The Best That Never Was 2 (Prototypes)

[Raellus]

2S35 Koalitsiya-SV

This beast is too recent to fit in any but the 2013 T2k continuity, but how can we not speculate at this Russian double-barreled SPAG

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/russia-nearly-fielded-a-double-barreled-self-propelled-artillery-gun

-

[Vespers War]

C&Rsenal did an episode last week on the Gehendra Rifle. It was a late 1890s Nepalese rifle based on the Martini-Henry with modifications for domestic production. The action was modified to run on flat springs instead of a coil spring, and rifles were hand-fitted rather than machined. There was also a carbine version that's exceedingly rare - Nepal had little cavalry and it's not clear who the carbines were intended for. It's worth noting these post-date the introduction of smokeless powder and bolt-action rifles. Britain didn't want Nepal to have the most modern equipment, but did want Nepal to be better equipped than China in order to serve as a buffer state between India and China.

Gehendra Rifle
Wt 4.20 kg, Mag 1i, Dam 3, Pen Nil, Blk 8, SS 2, Rng 90

Gehendra Carbine
Wt 3.50 kg, Mag 1i, Dam 2, Pen Nil, Blk 6, SS 2, Rng 60

One other firearm developed in the late 1890s was the Bira, a manually cranked machine gun using an action similar to the Gardner but reversed so that the crank was rotated counter-clockwise instead of clockwise, as the inventor felt a pulling motion could be sustained longer than a pushing motion. It was twin-barreled and used a pan magazine that visually resembles the later Lewis magazine, loaded with 120 rounds of .577/450 Martini. They are incredibly heavy, at roughly 900 pounds for the gun, and each magazine weighs 30 pounds empty with the ammunition adding another 10 pounds when loaded. They were intended for use in defensive positions, so the tradeoff of massive weight in exchange for more reliability was viewed as a positive. Like the rifles, parts were hand-fitted to each gun, so most pieces are not interchangeable without shims or other modifications.

Recoil is negligible since the gun is so heavy and is mounted on what's basically a light artillery carriage. Rate of Fire is based on Royal Navy tests of the Gardner, which fired 236 rounds in 30 seconds in its 2-barrel configuration. Since this is less than 700 RPM, ROF is 5 rather than 10 based on the guidelines in Infantry Weapons of the World.

Bira Manual Repeater
Wt 410 kg, ROF 5, Mag 120, Dam 3, Pen Nil, Blk 10, Rng 115

[Raellus]

Burya Cruise Missile

A massive, ramjet-powered nuclear-tipped cruise missile with a range of around 4,000 miles.

https://www.twz.com/38188/the-soviet-unions-burya-cruise-missile-was-a-little-known-cold-war-monster

-

[Tegyrius]

It looks like the M2A3 Bradley Hellfire and 1e's M920 Hellfire AT Vehicle may have had some factual basis. According to this, ground-launched Hellfires were trialed on HMMWVs and an M901 in 1990-91:

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/m998-glh-l/

- C.

[Homer]

Not sure if it was ever live fire tested, but the AUSA Greenbook circa 1983-4 had a picture of an 880 pickup with a twin hellfire mounted in the back reportedly being used as a surrogate by the oehigh tech test bed. Its been a minute, but I think the article was pretty heavily focused on the DIV 86 structures, especially the light and motorized divisions and the divisional aviation brigades.

Thats about the time were on the cusp of fielding tactical UAVs (Aquila), bringing in no-shine combat boots, and getting rid of the Dragon

That may have been the same issue/year with the CAWS as a developmental weapons system, the M247 DIVAD test battery being fielded, and the add for the Ares 75mm automatic cannon mounted on the AAI high survivability test vehicle-lightweight- oeIn the time it takes to read this sentence, the ares 75mm cannon has put five rounds on target.

[Raellus]

Hellfire CUCV

From the Technicals thread.

-

[Homer]

Similar type vehicle. I think the picture I saw was taken out west, it was a little drier.

Lots of weird stuff got tested in that period.

[Raellus]

Object 287

Please forgive me if this one's been posted before.

The Object 287 Taifun was a tank-destroyer () based on the T-64 chassis. It had a super-low-profile turret with two low-pressure 73mm guns on either side of a pop-up ATGM launcher.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taifun_9M15

-

[Vespers War]

Please forgive me if this one's been posted before.

The Object 287 Taifun was a tank-destroyer () based on the T-64 chassis. It had a super-low-profile turret with two low-pressure 73mm guns on either side of a pop-up ATGM launcher.

-

I don't think it's shown up in this thread previously, but it was the last vehicle I statted out in my Soviet Missile Tanks thread.

[Raellus]

BMT-72

I don't think it's shown up in this thread previously, but it was the last vehicle I statted out in my Soviet Missile Tanks thread.

Thanks, VW.

Here's a strange one- probably too late for the Twilight War, but not outside the realm of possibility. In the 1990s, perhaps taking a page from Israel's Merkava MBT, the Ukrainians experimented with a heavy IFV based on the T-72. The BMT-72 featured a stretched hull (see image below) to accommodate a five-man troop compartment between the turret (from the T-80, with reduced ammo capacity) and the engine block. Entrance and egress is affected via a trio of roof hatches (see image).

