Jump to content


Alternate History Tank Project: Cheonho


  • Please log in to reply
140 replies to this topic

Daigensui #1 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 11:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 27300 battles
  • 29,501
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

HAV has one of the highest concentration of knowledge on historical tank technology, and I wish to receive help in making this project "historically plausible" as much as possible. I hope that you might give your assistance in this designing.

 

 

Alternate History Background

 

To be added

 

Current Specifications

 

 

Full Size Album

Link to 3D Model

 

Year of Acceptance: 1946

Crew: 5

  • Commander in turret left rear
  • Gunner in turret left front
  • Loader in turret right rear
  • Driver in hull left front
  • Radio operator in hull right front

Dimensions

  • Combat Weight: About 44.5 tonnes
  • Height: 274 cm (turret top 255 cm, hull top 165 cm)
  • Length without gun: 665 cm
  • Gun overhang forward: 285 cm
  • Width over tracks: 300 cm
  • Width over side skirts: 320 cm
  • Ground clearance: 45 cm
  • Fire height: (To be remeasured)
  • Turret ring diameter: 2160 mm
  • Ground pressure: 0.729 kg/cm²

Armament

         1. Main Armament: 10 cm Tank Gun Pacheon

         2. Commander MG
         3. Coaxial MG

Rangefinders

  • Commander: Stereoscopic, base length 240 cm, magnification x15, 4° field of view, range 500 ~ 6,000 m.
  • Gunner: Coincidence, (work in progress, possibly base length 70 cm)

Hull Armor

  • Upper front: 125 mm, 65°
  • Lower front: 80 mm, 50°
  • Upper side: 60 mm, vertical
  • Lower side: 40 mm, vertical
  • Rear: 45 mm, vertical
  • Top: 40 mm
  • Floor: 20 mm

Turret Armor

  • Mantlet: 300 mm
  • Front: 180 mm (280 mm equivalent)
  • Side:  100 mm (115 mm equivalent)
  • Rear: 65 mm (83 mm equivalent)
  • Top: 40 mm

Automotive Performance

  • Engine: Cheongong Gas Turbine
  • Horsepower: Net 1250 hp, gross 3750 hp
  • Power/Weight: 28.09 hp/t
  • Fuel capacity: 1420 liters
  • Transmission: Planetary-gear shift with hydaulic torque converter (4 forward, 2 reverse)
  • Range: 300 km
  • Maximum road speed: 65 km/h
  • Off-Country speed: 48 km/h 

 

 

Current Issues

 

1. Turret traverse mechanics

2. Turret interior layout

3. Commander cupola redesign (hunter-killer capabilities)

 

 

Current Change Proposals

 

1. Move the gunner periscope a bit forward.

 


2. Increase commander view ports (1:30, 4:30, 6:00, 7:30, 9:00, 10:30).

 

3. Lower the gun position: Turret is already almost M60A1 level comfort, so it is possible to install the gun at a lower position.

 
Cheonho: 3.1 meter long, 2.65 meters wide, 0.9 meters tall, turret ring 2.3 meters wide
M60A1: 3.38 meter long, 2.6 meters wide, 1.06 meters tall, turret ring 2.16 meters wide

 

 

As you can see, when comparing with a Patton, the Cheonho gun is set quite high. While putting it down to Patton's level (bottom 1/3) will be difficult due to how far back the turret is located, at least lowering the barrel position to half the height of the turret will improve things greatly.

 

4. Change commander periscope form (something similar to Leopard 1's)

 

 

5. Widen the mantlet/gun mount and install gun sight and coaxial MG into the mantlet

 

 

Example of how the original gun sight was installed. Actual measurements/locations will be calculated later.

 

6. Engine changes

 

Current Engine Deck

 

 

Changed Engine Deck

 

 

I've basically made the engine smaller by 10 cm, resulting in the above changes. This gives the extra space to comfortably add in the transmission without having to deal with raising the engine deck or lengthening the hull. What I remembered was that Korea* had more advanced metallurgy than Germany, so a slightly slimmer engine is in the realm of possibility.



Daigensui #2 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 11:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 27300 battles
  • 29,501
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

I'm focusing on the following two issues.

 

1. Turret traverse mechanics: I have no idea what kind of turret traverse mechanics there are. Any particular insight to this?

