How are prototype AFVs constructed?

[raketenjagdpanzer]

There's a restoration effort planned for the Chrysler/GDLS XM1 prototype, and I have seen it (and the XMBT-70) referred to as "mild steel", so that's...what, like the stuff a dumpster or car is made out of?

The reason I ask is, IMC I may have a few one-off prototype show up in the hands of CivGov troops either in Europe or back in the 'States...probably Europe since I think per canon there was one last reinforcement push in '98 by CivGov and I can imagine them cobbling together everything they could, including raiding FMC's facilities and Ft. Knox for the XM800 ARSVs, getting the engines running and guns in working condition and sending them on, but not if they were just mock-ups.

(ps yes I know but it's a game...)

[StainlessSteelCynic]

That's correct, they use mild steel for a number of reasons such as it's easier to work with than hardened or armour-quality steel and it's easier to obtain. Also, if you need to make alterations or you mess up something, it's easier to change because of those first two reasons. It also means you don't have as much weight to worry about when submitting the vehicle for testing/trials or moving it around for display or demonstration purposes.
Vehicles made from mild steel are typically "proof of concept" vehicles and while they may have all the weapons, systems and other equipment of a production vehicle, they are not meant to see combat. They are purely for testing of the systems and the overall package and for demonstrations of the concept.

Once they have gone past "proof of concept" the next set of vehicles made will typically be "pre-production" vehicles. These will normally have hardened steel but quite likely whatever armour is expected to be fitted to "production" vehicles. They'll also be as near as possible to the projected empty & combat weights of the production vehicle. They are used to iron out any last problems and do final integration before proper production is started.
They are often just a few upgrades away from being as fully capable as a standard combat vehicle (and often pre-production vehicles are put onto the assembly lines to be rebuilt as production vehicles as a way to speed up delivery of the finished product as well as re-use an otherwise unused but still capable vehicle).

During WW1 when the British were replacing some of their tank losses in Europe, they sent some of their test vehicles into combat. These were mild steel "proof of concept" tanks and offered next to no protection from rifle & machinegun fire let alone artillery or other tanks. It was quickly learnt that mild steel versions are not worth the loss of life unless you're really desperate. When I was at the Bovington Tank Museum at Dorset in the UK a number of years ago, they had a few mild steel WW1 tanks, one of which was used in combat and quickly withdrawn. It has a number of German bullet holes in the rear section - the projectiles drilled right through the outer steel and if they didn't kill or injure the crew outright, they probably rattled around inside scaring the hell out of them.

In a T2k setting, if the owner/user/enemy has no idea that it's not a properly armoured vehicle they might throw it into combat. But keep in mind that the projectile from the M1/M2 Carbine series will happily pierce mild steel at 50 metres or more so the higher velocity steel cored SS109 round used in modern 5.56mm weapons will pop right on through and 7.62mm NATO will chew it up.

There's a restoration effort planned for the Chrysler/GDLS XM1 prototype, and I have seen it (and the XMBT-70) referred to as "mild steel", so that's...what, like the stuff a dumpster or car is made out of?

The reason I ask is, IMC I may have a few one-off prototype show up in the hands of CivGov troops either in Europe or back in the 'States...probably Europe since I think per canon there was one last reinforcement push in '98 by CivGov and I can imagine them cobbling together everything they could, including raiding FMC's facilities and Ft. Knox for the XM800 ARSVs, getting the engines running and guns in working condition and sending them on, but not if they were just mock-ups.

(ps yes I know but it's a game...)

[stormlion1]

Also don't forget that a lot of 'display' Tanks, Cars, and aircraft generally don't have oil in them and quickly end up with the engines becoming a inert hulk. Go to a museum and look under, say a airplane and look how many have oil pans below them. If they do there taken care of and have a working engine. If not either the engines a hulk or its not there at all. And a lot of display tanks lack there engines which are pulled and either scrapped or used in something else.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Also don't forget that a lot of 'display' Tanks, Cars, and aircraft generally don't have oil in them and quickly end up with the engines becoming a inert hulk. Go to a museum and look under, say a airplane and look how many have oil pans below them. If they do there taken care of and have a working engine. If not either the engines a hulk or its not there at all. And a lot of display tanks lack there engines which are pulled and either scrapped or used in something else.

Yeah; I saw a picture of the XM800 at the FMC plant and there's a plastic pan sitting underneath it.

(as an aside, a long while ago I saw the weirdest damned thing, it was a picture of an M22 Locust in a park, but it was just sitting there on a slight pedestal. No plaque, no nothing. Just like...hey, we need something in the park. Here's an old tank.)

[raketenjagdpanzer]

In a T2k setting, if the owner/user/enemy has no idea that it's not a properly armoured vehicle they might throw it into combat. But keep in mind that the projectile from the M1/M2 Carbine series will happily pierce mild steel at 50 metres or more so the higher velocity steel cored SS109 round used in modern 5.56mm weapons will pop right on through and 7.62mm NATO will chew it up.

Okay so the two aforementioned prototypes wouldn't ever have been sent then, so that settles that. Thanks for the heads-up!

