vehicle. Again, IMO a middle to late 1939 seems closer than trying to rush the vehicle into production too soon.

Would it be possible to start with a 75mm-armed version in 1938 and then advance it to 105mm in 1940?

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Would it be possible to start with a 75mm-armed version in 1938 and then advance it to 105mm in 1940?

That is another possibility. Shows linear development.

A 75mm armed version makes alot of sence and is certainly not ahead of the curve. Atlantis has just started producing 75mm armed mobile arty on the AT-35 chassis and has been producing small numbers on the AT-33 chassis. There are also many other historical American designs of this period mounting 75mm guns.

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
A 75mm armed version makes alot of sence and is certainly not ahead of the curve. Atlantis has just started producing 75mm armed mobile arty on the AT-35 chassis and has been producing small numbers on the AT-33 chassis. There are also many other historical American designs of this period mounting 75mm guns.

Bharat is also mounting 75mm guns on Argun hulls on the Mechanized Brigades. It seems agreeable for China to do this. Shows linear development and is on par with the rest of the WW. I think the dateline recommended by Brock could work.

So China will start with a 75mm gun and may be in some years it will be changed to a bigger gun.

I will change the stats !!!

Thats not to say there isn't any larger mobile guns out there but they are really large and bulky like these....





Both mount 7.5" guns but are really too slow to be used in modern warfare.

Tung Meng SP75
self propelled Artillery

Weight: 9,5 t corrected
Crew: 4 men
Length: 5,05 m
Width: 2,14 m
Hight: 2,29 m
Speed: 43 km/h
Range: 250 km
Motor: Hong Po EPA-II
Power: 162 PS

Armament:
Maingun: 75mm Howitzer H/37


Armour:
Car Tower
Front: 25 mm
Back: 15 mm
Side: 15 mm

standard camo

Seems fine but weight should go down a little bit. Remember you're using a lighter gun. I guess your engineers will notice by 1939 the vehicle is robust enough to carry a 105mm and try accordingly before entering service in 1940.

Down to ~8tons ???