2. Commander cupola redesigning: Currently trying to decide how to fit in hunter-killer capabilities. So far it's pretty much a mix of Leopard 1 style cupola/periscope and Tiger style designation. Trying to see if I can get this developed further without cluttering up the commander's position like what happened with Conqueror.

 



Elevendy #3 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 13:22

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18513 battles
  • 2,368
  • [YOUJO] YOUJO
  • Member since:
    03-30-2011

1946?

 

Way too ahead of it's time for a Leopard 1 type model. Heavy armor would still be used in this time.

 

Plus you're taking parts of tanks that never existed at the time and saying the Japanese magically just put this together. .-.

 

Wikipedia

 

Leopard 1

The Leopard project started in November 1956 in order to develop a modern tank, the Standard-Panzer, to replace the Bundeswehr's American-built M47 and M48 Patton tanks, which, though just delivered to West Germany's recently reconstituted army, were rapidly becoming outdated.

 


Edited by Elevendy, Jul 28 2014 - 13:39.


Daigensui #4 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 13:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 27300 battles
  • 29,501
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012
In what way is this a Leopard 1, and in what way is this Japanese?

Guardianleopard #5 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 13:47

    Captain

  • Players
  • 11439 battles
  • 1,134
  • [SAKU] SAKU
  • Member since:
    05-11-2012

I think that in 1946 or immediate post war there was some craze about auto loaders and oscillating turrets

or the design would call for more armour. I think in 1946 not many people might not have actually wanted a tank...

 

However, I think if they did want a tank, the hull would be averaged out to be suitable for the kind of stuff that happened when tanks got too close to heavy AT weapons. They also would have known that WWII AT weapons (german Infantry, Panzerfausts) could basically insta kill your tank 100m away

 

the turret armor is just, GOD THICK, its like AT proof, the turret armor is VERY IMBALANCED, are you trying to design a heavy tank?


Edited by Guardianleopard, Jul 28 2014 - 13:57.


FISSION_CURES_ANIME #6 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 13:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 32273 battles
  • 3,222
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-23-2013

I'm very curious how a 1946 gas turbine manages to produce over 80% of the power output of the AGT1500, despite (presumably, based on tank size) being much smaller.

 

Unless, of course, this takes place in a world where technology is advanced by 20 years or so for whatever reason.



Legiondude #7 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 13:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 20134 battles
  • 23,025
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011
You have a typo on the Lower Front hull armor, it uses cm instead of mm

Elevendy #8 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 13:58

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18513 battles
  • 2,368
  • [YOUJO] YOUJO
  • Member since:
    03-30-2011

I read your other post about the extended time line. So I'm going based off that. What nation would this be from then?

 

Regardless the Leopard 1 was made at the time the realization for speed and mobility over armor was first introduced. So regardless this tank couldn't exist in this era.


Edited by Elevendy, Jul 28 2014 - 13:59.


Guardianleopard #9 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 13:58

    Captain

  • Players
  • 11439 battles
  • 1,134
  • [SAKU] SAKU
  • Member since:
    05-11-2012

View PostLostCosmonaut, on Jul 28 2014 - 14:53, said:

I'm very curious how a 1946 gas turbine manages to produce over 80% of the power output of the AGT1500, despite (presumably, based on tank size) being much smaller.

 

Unless, of course, this takes place in a world where technology is advanced by 20 years or so for whatever reason.

well actually if you came up with some random fictional country with that much of a tech gap it could work

 

though, I think 1000hp would be going a little far



Daigensui #10 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 14:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 27300 battles
  • 29,501
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

View PostLostCosmonaut, on Jul 28 2014 - 05:53, said:

I'm very curious how a 1946 gas turbine manages to produce over 80% of the power output of the AGT1500, despite (presumably, based on tank size) being much smaller.

 

Unless, of course, this takes place in a world where technology is advanced by 20 years or so for whatever reason.

 

GT 101 says hi.

 

View PostLegiondude, on Jul 28 2014 - 05:56, said:

You have a typo on the Lower Front hull armor, it uses cm instead of mm

Bugger, thanks.



Guardianleopard #11 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 14:01

    Captain

  • Players
  • 11439 battles
  • 1,134
  • [SAKU] SAKU
  • Member since:
    05-11-2012

View PostElevendy, on Jul 28 2014 - 14:58, said:

I read your other post about the extended time line. So I'm going based off that. What nation would this be from then?

