Twilight 2020

[ChalkLine]

I'm sorry if I got a bit strident there guys. I got called a 'Russian appeaser' over at RPG.net and it got my back up

[Legbreaker]

I'm sorry if I got a bit strident there guys. I got called a 'Russian appeaser' over at RPG.net and it got my back up

Actually, I think you were pretty much on point with your earlier comments. When we step back and look at the world from an unbiased viewpoint, there's plenty of good reasons why Russia might be just a tiny bit upset with the west and the US in particular.

[ChalkLine]

Back on Topic.

I think a 'Twilight 20x0' set on China's eastern seaboard might be an idea. An international coalition gets cut off after taking a large swathe of the area. This would have the flat terrain of China's coastal plain and the urban terrain of the various mega-cities

[unkated]

Actually, re-read the top message: "on topic" is a discussion of what things would appear in a modern Twilight:2020 that would need additional rules.

And I thought of one I don't think was covered: limits/capabilities on autonomous actions by unmanned vehicles.

The Israelis have a couple of (armed) ground vehicles capable or an amount of autonomy (it can navigate a track; stop and report if anomalies detected). Distinctly, it cannot attack automatically - but that is more a matter of programming than a lack of capability.

I also know there are other unmanned vehicles in the US, UK, and Russia with a mix of capabilities.

Uncle Ted

[StainlessSteelCynic]

<snip>
The Israelis have a couple of (armed) ground vehicles capable or an amount of autonomy (it can navigate a track; stop and report if anomalies detected). Distinctly, it cannot attack automatically - but that is more a matter of programming than a lack of capability.
<snip>
Uncle Ted

To go further with this, the matter of programming is more to do with legalities and liabilities than any inability to create the software that would allow any unmanned vehicle autonomy in regards to attacking.
Another aspect of the situation is that in some cases communications difficulties have lessened human oversight of various robots used in combat zones so a push to have them able to "think" for themselves is not seen as a bad thing by some people.

There's enough research and even practical examples of target recognition software available to show that the idea is viable e.g. traffic monitoring systems that have the ability to single out specific vehicles such as heavy trucks using roads they aren't supposed to. Refining the abilty would probably be a case of using various sensors to get confirmation that the potential target is an armed enemy rather than changing the software.

Many people are not happy with the idea of "armed robots" let alone the idea of those "armed robots" having the discretion to attack as their AI decides... echoes of Skynet and the Terminator...
Do you remember back in 2007 in South Africa when a 35mm AA system opened fire on some troops and killed 9 of them and injured others That AA system wasn't even autonomous, it apparently just glitched.

https://www.wired.com/2007/10/robot-cannon-ki/

But the push for combat robots with more autonomy was being pursued even with that sort of negative publicity.

https://www.wired.com/2007/10/roomba-maker-un/

The legal/liability aspect plays a big part as obviously very few governments want the bad publicity that would be generated if an autonomous unit shot innocent bystanders.
This is similar to what's happening in the world of self-driving vehicles. In industrial areas where there's no unauthorised & untrained personnel around they are in use and working well.
There's a great barrier to their introduction for private vehicle use though because governments have not yet defined who would be at fault if a self-driving car crashes into someone or something.

[pmulcahy11b]

The US hasn't built any new tanks since the mid-1990's, but with good reason as practically all their M1 tanks have been rebuilt to such an extent they are practically new tanks. They are also fitted with DU armour, which is about the strongest armour around and none have been lost to enemy action by a direct hit in their critical frontal armour. In 2018 the US Army and Marines had 2,831 M1 Abrams in service with another 3,500 held in storage.

Sorry to get a little off-topic, but I have a question about DU armor. We know from vehicles and aircraft firing DU ammunition that DU is pyrophoric, which means that it tends to burst into a giant flaming mass when it penetrates a target. What happens if the DU layer of armor is hit by a good penetrator

[RN7]

Sorry to get a little off-topic, but I have a question about DU armor. We know from vehicles and aircraft firing DU ammunition that DU is pyrophoric, which means that it tends to burst into a giant flaming mass when it penetrates a target. What happens if the DU layer of armor is hit by a good penetrator

Good question and to be honest I don't know. I've been browsing around for a while and can't find an answer for you. Maybe the information is on some website but likely it is not as the composition of DU armor is highly classified defence material. However from what I've read and surmised the DU armor is fitted in layers with other extremely tough material such as Chobham or other ceramic materials, or is mixed with it when fitted to the Abrams tank making it less flammable. DU armor is concentrated on the frontal glacis of the Abrams and as far as I know it has never officially been penetrated by any type of tank round or missile ordinance. Only US Army and Marine Abrams tanks are fitted with DU armor and the US has not exported the tank fitted with DU armor to any country expect possibly Australia.

