The Chieftain just did a Youtube on this tank.

Air Defense Vulcan Bomber
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/re...eant-be-193904

You know, I have figured out that, in the 17 years (by averages) of life that I have left, I will never finish my web site.

One I've only found some information on, so it's a bit tentative:

In the early 2000's, McCann Industries manufactured an M1 Garand in .458 Winchester Magnum, using a muzzle brake and a mercury cylinder in the stock to control recoil. Weight is an estimate, everything is calculated using FF&S.

.458 Win Mag Garand
Wt. 5.30 kg, ROF SA, Mag 8(c)8, Dam 6, Pen 2-4-6, Bulk 7, SS 4, Rng 109

Without the brake, SS increases to 6.

It's certainly not a light rifle, but for sentry duty or similar work it puts a higher-powered round into action while still potentially being in a familiar form.

I could have sworn I had written about these, but I can't find a post about it now, so apologies if this is mostly a rehash (and now that I think on it some more, I may have only posted it on a Dark Conspiracy message thread elsewhere).

Back in 2018, Gun Jesus did a video on a Szescei & Fuchs double-barrel bolt-action rifle. Intended for dangerous game hunting, it provides a quicker follow-up shot than a conventional bolt-action with higher ammunition capacity than a tradition double-barrel. Poking around on their website, I found they fall into 7 cartridge sizes: varmint rounds (.17-.22), .30-06, 8x68mm S, .375 H&H Magnum, 9.3x62mm Mauser, .416 Remington Magnum, and .470 Capstick. The Remington Magnum has both side-by-side and over-under configurations, the 8x68mm S is only an over-under, and all the others are only side-by-side. For the Hummingbird in small calibers, I only figured stats for .22 Hornet, which is the most powerful of the available rounds. These are absolute show pieces with engraving and plating and all sorts of decoration, so possibly appropriate for a very rich character to have. While marked as BA for rate of fire, they should be allowed 2 fire actions at SA before having to reload; if only 1 shot is fired before reloading it will eject a live round, since the bolt cycles both barrels' actions simultaneously. The magazine numbers all have "+2" to indicate that both barrels can be carried loaded along with a full magazine.

Hummingbird (5.6x35mm, .22 Hornet)
Wt 3.5 kg, ROF BA, Dam 3, Pen 1-Nil, Blk 7, Mag 8+2, SS 3, Rng 63

Lion’s Dream (7.8x63.1mm Springfield .30-06)
Wt 4.4 kg, ROF BA, Dam 5, Pen 2-3-Nil, Blk 8, Mag 6+2, SS 4, Rng 69

Blue Boy (8x68mm S)
Wt 5.2 kg, ROF BA, Dam 5, Pen 2-4-6, Blk 8, Mag 4+2, SS 5, Rng 75

Elephant’s Life (9.6x72.4mm .375 H&H Magnum)
Wt 5.2 kg, ROF BA, Dam 6, Pen 2-4-6, Blk 9, Mag 6+2, SS 6, Rng 82

Russian Five (9.3x62mm Mauser)
Wt 4.3 kg, ROF BA, Dam 6, Pen 2-4-6, Blk 9, Mag 6+2, SS 6, Rng 83

Big Five Royal Blue / White Tiger / African Queen (10.6x72.4mm .416 Remington Magnum)
Wt 5.2 kg, ROF BA, Dam 7, Pen 2-3-4, Blk 9, Mag 6+2, SS 7, Rng 90

Mokume / Celtic (12.1x72mm .470 Capstick)
Wt 5.4 kg, ROF BA, Dam 8, Pen 2-3-4, Blk 10, Mag 6+2, SS 7, Rng 103

That's too juicy to ignore! You mind if I do some research on it and come up with stats on my own?

Please do. Their own website is where I got the gun weights and barrel lengths; those plus the bullet diameter and case length are the main numerical variables for the spreadsheet I built based on the FF&S construction system.

FV721 Fox Combat Vehicle Reconnaissance (Wheeled) (CVR(W)) Variants


Some of these are well known but I'll put them all here in the one place for ease of reference. Note that at least one of each of these vehicles exists today.

The FV721 FOX CVR(W) is a well known vehicle with a 30mm RARDEN autocannon firing from a three round clip. One of the nice things about the RARDEN is that once the clip is inside the weapon is sealed and no gasses escape into the turret. A conversion kit was made for the FV101 Scorpion CVR(T) creating the FV107 Scimitar CVR(T) but the Fox turret¹ also was fitted to the FV423 (issued to the Berlin Brigade), the M113 and the Alvis Saladin.

Note that some FV721 FOX CVR(W) were fitted with a ZB298 ground search radar but these never had a specialised typology. The FV432 conversion mentioned above had this as standard.