[Panther Al]

That's correct, they use mild steel for a number of reasons such as it's easier to work with than hardened or armour-quality steel and it's easier to obtain. Also, if you need to make alterations or you mess up something, it's easier to change because of those first two reasons. It also means you don't have as much weight to worry about when submitting the vehicle for testing/trials or moving it around for display or demonstration purposes.
Vehicles made from mild steel are typically "proof of concept" vehicles and while they may have all the weapons, systems and other equipment of a production vehicle, they are not meant to see combat. They are purely for testing of the systems and the overall package and for demonstrations of the concept.

Once they have gone past "proof of concept" the next set of vehicles made will typically be "pre-production" vehicles. These will normally have hardened steel but quite likely whatever armour is expected to be fitted to "production" vehicles. They'll also be as near as possible to the projected empty & combat weights of the production vehicle. They are used to iron out any last problems and do final integration before proper production is started.
They are often just a few upgrades away from being as fully capable as a standard combat vehicle (and often pre-production vehicles are put onto the assembly lines to be rebuilt as production vehicles as a way to speed up delivery of the finished product as well as re-use an otherwise unused but still capable vehicle).

During WW1 when the British were replacing some of their tank losses in Europe, they sent some of their test vehicles into combat. These were mild steel "proof of concept" tanks and offered next to no protection from rifle & machinegun fire let alone artillery or other tanks. It was quickly learnt that mild steel versions are not worth the loss of life unless you're really desperate. When I was at the Bovington Tank Museum at Dorset in the UK a number of years ago, they had a few mild steel WW1 tanks, one of which was used in combat and quickly withdrawn. It has a number of German bullet holes in the rear section - the projectiles drilled right through the outer steel and if they didn't kill or injure the crew outright, they probably rattled around inside scaring the hell out of them.

In a T2k setting, if the owner/user/enemy has no idea that it's not a properly armoured vehicle they might throw it into combat. But keep in mind that the projectile from the M1/M2 Carbine series will happily pierce mild steel at 50 metres or more so the higher velocity steel cored SS109 round used in modern 5.56mm weapons will pop right on through and 7.62mm NATO will chew it up.

Okay so the two aforementioned prototypes wouldn't ever have been sent then, so that settles that. Thanks for the heads-up!


Weeelllllllll......


Yes, Mild Steel is crap armour, but enough crap will stop anything. I would add to SSC's comment the word "relatively thin" in front of mild steel in that last sentence. 1/4"? Sure, Hot Chainsaw through warm butter. 12"+ that is on the tracks in question? Yeah, thats enough crap armour there. :)

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Yep! Quite right, I didn't even think to mention that we're talking relatively thin sheet metal here. I mean, it's like I was thinking "I know it's thin sheet metal so everybody else will know as well".

So yeah, you could still make use of the vehicle by adding more metal, just don't let it get near artillery or anti-tank weapons!
To go further with Panther Al's suggestion, you could add some rubber matting and then some layers of the mild steel sheet and make a kind of "sandwich" armour that could take a bit of punishment from small arms.

Weeelllllllll......


Yes, Mild Steel is crap armour, but enough crap will stop anything. I would add to SSC's comment the word "relatively thin" in front of mild steel in that last sentence. 1/4"? Sure, Hot Chainsaw through warm butter. 12"+ that is on the tracks in question? Yeah, thats enough crap armour there. :)

[Olefin]

We build prototype AFV's where I am employed and it depends on how many you build. For instance we have to do ballistic testing and that requires some of the prototypes to be built with the same armor that the production one would have. Same for our firing prototypes as well.

The M8's we built for instance were built with the same armor that was to go on the production build.

[Cdnwolf]

Like this from Black Ops 2 lol

http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t6/grtcdnwolf/blackopstank_zps67c381b2.jpg (http://s156.photobucket.com/user/grtcdnwolf/media/blackopstank_zps67c381b2.jpg.html)

[raketenjagdpanzer]

I guess in retrospect I could see a unit here or there with their hands on a MICV prototype draped in "composite" armor (call it a value of around 50, maybe, on front/vital areas, 20 sides, 10 rear etc. for T2k v1?) thrown into the fight...or worse, such a vehicle in NA hands. If your opponents are a bunch of displaced people with at best civilian side- and hunting weapons, such a beast would be a terror...

[Olefin]

How about a prototype pulled out of a museum - Aberdeen and other museums have them of various vehicles -

[raketenjagdpanzer]

How about a prototype pulled out of a museum - Aberdeen and other museums have them of various vehicles -

depends on whether or not it was put there with a working engine, I guess.

Brazil's army actually owns and parades its two Osorio prototypes around (although I've heard tell that they're in such a poor state that an iron rod was welded between the gun breech and floor of the turret to keep the main gun from flopping around). Engesea folded and without anyone else picking up their physical assets, the gov't just kept the two protos as parade vehicles.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Oh I also found out that the LAV-75 (not sure if it's a mild steel prototype or production prototype) is in the hands of a private collector who keeps it in running condition. :)

I'm sure the ARES cannon is de-milled, but I think it's cool that he keeps it running. It shares a lot of commonality with the m113 in the drivetrain and suspension so parts are probably not an issue...