Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
I decided to take a look at Vehicle Maker when it comes to a Real World Tank. The basic parameters for Vehicle Maker tanks appear to be as follows.
If I understand it correctly, Tracked Vehicles are Tech Level 7, and add 2 Tons to the Vehicle Design Box. As this will be Fossil-Fueled, it looks like I subtract 2 from the Tech Level and add another 2 tons to the Vehicle Design Box. As I am seeing how a Light Tank stacks up, it looks like I subtract 1 from the Tech Level, divided the Vehicle Design Box tonnage by 2, and add +1 to speed. It also looks like Armor is divided by 2, dropping it to 25 from 50.
Now, in the example of fitting a tank to the Vehicle Design Box on 257, the hull and turret are treated separately, so I will do likewise.
If I am not reading something correctly, anyone can feel free to correct me.
The Real World Tank that I am looking at is the US M3 Stuart Light Tank from World War 2. All data comes from US Army Technical manuals.
The hull of the M3 is approximately 4.5 meters long by 1.5 meters high by 2.24 meters wide, so 3 squares X 1 square X 2 squares giving 6 cubes or 1.5 tons. The turret is less than a meter high at about 0.91 meters, and about 1.5 meters in diameter, so another cube is added, for a total of 7. Initial estimate is therefore 7 cubes or 1.75 tons. As the M3 was tracked, I add 2 tons, and powered by either 80 octane gasoline or 50 cetane Diesel, both Fossil Fuels, so I add another 2 tons, for a total of 5.75 tons, but as it is a Light Tank, I divide by 2 to get 2.875 tons. The actual cube of the vehicle was 924 feet or 26.164766 cubic meters, or less than 2 Traveller displacement tons, but still 2.875 tons is fairly close.
Now, based on the 2.875 tons, the crew should be 1.4375 persons, dividing 2.875 tons by 2. I am not sure if that means that the crew should be 1 or 2, but rounding up appears to make the most sense, so per Vehicle Maker, the crew should be 2. The actual crew of the tank was 4. Based on the French experience with 2 man tanks in World War 2, at least for that period, 2 man tanks were a not a good idea. So not very good there.
Now, the armament of the M3 was as follows: one 37MM gun and a co-axial .30 caliber air-cooled Browning in the turret, one .30 Browning in the hull front, two .30 Brownings fixed in the side sponsons, and a flexible .30 Browning mounted on the turret roof for the commander to use against air and ground targets. I am not sure how that compares to the two weapons cited earlier. By the way, it gets a lot worse with the M3 Grant/Lee Medium when it comes to weapons.
The speed of the Vehicle Maker tank looks like it is 4 + 1 or 5, which equates to 50 kilometers per hour or 31 miles per hour. The maximum allowed speed of the M3 with governor was 36 miles per hour, so not that far off.
The armor per Vehicle Maker is 25, but looking at the Enhancers, it looks like Fossil Fuel reduces it by another 10, down to 15. Per page 640, one centimeter of steel, quality not stated, is equal to an Armor Value of 70. Dividing 15 by 70 gives me a value of 0.21428571 centimeters, or 2.14 millimeters, or less than a tenth of an inch of steel.
The thinnest armor on the M3 was located on the top and bottom 0.375 inches, or 9.525 millimeters, just under a centimeter. The thickest armor on the M3 hull was 1.5 inches sloped for greater resistance, while the turret front was 1.5 inches with the sides and rear having 1.25 inches. That equates to 3.81 centimeters and 3.175 centimeters, without allowing for any hull slope. Plugging those figures into the Armor Value for steel of 70, the thinnest armor on the M3 should have an Armor Value of 66, while the thickest armor on the M3 should have a rating of 267. The Armor Values for Vehicle Maker are way, way, way off. That without plugging in any difference in protection between mild steel and rolled or cast homogeneous steel, or face-hardened or high-hardness plate.
Side Note: The armor penetration of the US .30 caliber round at 100 yards was 0.625 inches or 1.5875 centimeters, or an Armor Value of 111. The US .50 AP round penetrated an inch of armor at 300 yards, or 2.54 centimeters, or an Armor Value of 177.8. It could penetrate, assuming a 90 degree impact, a half-inch of homogenous armor plate at 1,000 yards. Against mild steel, that would double.
Given that Iron, presumably Wrought Iron, is given an Armor Value of 50 for a one centimeter thickness, while Steel is given a value of 70 for the same thickness, it looks like the Steel is Mild Steel, and not any form of actual steel armor. The standard Figure of Merit for Wrought Iron in comparison to Mild Steel is 1.3, which would make give Steel an Armor Value of 65 in comparison to the Value of 50 for Iron.
Edit Note: It looks like Highways are disallowed terrain for Tracked Vehicles. The M3 Light Tank operated very nicely on highways prior to and during World War 2, using rubber-blocked tracks. The same holds true for trails. Steel tanks treads will tear up roads pretty bad if asphalt, but that does not make them unsafe to drive on.
I am not sure why there is no Desert Terrain in the Terrain Chart.