While the 30mm RARDEN was good Alvis also tried out some other variations for niche roles, and all but a few were simply turret swaps:

Fox Scout 7.62mm chaingun or GPMG²
Fox MILAN 7.62mm chaingun or GPMG and twin MILAN post²
Fox AA Oerlikon 20mm
Panga FT700 7.62x2
Panga FT800 12.7/7.62
Panga GKN 7.62x1
Stoat/Pole Cat GKN 7.62 turret (as used on the standard FV432)
Night Fox w/thermal instead or radar²
Fox Blow/Jav 7.62mm chaingun or GPMG (replace MILAN with other missile)²
Thunder Fox 7.62mm chaingun or GPMG and HVM missile
Fox "Glow" NBC reconnaissance (no weapon). This little guy is massively sealed and the interior has a nuclear spall liner.

While none of the turrets fitted to the FV101 Scorpion CVR(T) could be fitted to the FV721 FOX CVR(W), all the turrets on the Fox could be fitted to the Scorpion. This means you can have some really weird and whacky Scorps in your game.

¹I can't find its designation
²This is the same turret and the systems are interchangeable

There was also an experimental Fox shown at the 1982 British Army Equipment Exhibition with the one-person FMC turret equipped with a 25mm Bushmaster M242 chain gun and a coaxial 7.62mm.

As far as I know that one doesn't exist anymore, but the Vixen does, the unarmed variant with a turret blank carrying the smoke grenade launchers.

In this month's, well the November 2021 issue of, Military Modelcraft International, there is a 1/72 model build of Obiekt 195. (Object 195? Or is it "Ob’yct"?):

https://pocketmags.com/military-mode...613/obiekt-195

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/w-mo...m-gun--1347074

Crewless turret with a 152mm gun and "auxilliary cannon". Looks wile the latter can be used an an AA gun (?)

Is this James Langham's "T95 (Ob'yct 1321)" in his 'The Last Soviet Tanks'?

Ob'yekt or Ob'jekt. I've seen both. English translation, Object or in this context, Prototype.

Didn't the FV722 Vixen have the GKN-Sankey turret with a 7.62? I have seen one with the turret somewhere, I think it's here in Australia

just found this and thought it would fit here. the key is production cost at less than 50 dollars. it would be good for truck crews or ship's crews kind of like M3.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQK9JNsrq_8

Got that -- though I don't remember where I put it. (I think Best Shotguns That Never Were.) However, the T2K cost is significantly more than $50.

i think i am going to make it fire darts underwater. the russians have a pistol with 4 barrels (4.5mm) for underwater use.

The Russians also have a pair of amphibious longarms (they're smoothbore, so technically not rifles) - the 5.66x39mm APS and 5.45x39mm ASM-DT, plus the rifled amphibious bullpup 5.45x39mm ADS. Only the APS would be available in most T2K timelines, with the ASM-DT accepted for service in 2000 and the ADS in 2013.

Duxford Tanks. Chieftain Marksman. 17/06/2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CWeino-wu0

Some "never was" and / or Frankentanks here: 'Alternate AFVs for the '70s'. - https://www.alternatehistory.com/for...he-70s.424117/

Plus a M551 Sheridan Low Altitude Parachute drop from youtube (?) part way down the third page.

Nice find!

I have highly inappropriate feelings toward that Israeli upgrade of the M60A2 on the second page of that thread.

- C.

At least one of the frankentanks might be a bit problematic:

The Roetz (Panther hull with a T-54 turret) will run into diameter issues, since the Panther has a 165cm ring and the T-54 a 182.5cm ring.

I think model makers tend to gloss over such inconvienint facts or say the turret ring was "modified" so it fit... I do try to keep any of my 'What ifs? 'possible' / vaguely 'logical'.

However, when I found that a model (?) T34/76 turret would fit exactly on a (Revell 1/72) M2 Bradley kit, i.e. the model's turret 'rings' were the same... well, it could have happened...

Just wish someone did a 1/72 Starship turret / kit. There is / was a 1/72 kit of it but it is now seemingly 'collectable' / out of production / v. expensive. Even when there were lots of LMSs (Local Model Shops) I never saw one on the shelf.

I have seen photos of M60 Starships, or one as a test, with the trad. gun swopped for a non-missile firing 105mm (?) main gun.

I think IIRC Antenna photoshopped the real turret onto an Abrams.

I'm no rivet counter but I have to have logical builds. Like I get an eye-twitch when I see desert vehicles with crap festooned over the air intakes.

The beauty of T2K conversions is that you seriously can drape tonnes of stowage all over a vehicle and it's absolutely right!

The M60A1E3 was a prototype that tested the M68 105mm cannon with the Starship turret (on an M60A1 hull, as this was part of the testing to develop the M60A2). It was about 1700 pounds heavier than the M60A2 ended up being. AFAIK, it was an M68 (the M60's cannon), not the M68E1 used on the A1 and A3 tanks.

Edit to add: I'm usually OK with small differences in turret ring size or other equipment carriage mounts - the T-34/76 is pushing it on being too small for a Bradley (the 1942 turret is 1.38 meters, while the Bradley is 1.50). The T-34/85 would almost be a better match at 1.56 meters, or a bit over 2" larger than the Bradley. The Panther/T-54 difference is almost 7", which is enough volume that I can't imagine there wouldn't be something important being impinged on.

if the new turret is wider then it should not be an issue of making a "step" that acts as an adapter between old hull and new turret. it would have to have armored skin or maybe just ERA covering that area.

