WesWorld

Busan Tractor Factory J5 A (mod. 1942)


Crew: 5 (driver, loader, gunner, commander, radio operator)
Weight: 32,5 t
Armament: 1x 75 mm Cannon, 2x MG
Engine: V-12 diesel engine with 450 hp
Speed: Street= 42 Km/h, terrain= 32 Km/h
Range: 250 Km
Armor:
hull front: 70 mm
hull side: 60 mm
hull rear: 35 mm
hull top: 20 mm
hull bottom: 25 mm
turret front: 75 mm
turret side: 60 mm
turret rear: 35 mm
turret top: 20 mm



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Seoul Automotive SAT-25-2 (mod. late 1942)

Crew: 4 (driver, loader, gunner, commander)
Weight: 24,5 t
Armament: 1x 75 mm high velocity Cannon, 1x MG
Engine: V-12 diesel engine with 350 hp
Speed: Street= 73 Km/h, terrain= 42 Km/h
Range: 350 Km
Armor:
hull front: 30 mm
hull side: 20 mm
hull rear: 5 mm
hull top: 5 mm
hull bottom: 5 mm
turret front: 35 mm
turret side: 20 mm
turret rear: 5 mm
turret top: 5 mm



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

The "Busan Tractor Factory J5 A (mod. 1942)" specs look relatively reasonable, I think, but I don't think that second tank is going to work all that well. The main gun is extremely long even for this period, and a road speed of 73kph / 45mph? When you combine the speed, decent armor, and that massive gun, it throws up a lot of red flags for me. The other mods and I've been trying to rein in tank development over the past few years in order to keep things relatively plausible, and the SAT-25-2 would definitely be a problem for me on that count. It's got suspiciously similar specs to the mid-1950s M41 Walker Bulldog (which had a more powerful engine and less range). How is Chosen, not a tank-producing country by any stretch of the imagination, designing two tanks in the same year, one of which leapfrogs every other tank in Wesworld by a good decade or more?

For the SAT-35-2 I oriented myself on american tank hunters (M10/M18/M36).
The idea with the SAT-25-2 was to sacrifice everything for firepower and mobility.
The gun is supposed to be a 7,5cm L/70 (barrel length would be around 5,2m) which is pretty much in scale in the drawing. Do you think a L/70 would be too advanced?
I wasnt too shure about the speed. My tank is supposed to be somewhere between a M18 and a M10, the M18 made over 90km/h on the road as far as I know...anyway, I will correct the speed.
Not too shure what you mean with decent armour, the tank is vurnable too almost everything bigger than .50 cal.
I could downgrade even that though.

Quoted

Originally posted by Daidalos
For the SAT-35-2 I oriented myself on american tank hunters (M10/M18/M36).
The idea with the SAT-25-2 was to sacrifice everything for firepower and mobility.
The gun is supposed to be a 7,5cm L/70 (barrel length would be around 5,2m) which is pretty much in scale in the drawing. Do you think a L/70 would be too advanced?
I wasnt too shure about the speed. My tank is supposed to be somewhere between a M18 and a M10, the M18 made over 90km/h on the road as far as I know...anyway, I will correct the speed.
Not too shure what you mean with decent armour, the tank is vurnable too almost everything bigger than .50 cal.
I could downgrade even that though.

Okay, I can understand what you're aiming for, now. I mainly saw the specs and drawing and it looked like a straight-up clone of the M41 Walker Bulldog, hence my concern. Now that I know better what you're aiming for, I might be able to help you more.

The US tank destroyers sacrificed a lot of weight to achieve those speeds, up to the point where they dispensed with the turret roof entirely. The M18 Hellcat featured only 25mm of armor on the front of the turret, 19mm on the gun shield, and 13mm on the glacis; compared to the 35mm you have on the front of the turret and 30mm on the glacis. The Hellcat does have slightly better all-around armour - 13mm all around - while you've dipped as low as 5mm in some places. The Walker Bulldog has 32mm of armour on the turret face and 25mm on the glacis, so the SAT-35-2 is comparable in the frontal arcs to the M41. The rest of the Walker Bulldog's armour is fairly similar to the M18 Hellcat, ranging between 10-19mm depending on the location.

Regarding speed. The M18 Hellcat made its 80 km/hr speed in large part due to its high power-to-weight ratio of 18.9 horsepower per ton. The SAT=35-2 has a power to weight ratio of 14.3 horsepower per ton, which puts it closer to the 50kph M10 tank destroyer.

Next, the 75mm/L70 gun. The M18 Hellcat (continuing the comparison) used a 75mm/L52 gun - eighteen calibers shorter than your proposed 75mm/L70. At the moment, the largest 75mm gun used in Wesworld are (to my knowledge) the 75mm/L53 guns used by Britain and France, although the French have tinkered some with an L60 gun. Japan, the US, and most of the European powers use 75mm guns in the L40-L50 range (when they use 75mm guns at all, which not everyone does).

Next, I have to ask about Chosen's current plethora of designs. Chosen is introducing another tank (the J5A) and a completely different series of fully-tracked vehicles - having never designed a single tank or armoured vehicle before now. It takes three to five years to get a tank from the beginning of a design project to its introduction into service, but these vehicles just appear out of the blue, and are superior in many ways to tanks designed by countries with very talented, well-funded, long-established design teams like Germany, Russia, Britain, and the US.

