RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Twilight 2000 Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old 07-23-2009, 03:38 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Southern AZ
Posts: 4,224
Default

I was thinking that maybe the W. German government, anticipating a relatively bloodless reunification by force, placed an order for a bunch of new 120mm with which to retrofit the T-72s they expected to capture/inherit.

But then, another thought struck me. The T-72 has an autoloader for its 125mm gun. It's turret is simply too cramped to accomodate a human loader. Developing an autoloader and its accompanying magazine for the 120mm Rheinmetal gun would be difficult to say the least, and retrofitting the entire system (gun and new autoloader/magazine) into the T-72's cramped turret would take a lot of time, if it was possible at all. Trying to operate the 120mm gun conventionally with a two person crew would slow the weapon's firing time dramatically and probably also negatively impact accuracy. The other option would be to develop an entirely new turret for the T-72 and that wouldn't be easy (or cheap, or fast).

With this in mind think the better (easier, cheaper, more effective) option would be to keep the T-72's original 125mm gun and start making ammo for it.
__________________
Author of Twilight 2000 adventure modules, Rook's Gambit and The Poisoned Chalice, the campaign sourcebook, Korean Peninsula, the gear-book, Baltic Boats, and the co-author of Tara Romaneasca, a campaign sourcebook for Romania, all available for purchase on DriveThruRPG:

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...--Rooks-Gambit
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...ula-Sourcebook
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...nia-Sourcebook
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...liate_id=61048
https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/...-waters-module
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-23-2009, 05:54 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 5,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
Just train your troops not to use weapon type alone for enemy recognition. Use it as part of a matrix including helmet shape, cammo pattern, etc.
This is exactly what I'm getting at. Training takes time and resources which aren't exactly in great supply in the early days of the war, or while units are on the front lines.

This retraining also isn't all that critical as long as the units with the enemy weapons are kept apart from those with standard issue. The problem really only arises if weapon types are mixed within units - section/squad, plattoon, company, even battalion (unlikely for larger units to be working closely enough to be a problem).

Arming one battalion of a brigade of say three, or the supporting units (supply, medical, transport, etc) with enemy weapons is a possible solution also, however all those issued with these weapons will still need training on the weapons themselves.

Every problem can be solved with enough time and resources. Unfortunately one, or both is often in short supply in a battle zone.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-23-2009, 09:16 PM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,688
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
I was thinking that maybe the W. German government, anticipating a relatively bloodless reunification by force, placed an order for a bunch of new 120mm with which to retrofit the T-72s they expected to capture/inherit.

But then, another thought struck me. The T-72 has an autoloader for its 125mm gun. It's turret is simply too cramped to accomodate a human loader. Developing an autoloader and its accompanying magazine for the 120mm Rheinmetal gun would be difficult to say the least, and retrofitting the entire system (gun and new autoloader/magazine) into the T-72's cramped turret would take a lot of time, if it was possible at all. Trying to operate the 120mm gun conventionally with a two person crew would slow the weapon's firing time dramatically and probably also negatively impact accuracy. The other option would be to develop an entirely new turret for the T-72 and that wouldn't be easy (or cheap, or fast).

With this in mind think the better (easier, cheaper, more effective) option would be to keep the T-72's original 125mm gun and start making ammo for it.
You raise an excellent point about the autoloader. I don't know how difficult it would be to modify a T-72 autoloader to carry 120mm ammunition, but the addition of anther task on the list of converting a T-72 to NATO standard ammunition is a task in favor of keeping the 125mm gun on captured T-72s and putting up with the logistical headaches.

Webstral
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07-23-2009, 09:23 PM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,688
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
I was thinking, though, that the reunified German army would stay segregated for a while, with former E. German army units keeping their Soviet-Bloc weapons and vehicles. It wouldn't be too hard to keep such homogenous units supplied. Such and such a division gets 125mm tank shells, 7.62mm S ammo, 122mm arty rounds, etc. while the other ones get standard NATO.

I don't see the Germans scrapping all of the former E. German army's Soviet made artillery tubes, rocket launchers, trucks, etc. for the sake of creating ammo commonality as it would take time and money to replace it all with standard NATO gear. It just seems that the war moves too fast (up to '98 or so) for that to happen. Those T-72s would be needed at the front.