A Tank has a crew equal to its tonnage divided by 2.
Install TWO weapons: one Vehicle-Mount and one Turret-Mount.
If I understand it correctly, Tracked Vehicles are Tech Level 7, and add 2 Tons to the Vehicle Design Box. As this will be Fossil-Fueled, it looks like I subtract 2 from the Tech Level and add another 2 tons to the Vehicle Design Box. As I am seeing how a Light Tank stacks up, it looks like I subtract 1 from the Tech Level, divided the Vehicle Design Box tonnage by 2, and add +1 to speed. It also looks like Armor is divided by 2, dropping it to 25 from 50.
Now, in the example of fitting a tank to the Vehicle Design Box on 257, the hull and turret are treated separately, so I will do likewise.
If I am not reading something correctly, anyone can feel free to correct me.
The Real World Tank that I am looking at is the US M3 Stuart Light Tank from World War 2. All data comes from US Army Technical manuals.
The hull of the M3 is approximately 4.5 meters long by 1.5 meters high by 2.24 meters wide, so 3 squares X 1 square X 2 squares giving 6 cubes or 1.5 tons. The turret is less than a meter high at about 0.91 meters, and about 1.5 meters in diameter, so another cube is added, for a total of 7. Initial estimate is therefore 7 cubes or 1.75 tons. As the M3 was tracked, I add 2 tons, and powered by either 80 octane gasoline or 50 cetane Diesel, both Fossil Fuels, so I add another 2 tons, for a total of 5.75 tons, but as it is a Light Tank, I divide by 2 to get 2.875 tons. The actual cube of the vehicle was 924 feet or 26.164766 cubic meters, or less than 2 Traveller displacement tons, but still 2.875 tons is fairly close.
Now, based on the 2.875 tons, the crew should be 1.4375 persons, dividing 2.875 tons by 2. I am not sure if that means that the crew should be 1 or 2, but rounding up appears to make the most sense, so per Vehicle Maker, the crew should be 2. The actual crew of the tank was 4. Based on the French experience with 2 man tanks in World War 2, at least for that period, 2 man tanks were a not a good idea. So not very good there.
Now, the armament of the M3 was as follows: one 37MM gun and a co-axial .30 caliber air-cooled Browning in the turret, one .30 Browning in the hull front, two .30 Brownings fixed in the side sponsons, and a flexible .30 Browning mounted on the turret roof for the commander to use against air and ground targets. I am not sure how that compares to the two weapons cited earlier. By the way, it gets a lot worse with the M3 Grant/Lee Medium when it comes to weapons.
The speed of the Vehicle Maker tank looks like it is 4 + 1 or 5, which equates to 50 kilometers per hour or 31 miles per hour. The maximum allowed speed of the M3 with governor was 36 miles per hour, so not that far off.
The armor per Vehicle Maker is 25, but looking at the Enhancers, it looks like Fossil Fuel reduces it by another 10, down to 15. Per page 640, one centimeter of steel, quality not stated, is equal to an Armor Value of 70. Dividing 15 by 70 gives me a value of 0.21428571 centimeters, or 2.14 millimeters, or less than a tenth of an inch of steel.
The thinnest armor on the M3 was located on the top and bottom 0.375 inches, or 9.525 millimeters, just under a centimeter. The thickest armor on the M3 hull was 1.5 inches sloped for greater resistance, while the turret front was 1.5 inches with the sides and rear having 1.25 inches. That equates to 3.81 centimeters and 3.175 centimeters, without allowing for any hull slope. Plugging those figures into the Armor Value for steel of 70, the thinnest armor on the M3 should have an Armor Value of 66, while the thickest armor on the M3 should have a rating of 267. The Armor Values for Vehicle Maker are way, way, way off. That without plugging in any difference in protection between mild steel and rolled or cast homogeneous steel, or face-hardened or high-hardness plate.
Side Note: The armor penetration of the US .30 caliber round at 100 yards was 0.625 inches or 1.5875 centimeters, or an Armor Value of 111. The US .50 AP round penetrated an inch of armor at 300 yards, or 2.54 centimeters, or an Armor Value of 177.8. It could penetrate, assuming a 90 degree impact, a half-inch of homogenous armor plate at 1,000 yards. Against mild steel, that would double.
Given that Iron, presumably Wrought Iron, is given an Armor Value of 50 for a one centimeter thickness, while Steel is given a value of 70 for the same thickness, it looks like the Steel is Mild Steel, and not any form of actual steel armor. The standard Figure of Merit for Wrought Iron in comparison to Mild Steel is 1.3, which would make give Steel an Armor Value of 65 in comparison to the Value of 50 for Iron.
Edit Note: It looks like Highways are disallowed terrain for Tracked Vehicles. The M3 Light Tank operated very nicely on highways prior to and during World War 2, using rubber-blocked tracks. The same holds true for trails. Steel tanks treads will tear up roads pretty bad if asphalt, but that does not make them unsafe to drive on.
I am not sure why there is no Desert Terrain in the Terrain Chart.
Last edited: