Turret Traverse Speeds

[swaghauler]

My players are considering the "appropriation" of a T-55M that they have learned the location of in their last session. I have a session or two of breathing room but need some more stats to "flesh out" the tank and it's future adversaries (of which I cannot speak because one of my players reads this forum).

I already have certain information I consider important collected such as min/max gun elevation/depression, step, fording, and ditch crossing specs. One specification I don't have accurate information on is Traverse/Elevation Speed of the tank in question. As I use a 1/2 Second Phase (1 to 12 phases in a 6 second round) Initiative system; The speed that a tank can traverse through In Degrees in a second is an important stat I need. I have looked at several sources both online and in print but would like the experts on armor in the forum to double check what I have discovered.

T-54/T-55; The military identification website forum had several members tell me that the traverse was about 45 Degrees per second on this tank. It had a standard manual backup.

T-64,T-72 & T-80; a YouTube video on the T-72 said these tanks had an improved turret ring which increased traverse speed by up to 12%. I therefore set their traverse speed at 50 Degrees per second. They have standard manual backups

T-90 & T-90M; A Youtube video "explaining" why the T-90M will win a fight with the M1 Abrams claimed that the T-90M had a new electric turret drive that allowed 360 degree traverse in just 6 seconds. It also said that this is 15% faster than the T-90. This would give the T-90M a 60 Degrees per second traverse (and the T-90 a 51 Degree per second traverse). I gave the T-90 a 50 Degree per second traverse. Standard manual backups are present.

M60; I was given a 50 Degree per second Traverse rate for the M60 in the Military ID forum. I know there is a manual backup but I'm not sure if it is variable speed.

M1 Series; The only information I could find on the M1 was in the fire control text of Modern Land Combat. It stated that the M1 and the Challenger both had a 70 Degree per second traverse speed with manual backup.

Challenger; I gave it a 70 Degrees per second traverse speed with manual backup. See above for why.

Manual Traverse; Most manual traverse (with hydraulic assist) is capable of 1 Degree (10 mils) of traverse per second with an average user.
I have decided to set the speed of Manual Traverse at [Average of STR & AGL] in Degrees per COMBAT ROUND. This system is common on towed artillery and on the Chinese Type 59 Main Battle Tank.

Enhanced Manual Traverse; This traverse has a two speed wheel system with a coarse "high speed" crank setting to get you rapidly near your intended target and a more precise "low speed" crank setting for getting a precise "fix" on the target. I allow a speed of Traverse at [STR+AGL] in Degrees per COMBAT ROUND. This form of traverse is found on the British Light Gun (and the newer M777 155mm's), and several Russian AA and Field Guns.

While most AA platforms have well documented traverse and elevation speeds in their descriptions; I have been unable to find the traversing speeds for most AFVs that appear in Twilight2000. I haven't even been able confirm these traverse speeds from at least two different sources and was not able to find any info on the other tanks in game. I would appreciate any input from the tankers in the forum.

[CDAT]

First off, I have no first hand experience with any soviet tanks. But having said that everything on your list looks good so I would go with either leaving it at 45 (easy way) or splitting the difference and give it a 47 or 48 per second. I would go with the easy way and just leave it at 45, just so do not end up with it going 47, 94, 141, 188, 235, 282, 329, 16. never getting easy to do a full 360.

[pmulcahy11b]

The M2A1 Bradleys we had had two speeds: normal (360 degrees in 30 seconds) and high speed (360 degrees in 10 seconds).

[swaghauler]

I wonder why the traverse speeds vary so much from AFV to AFV? You'd think they would be similar between models of a given generation. I plan on trying to stick with the real world speeds but will round to the nearest 5 degrees. I use a hex mat so each facing is 60 Degrees on the mat. If 70 degrees per second is the real speed of an Abrams traverse, that drive motor must be a monster.

[swaghauler]

The M2A1 Bradleys we had had two speeds: normal (360 degrees in 30 seconds) and high speed (360 degrees in 10 seconds).

This seems a more realistic speed of traverse to me. I was shocked at the speeds I was being quoted in the forums and seeing posted on Youtube videos. That's why I'm asking all of you about this. The M109 Paladin HIP had a fully automatic traverse but it was only about 45 Degrees a second in Deflection and 15 Degrees a second in elevation. Our older M109A2's (what I trained on in basic/AIT) had a traverse that was similar to your Bradly's.

[CDAT]

This seems a more realistic speed of traverse to me. I was shocked at the speeds I was being quoted in the forums and seeing posted on Youtube videos. That's why I'm asking all of you about this. The M109 Paladin HIP had a fully automatic traverse but it was only about 45 Degrees a second in Deflection and 15 Degrees a second in elevation. Our older M109A2's (what I trained on in basic/AIT) had a traverse that was similar to your Bradly's.

I do not remember for sure what the speeds are, but the numbers in the first post looks close to me. The speeds for the Bradley just sounds slow to me.

[cavtroop]

This seems a more realistic speed of traverse to me. I was shocked at the speeds I was being quoted in the forums and seeing posted on Youtube videos. That's why I'm asking all of you about this. The M109 Paladin HIP had a fully automatic traverse but it was only about 45 Degrees a second in Deflection and 15 Degrees a second in elevation. Our older M109A2's (what I trained on in basic/AIT) had a traverse that was similar to your Bradly's.

I was a gunner on a M2A2 a long long time ago, and I seem to remember a 6 second 360 time, which is 60deg/sec. Some sources online back me up, but Im old and fuzzy now so I may be wrong.

[Elf86]

I served with the M2A1's in the Gulf War. The speeds are accurate.

The reason why speeds differ from AFV to AFV is due to avionics, motor designs and weight of the turret. Tank turrets will traverse faster than an IFV (Infantry Fighting Vehicle) is because the motors are far more powerful. On average, a MBT (Main Battle Tank) will have a price tag of roughly $8 million while a typical IFV will be $3 million. Therefore, tanks will have more of everything because infantry are cheap and plentiful.

So, grab your ruck and move out, TROOP! (while wishing he was a tanker...)

[swaghauler]

I was a gunner on a M2A2 a long long time ago, and I seem to remember a 6 second 360 time, which is 60deg/sec. Some sources online back me up, but Im old and fuzzy now so I may be wrong.

I'm told this was one of the major upgrades (along with horsepower and electrical power output) in the "new build" M2A1/M2A2 Bradleys. Older M2 and early "upgraded" M2A1 Bradleys did in fact have the slower turret speeds because they lacked the (then new) High Output Electric Turret Drives (having an older hydraulic turret drive) that were faster and could be operated with the engine off but the main power on (at reduced speed). This falls in line with the various Youtube videos from Eastern Europe and Asia bragging about enhanced electric turret drives that are faster than the older hydraulic turret drives on the T62 through the 1st generation T90. This could prove to be a major advantage in game; Especially when combined with some more detailed rules I'm developing for Stabilization and Fire Control/Ranging systems.
My major goal in all this is to turn the player's AFVs into a sort of "NPC" with it's own disadvantages, advantages, and quirks. this will force the players to develop strategies which enhance their equipment's strengths while mitigating it's weaknesses.

[bobcat]

not being a tanker i can only comment that 1 degree is 17.77777~ mils(often rounding that to 17.8) but other than that it looks good to me.