To be honest I put the T72/76 turret on as a) it was available / left over and b) looked 'ok'. I am interested that the T34/85 has a similar turret ring size but it seems like too much turret and too much gun. However having seen photos of the what has been put on M113s in the real world... I suppose it depends on how much stress the firing puts on the chassis / whatever?

PS. I did stick a Bradley turret on a standard M113... hence why I had a Bradley chassis spare.

MBB Lampyridae
 

I'm not sure if this has been posted, I couldn't find it.

Vickers Mark 11 6x6 Armoured Car

A failed bid for the Australian Bushranger contact, the Mk11 is a lightly armoured wheeled personnel carrier with surprisingly heavy armament. Development began in 1993 and the result is as follows:

Crew: 4+8
Mass: 20,000kg
Max speed (road): 105km/h
Max speed (water): 8km/h
Range: 1,000km
Armour: Proof vs mall arms (7.62AP) and shell fragments
Fuel cap: 500L
Armament:
L7 105mm cannon, 7.62mm MAG MG co-ax, 12.7mm M2 (loader)
or
120mm mortar or 81mm mortar, 12.7mm M2
or
20mm AA gun (unspecified), 7.62mm MAG MG co-ax
or
12.7mm M2, 7.62mm MAG MG co-ax (APC variant)

as well as the usual command, ambulance, fitter and so on variants.

Extra equipment: 350L water tank, centralized tyre pressure regulation system.

http://zonwar.ru/images/tank/sovr_bt...rs_Mk_11_2.jpg

http://zonwar.ru/images/tank/sovr_bt...rs_Mk_11_3.jpg

Oh, wow, can't remember I ever read about this one before. With a complement of 4+8 people and a 105 mm gun, this sure sounds cramped for a 6x6. Though this link speaks only of 7 dismounts, which would still be a regular number for armored infantry: http://www.military-today.com/artill...ckers_mk11.htm

Any knowledge as to why it failed the bid?

I'm not sure of the specifics, but it was out of contention early in the process. The prototypes the Australian Army ended up evaluating were the ADI Bushmaster (based on the Irish MP44) and the ASVS Taipan (based on the South African Mamba). It seems like the Vickers was out of contention by 1995 in the Bushranger Project tender process. If I had to guess, it probably didn't meet the 70% threshold for the requirement to be manufactured and built in Australia.

Ah, yes, that all sounds very likely, thanks.

The Royal Armouries released a video a few days ago on the BSA 28P. Rather unsurprisingly, Paul already has it in his Best Assault Rifles That Never Were, but the video mentions that the earliest prototypes did not include the cyclical rate inhibitor of the rifle that was written up. For serial number 1 (and an unknown number after, but probably no more than 6 because SN 7 has the inhibitor):

Change ROF from 5 to 10
Change burst recoil from 9 to 19

Yes, it's going to spit bullets everywhere but where it is aimed. Based on trials results, that seems to be historically accurate.

The write-up also mentions that it used rifle grenades. Per the video, the one it was designed around was the British anti-tank grenade No. 85, which was equivalent to the American M9/M9A1. It used a scaled-down bazooka-like shaped-charge warhead capable of penetrating 2" (~51mm) of armor.

Object 279
 

Pretty sure we've discussed this one already, but it's an interesting piece. It includes a bit about the "never-really-was" IT-1 Missile Tank as well.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...d-back-to-life

-

I just checked my site; I can't believe I didn't do that one!

I also checked your site earlier today to see if you'd done it. There's some very basic information here on various missile tanks, and I might pull together more information, since some of these are beautifully weird vehicles.

Object 757 was an IS-3 with a 125mm launcher for 9K112/AT-8 "Songster" missiles.

Object 775 was a new hull with the same launcher.

Object 282 was built on a T-10 chassis with a pop-up launcher firing either 152mm anti-tank rockets (22 carried) or 132mm anti-tank rockets (30 carried).

Object 287 is a weird little thing with a pair of the 73mm gun-launchers from the BMP-1 (and a pair of coaxial PKT machine guns) and a pop-up launcher with 15 of the 9M15 Taifun radio-guided anti-tank missile.

And, of course, the IT-1 that saw service with two tank destroyer battalions.

By the way, on the "Best Tanks That Never Were," I think the ammo loadouts for the M1A4 and M60 Modernization Package have been reversed - the M1A4 is carrying 105mm rounds despite being armed with a 140mm gun, and the M60 has 140mm and 30mm rounds. Also, the M60-2000 has 120mm ammo despite having a 105mm M68.

All I can say is Oops! Thanks for the catch!

IS-3? T-10? What did the Soviets do, raid a boneyard?

Object 757 dates to 1959 and Object 282 to 1961, so when they were built their hull types had been introduced 15 and 9 years earlier respectively. They were probably trying to find a use for the old heavy tank hulls after the introduction of the T-54/55.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a31zPv5bljg

It's about the MiG-31 - but not the one you think.

While you're watching it, remember the date today...

Didn't Mitchell Gant steal one for us. :)