Information is sparse. The following link is the most comprehensive source I've managed to find.

https://en.topwar.ru/142484-tyazhelaya-boevaya-mashina-pehoty-bmt-72-ukraina.html

I'm not surprised that this design didn't enter production. A five-person infantry squad is underpowered, and exiting the vehicle under fire from roof hatches makes the dismounting under fire extremely hazardous.

The Ukrainians also experimented with a version based on their T-84 MBT, the BTMP-84 (2001). The concept and design was similar to the BMT-72, but the engine was offset from center to allow the five troops to dismount via a door in the rear of the tank (like the Merkava). This, no doubt, would have improved survivability for the dismounted infantry, but the project, offered for export, attracted no customers.

-

[Vespers War]

There was also a Heavy APC program, the BMP-55. It converted a T-55 to an APC with a 3 person crew and 10 infantry passengers. They swapped the machine end for end so the engine would be at the front and the old front could be fitted with doors to avoid the ingress/egress issues of the BMT-72. They also swapped out the original engine for a 5TDF from a T-64. Armament was an RWS with a 12.7mm machine gun with the potential to mount a pair of ATGMs.

As an effort to find some use for obsolete T-54/55 hulls, it made sense. Unfortunately, it was proposed during the Peace Dividend era, and was probably relatively expensive given the extensive conversion being performed.

Additionally, 2005 saw the BMPV-64 prototype built. Shockingly, it was a T-64 conversion. 3 crew and up to 12 passengers, again swapped end-for-end to clear the rear for a clamshell door. The RWS for this one had a 30mm autocannon and a coaxial 7.62mm machine gun. Defenses were augmented with Nozh ERA and Zaslon active defense systems. Again, no sales were made.

[Raellus]

There was also a Heavy APC program, the BMP-55. It converted a T-55 to an APC with a 3 person crew and 10 infantry passengers. They swapped the machine end for end so the engine would be at the front and the old front could be fitted with doors to avoid the ingress/egress issues of the BMT-72. They also swapped out the original engine for a 5TDF from a T-64. Armament was an RWS with a 12.7mm machine gun with the potential to mount a pair of ATGMs.

Interesting. Sounds very much like the IDF's Achzarit heavy APC (also based on the T-54/55). It first entered service in 1988, so perhaps the Achzarit was an inspiration for the USSR's BMP-55.

As an effort to find some use for obsolete T-54/55 hulls, it made sense. Unfortunately, it was proposed during the Peace Dividend era, and was probably relatively expensive given the extensive conversion being performed.

Given that most of the T2k timelines eliminate or tone down the Peace Dividend drawdowns, BMP-55 seems a likely candidate for at least partial-scale production and, therefore, would have made an appearance on the battlefields of the Twilight War. Dang, it's kind of a looker.

[Raellus]

'Schwarzer Jaguar' Haubitzejagdpanzer HJPz 2A

A prototype mockup from our very own Chalkline mating a former East German 122mm howitzer to a West German Jaguar 2 Raketenjagdpanzer.

To me, this marriage makes perfect sense. HOT and TOW missiles are going to be used up quickly (plus, there are better platforms to use them). On the other hand, stockpiles of DDR 122mm rounds would probably last considerably longer.

[Vespers War]

Weight's likely going to be an issue with that conversion. The Raketenjagdpanzer 4 Jaguar 2 carried a TOW launcher and 20 missiles, which would be around 500 kilograms total. A 122mm howitzer is about 3 tonnes on its own, and the lightest shell is ~17.5 kilograms, so 47 of those will add another 822 kilograms. There will probably need to be some internal reinforcements because the hull's designed for recoilless systems, so I wouldn't be surprised if the overall vehicle weight went from 25 tons to 30 tons. That's still not a heavy vehicle, but the engine's sized for the original vehicle, and the horsepower per ton is going to drop from 20 to 16.67. That's roughly on par with a Swiss Panzer 58 and only slightly better than an M60 Main Battle Tank.

[ChalkLine]

Weight's likely going to be an issue with that conversion. The Raketenjagdpanzer 4 Jaguar 2 carried a TOW launcher and 20 missiles, which would be around 500 kilograms total. A 122mm howitzer is about 3 tonnes on its own, and the lightest shell is ~17.5 kilograms, so 47 of those will add another 822 kilograms. There will probably need to be some internal reinforcements because the hull's designed for recoilless systems, so I wouldn't be surprised if the overall vehicle weight went from 25 tons to 30 tons. That's still not a heavy vehicle, but the engine's sized for the original vehicle, and the horsepower per ton is going to drop from 20 to 16.67. That's roughly on par with a Swiss Panzer 58 and only slightly better than an M60 Main Battle Tank.

The howitzer is not that weight, it's 40kg lighter than the 90mm of the kanone. I suspect you are including the weight of the ground system.
That's why the amount of shells has decreased because 90mm shells are lighter than 122mm shells.

Here's the numbers:

Barrel: 4.27m
Hull: 6.61m

47x 122mm rounds.
27.5 tons.
70km/h.


122mm Howitzer: 990.65kg (21.7kg/shell) 122 x 447mmR
90mm Cannon: 1,030.00kg (19.2kg/shell) 90 x 600-615mmR
+1,800.0kg armour applique (included)