 

Regardless the Leopard 1 was made at the time the realization for speed and mobility over armor was first introduced. So regardless this tank couldn't exist in this era.

Not that it wouldn't exist, it simply wouldn't pass the drawing board in that era, as I believe you must fit the context of the time period and country (unspecified)



FISSION_CURES_ANIME #12 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 14:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 32273 battles
  • 3,222
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-23-2013

View PostDaigensui, on Jul 28 2014 - 08:01, said:

 

GT 101 says hi.

 

Bugger, thanks.

 

So, can you list for me some real world applications of the GT101, and how it performed in those applications?

 

Honestly, I don't even know why I'm asking, you're going to do whatever you want with your Mary Sue tank no matter what anyone says.


Edited by LostCosmonaut, Jul 28 2014 - 14:05.


Guardianleopard #13 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 14:05

    Captain

  • Players
  • 11439 battles
  • 1,134
  • [SAKU] SAKU
  • Member since:
    05-11-2012

the Time Period would be

A: 1950's where they said ARMOR DOESNT MATTER cause of HEAT rounds

B: 1943 in Germany where the whole tank would be considered 'realistic' (not russia, it was practical there)

C: Piggybacking on the year whatever tank you decide it slightly resembles



Legiondude #14 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 14:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 20134 battles
  • 23,025
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostGuardianleopard, on Jul 28 2014 - 08:05, said:

C: Piggybacking on the year whatever tank you decide it slightly resembles

I'm pretty sure the base of Dai's design included the Chi-Se



Guardianleopard #15 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 14:11

    Captain

  • Players
  • 11439 battles
  • 1,134
  • [SAKU] SAKU
  • Member since:
    05-11-2012

View PostDaigensui, on Jul 28 2014 - 12:02, said:

HAV has one of the highest concentration of knowledge on historical tank technology, and I wish to receive help in making this project "historically plausible" as much as possible. I hope that you might give your assistance in this designing.

 

 

Alternate History Background

 

To be added

 

Current Specifications

 

 

Full Size Album

Link to 3D Model

 

Year of Acceptance: 1946

Crew: 5

  • Commander in turret left rear
  • Gunner in turret left front
  • Loader in turret right rear
  • Driver in hull left front
  • Radio operator in hull right front

Dimensions

  • Combat Weight: About 44.5 tonnes
  • Height: 274 cm (turret top 255 cm, hull top 165 cm)
  • Length without gun: 740 cm
  • Gun overhang forward: 260 cm
  • Width over tracks: 300 cm
  • Width over side skirts: 320 cm
  • Ground clearance: 45 cm
  • Fire height: (To be remeasured)
  • Turret ring diameter: 230 cm
  • Ground pressure: 0.724 kg/cm²

Armament

         1. Main Armament: 10 cm Tank Gun Pacheon

         2. Commander MG
         3. Coaxial MG

Rangefinders

  • Commander: Stereoscopic, base length 240 cm, magnification x15, 4° field of view, range 500 ~ 6,000 m.
  • Gunner: Coincidence, (work in progress, possibly base length 70 cm)

Hull Armor

  • Upper front: 125 mm, 65°
  • Lower front: 80 mm, 50°
  • Upper side: 60 mm, vertical
  • Lower side: 40 mm, vertical
  • Rear: 45 mm, vertical
  • Top: 40 mm
  • Floor: 20 mm

Turret Armor

  • Mantlet: 300 mm
  • Front: 180 mm (280 mm equivalent)
  • Side:  100 mm (115 mm equivalent)
  • Rear: 65 mm (83 mm equivalent)
  • Top: 40 mm

Automotive Performance

  • Engine: Cheongong Gas Turbine
  • Horsepower: Net 1250 hp, gross 3750 hp
  • Power/Weight: 28.09 hp/t
  • Fuel capacity: 1680 liters
  • Transmission: Planetary-gear shift with hydaulic torque converter (4 forward, 2 reverse)
  • Range: 300 km
  • Maximum road speed: 65 km/h
  • Off-Country speed: 48 km/h 

 

 

Current Issues

 

1. Turret traverse mechanics

2. Turret interior layout

3. Commander cupola redesign (hunter-killer capabilities)

 

 

Current Change Proposals

 

1. Move the gunner periscope a bit forward.

 


2. Increase commander view ports (1:30, 4:30, 6:00, 7:30, 9:00, 10:30).

 

3. Lower the gun position: Turret is already almost M60A1 level comfort, so it is possible to install the gun at a lower position.