Let me address my initial concerns with this chart:


As you can see at a glance, the SAT-35-2 as currently designed compares favorably to the 1952-designed M41 Walker Bulldog in a number of ways. It has better firepower and much better range. The armour is thicker in some places, thinner in others. It has approximately the same weight, the same number of crewmen, and a hair more speed. But it has less horsepower and a significantly lower power-to-weight ratio. Now that you explain your intentions, I can see how you tried to arrive at your conclusions - but I look at the comparison, see all the similarities, and have my issue with the final results.

Does all this make sense?

I am convinced. The first parameters were overoptimistic. How is that?




Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Seoul Automotive SAT-25-2 (mod. late 1942)

Crew: 4 (driver, loader, gunner, commander)
Weight: 24,5 t
Armament: 1x 75 mm L/52 Cannon, 1x MG
Engine: V-12 diesel engine with 350 hp
Speed: Street= 58 Km/h, terrain= 35 Km/h
Range: 190 Km
Armor:
hull front: 25 mm
hull side: 20 mm
hull rear: 5 mm
hull top: 5 mm
hull bottom: 5 mm
turret front: 30 mm
turret side: 20 mm
turret rear: 5 mm
turret top: 5 mm


Well, concerning the number of my new designs your critique is cheap in my opinion.
If we would play realisticly, the only thing minor nations like Chosen could do would be counting grains of rice. Chosen wasn't even played in the past so am I supposed to write a book about economical development in the last 50 years (for a fictional country) just to be able to make some design proposals?
The transition from an agrar nation (which Korea was in the 30ies) to even a half industrialized one would take decades.

Furthermore you should keep in mind that everything I post in the weapons of Warfare section are Equipment suggestions. No vehicle has been fielded for now. And untill the J5A could be fielded in significant numbers (Significant means enough vehicles to equip two or three tank Brigades) it will be at least mid 1944.
I agree, the designs I am proposing for Chosens forces are utopic if the realworld capacities of Korea in the 30ies are considered, but compared to major nations in wesworld my tanks and planes are still one or two generations behind....outdated enough.

Quoted

Originally posted by Daidalos
I am convinced. The first parameters were overoptimistic. How is that?

Seoul Automotive SAT-25-2 (mod. late 1942)

*snipped*

Much better, I'd say... though I'd now have another thought.

The J5A has a pretty decent blend of speed, protection and firepower, particularly for a medium tank. If it were me, I'd actually suggest designing a tank destroyer based on that chassis, with the main gun in a German or Russian-style casemate rather than a turret. That would lower the overall height of the vehicle, reduce the complexity of the machine, and reduce the weight. If the weight is reduced, then the power to weight ratio (and thus the speed) will rise somewhat.

The end result would be a faster, much better-protected tank destroyer which shares a high level of mechanical similarity to the army's chief tank.

It might not fit with Chosen's armoured doctrine (having heard nothing about that, I can't speculate) but it would certainly make things a lot easier, in my opinion.

Thanks, good idea, I will consider it.
Concerning the armored doctrine...I will write something about the doctrine of the army later. Due to the rugged and hilly terrain in Chosen and some other reasons tanks will play a minor part in the Army doctrine.

Given the terrian and the masses of Chinese tanks (of differing qaulities) I'd agree with Brock that a casemate tank-destroyer is probably best for the bulk of the armoured force, with some tanks in smaller numbers as support.

When thinking of generations of equipment don't think global, you will only ever potentially face a few nation's tanks, mostly from your local region. China and Japan are the most likely, perhaps Russia too. Even so what are the chances Chosen can 100% match Russian and Japanese efforts (without buying off-the-shelf), although matching China might be easier.

Economics plays a sketchy part in everything we do. There has been too much hand-waving in the past by all players, either through inexperience or flawed thinking at the time. It seems Chosen may well have an industrial base aided by Japanese development, but all the same Chosen has to develop the diesel V-12, torsion bar suspension, 75mm gun, welded armour etc. Either they are starting from scratch, or relying on Japanese items/ know-how. Of course we know IC Chosen would regard these as 100% Chosen products but OOC the reality can be somewhat different. For example, the latest British tanks are Anglo-Canadian joint developments, FAR tanks share technologies, nearly all Argentine tanks rely on Italian and German technology etc.
You need to think about how and why Chosen's agricultural economy is/ has evolving/ evolved (it doesn't need to be a 15,000 word essay with graphs!). From previous experiences we've had it's safe to say if you can't justify something in your own mind then you'll find it much harder to convince anyone else.

Yes, I understand what you mean, the engine and gun wouldn't have to be domestic products though, I just need someone who sells me the stuff.
With the Sat-23-2 I was to much obsessed with countering the next generation chinese tanks which have not yet been revealed. Problem with that is, that I made those chinese tanks to a large extent.
Anyway, I am really not planning to make Chosen an industrial superpower but if I have to keep it real world realistic I would have to equip my army with pitchforks and donkeys.