[unkated]

DU Armor Additions

From a Quora article about the DU armor on the US M1 Abrams...

(Why is depleted uranium used in the Abrams new armor)

"The biggest drawback to DU armor was noticed during "blue on blue" fire during the Gulf War and the Iraq war - a DU penetrator passing through DU armor meant that higher levels of DU were present in the atmosphere of the tank immediately after it was hit, exposing the crew to higher levels of inhaled DU. So the greatest exposure was to tank crews was to those who were in a DU-armored tank hit with a DU round. Non-DU rounds (such as those used by the Iraqi army) were much less penetrating."

I found this in a Reddit article:

Solid uranium isn't all that pyrophoric, because that reaction is based on surface area. Uranium shavings or powder, like what you might get when machining it, are the real danger; that's why you operate the machines under oil or a non-oxygen gas (nitrogen and argon are common choices, I think). However, a sheet of uranium isn't going to be very enthusiastic about catching on fire, because only the very surface is subject to pyrophoricity.

(Since I am not a scientist, I make no claims about this; just passing it on. The article includes a picture of where the DU armor is (turret front).)

Uncle Ted

[StainlessSteelCynic]

The Australian M1 Abrams do not have the DU armour composite, it was explicitly mentioned in the request by Australia that the tanks use conventional composite armour (i.e. non-DU armour).
Can't remember the source for that info but it was mentioned in a few of the defence magazines I was reading at the time of the Abrams purchase and there's likely to be something online about it.

[Vespers War]

Going back to the original question of what's needed, one of the things that should have been in the previous editions (but wasn't) are active defense for tanks - systems like Drozd, Arena, Malachit, and Trophy.

It would be also interesting to me to see the up-gunned tanks being worked on (the Rheinmetall 130mm L/51, the 2A83 152mm L/45) and possibly some of the old guns that were being developed before APFSDS ammo became prevalent, like the XM291 140mm L/47 and the Leopard 2-140 L/50.



For small arms, one fairly recent development is Serbia's adoption-for-testing of the Zastava M17 in 6.5mm Grendel (essentially an AK platform, with 20-round straight mags and 30-round bananas). I recently found a photo of an information card from a trade show in Belgrade, and according to that it's 3.7 kg empty, has a telescoping stock with an overall length of 88-94.5 cm, barrel length of 41.5 cm, has over-and-under Pic rails on the handguard, and accepts either a .165 kg 20-round or .22 kg 30-round mag. Running it through FF&S, I get:
Wt 3.7 kg, Mag 20 or 30, ROF 5, Dam 3, Pen 2-Nil, Blk 6, SS 3, Brst 7, Rng 50.

There's mention of barrel lengths being available for CQB, Assault Rifle, and DMR use, but no other barrel lengths are specified on the sheet I've seen.

[pmulcahy11b]

Unkated -- That second link pretty much had the information I needed (though I don't normally trust just one source if I can avoid it). But thanks!

[RN7]

The Australian M1 Abrams do not have the DU armour composite, it was explicitly mentioned in the request by Australia that the tanks use conventional composite armour (i.e. non-DU armour).
Can't remember the source for that info but it was mentioned in a few of the defence magazines I was reading at the time of the Abrams purchase and there's likely to be something online about it.

They do have DU armour but the Australian government won't officially confirm it.

I've suspected for some time that the Aussie tanks have DU armour and what has always made me think that is the weight of the tank they bought from the US. Here is a detailed explanation about why the Australian M1 Abrams are fitted with DU armour from someone who knows.

https://www.quora.com/Does-the-Australian-Army-M1-Abrams-have-the-same-depleted-uranium-armor-as-the-US-Army-Abrams-tanks

[RN7]

Also a reply by an Aussie AFV commander on the same link contradicts the American tank commanders opinion and states that Australian tanks do not use DU armour. I much prefer the American tank commanders answer.

[ChalkLine]

As of two years ago the ADF stated that the next batch of M1s will have DU and they'd like the old ones upgraded

[ChalkLine]

The Morrow Project's superb system for settlements, tech levels and so on is something I think should be emulated. If you haven't seen it have look, it transfers easily to Twilight