 
Cheonho: 3.1 meter long, 2.65 meters wide, 0.9 meters tall, turret ring 2.3 meters wide
M60A1: 3.38 meter long, 2.6 meters wide, 1.06 meters tall, turret ring 2.16 meters wide

 

 

As you can see, when comparing with a Patton, the Cheonho gun is set quite high. While putting it down to Patton's level (bottom 1/3) will be difficult due to how far back the turret is located, at least lowering the barrel position to half the height of the turret will improve things greatly.

 

4. Change commander periscope form (something similar to Leopard 1's)

 

 

5. Widen the mantlet/gun mount and install gun sight and coaxial MG into the mantlet

 

 

Example of how the original gun sight was installed. Actual measurements/locations will be calculated later.

 

6. Engine changes

 

Current Engine Deck

 

 

Changed Engine Deck

 

 

I've basically made the engine smaller by 10 cm, resulting in the above changes. This gives the extra space to comfortably add in the transmission without having to deal with raising the engine deck or lengthening the hull. What I remembered was that Korea* had more advanced metallurgy than Germany, so a slightly slimmer engine is in the realm of possibility.

I'm starting to think my Fictional (BK) 2A6 has more plausible armour, engine and the gun plans were and still are insane (for my tank anyway)...

ex: the amour is all around, therefore the sides and back are pretty well armored

the suspension lowers ground pressure even more than the Tiger II, the result is a wider, more stable tank with more space (I was trying to make it wider when I realized it wouldn't look good enough)

Shrinking an engine or its deck for that matter isn't the best Idea, I think you should make it flush with the hull

 

the mantelet on my tank is paper thin, at only 50 mm, it relies on turret armour and its extreme slant

In other words, keeping the Tank flush minimizes weak points in the armor and welding along with increase of production


Edited by Guardianleopard, Jul 28 2014 - 14:16.


Guardianleopard #16 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 14:11

    Captain

  • Players
  • 11439 battles
  • 1,134
  • [SAKU] SAKU
  • Member since:
    05-11-2012

View PostLegiondude, on Jul 28 2014 - 15:09, said:

I'm pretty sure the base of Dai's design included the Chi-Se

thank you, Legion



Daigensui #17 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 14:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 27300 battles
  • 29,501
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

View PostLostCosmonaut, on Jul 28 2014 - 06:03, said:

So, can you list for me some real world applications of the GT101, and how it performed in those applications?

 

Honestly, I don't even know why I'm asking, you're going to do whatever you want with your Mary Sue tank no matter what anyone says.

 

GT 101 is basically a modified turboshaft version of BMW 003, the turbojet which powered Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-9.



FISSION_CURES_ANIME #18 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 14:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 32273 battles
  • 3,222
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-23-2013

Was it ever built and run in a ground application?

 

Also, from what I understand the BMW 003 had poor reliability. Also, gas turbines of the time tended not to respond well to sudden throttle movements, a characteristic which is likely undesirable when powering an armored vehicle.


Edited by LostCosmonaut, Jul 28 2014 - 14:23.


Guardianleopard #19 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 14:38

    Captain

  • Players
  • 11439 battles
  • 1,134
  • [SAKU] SAKU
  • Member since:
    05-11-2012

View PostLostCosmonaut, on Jul 28 2014 - 15:16, said:

Was it ever built and run in a ground application?

 

Also, from what I understand the BMW 003 had poor reliability. Also, gas turbines of the time tended not to respond well to sudden throttle movements, a characteristic which is likely undesirable when powering an armored vehicle.

therefore 'Much reliability' in a Medium tank?



FISSION_CURES_ANIME #20 Posted Jul 28 2014 - 14:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 32273 battles
  • 3,222
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-23-2013

Related question: What's the width of the hull between the tracks (specifically, how much space is there to install the engine)?

 

More importantly, what role is this thing designed to fill? Is it a heavy tank? A tank destroyer? An anime princess's personal plaything?






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users