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?