Later in the war, as attrition mandates blending of W. and former E. German units, supply would become more of an issue. Perhaps there would be time and the facilities needed to retrofit NATO guns to Soviet-made tanks shortly before the TDM. After that, it would probably be too late to manage such a large scale refitting.
I do believe you're right that the unified Germans aren't going to can all of the Pact gear they inherit. In some ways, having East German troops in the mix simplifies the matter of what to do with captured Pact gear. Later in the war, decentralized decision-making no doubt will be the order of the day. Where possible, Pact gear might be refitted; where not, captured or locally manufactured stocks might be made to work. By 2000, there aren't going to be many easy solutions.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
Also, many Israeli commando units (Sayeret Golani, for example) used AKs captured during the '67 war during the '73 war. Israeli rifle squads customarily included an RPG gunner as late as the '82 war in Lebanon. This, of course, in addition to their western and locally made weapons. If the Israelis could handle the supply and identification issues, I'm sure the Bundeswher could too.
Special operations types have their own way of doing business. The RPG is a good example of using the enemy's gear. The logistical chain becomes additionally burdened when some units are using the RPG, others the Carl Gustav, and still others the B300 (to pick three loosely comparable systems). If everyone is using the RPG, then an RPG shipment can go to any unit anywhere.

Webstral
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-23-2009, 09:28 PM
Mohoender's Avatar
Mohoender Mohoender is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Near Cannes, South of France
Posts: 1,653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Webstral View Post
You raise an excellent point about the autoloader. I don't know how difficult it would be to modify a T-72 autoloader to carry 120mm ammunition, but the addition of anther task on the list of converting a T-72 to NATO standard ammunition is a task in favor of keeping the 125mm gun on captured T-72s and putting up with the logistical headaches.

Webstral
Here is the answer: not that hard. In addition, what was stated it that Germany modified tanks they had. As I pointed out, this is only valid for v2.2. It doesn't apply to the v1.0 time setting.

The Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau has developed a T-72 tank main armament upgrade package which envisages use of a 120mm gun and NATO-standard ammunition.

It is possible to fit the T-72 tank with a 120-140mm main guns; in so doing, the scope of required re-designing is rather small, as these guns have the overall dimensions similar to those of the guns 2A46, 2A46M and KBA3. The breech-part of the offered 120mm KBM2 gun with a quick-replacement barrel has a high degree of commonality with the breech-part of the original gun of the T-72 tank.

In order to be able to use 120mm NATO-standard fixed ammunition, the automatic loader of the gun is installed in an isolated self-contained compartment in the turret bustle. The level of armour protection of the automatic loader compartment is analogous to that of the Leopard and Abrams tanks.

The total allowance of ammunition of the tank includes 40 rounds, of which 22 are positioned in the automatic loader.

http://www.morozov.com.ua/eng/body/t72-120.php
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-23-2009, 10:41 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 5,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoender View Post
[I]The Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau has developed a T-72 tank main armament upgrade package which envisages use of a 120mm gun and NATO-standard ammunition.
When was this developed?
If it was after 1997 and you're using 1.0 or 2.0/2.2 timelines, chances are it's still barely somebody's fantasy.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07-23-2009, 10:45 PM
Targan's Avatar
Targan Targan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,737
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker View Post
When was this developed?
If it was after 1997 and you're using 1.0 or 2.0/2.2 timelines, chances are it's still barely somebody's fantasy.
Sometimes such things would not be available in any of the original T2K timelines because of the technology not having yet been developed. But in this and other similar cases it shows that it could have been done with the technology available had someone had reason to try.

Perhaps I didn't explain that very well but do you see what I mean?
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 07-23-2009, 11:08 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 5,070
Default

One of my pet hates is people who can't see that technology of today (2009), or even of ten years ago, simply can't apply to the world of T2K in 2000.
Technology may have developed relatively swiftly for some military applications, however, on the whole, technology in T2K can't be much more advanced that what was available IRL late in 1997.
This applies regardless of 1.0 or 2.0/2.2 timelines as the nukes brought virtually all development to a grinding halt.

There may be some exceptions (those with significant military applications and which took only 6 months or so from development to implementation). However those technical advances with no, or limited military applications are likely to have first slowed, then stalled as the war ground on - resources were diverted more and more from consumer goods, etc to war production.

Unit composition, tactics, etc are another similar issue. As 1.0/2.0/2.2 do not include such events as Iraq and Afganistan, where many lessons have been learnt, not to mention political changes and decisions (military budgets being just one small part), real world unit strengths, equipment, etc simply can't apply (certainly not in the first stages of the war, and with the speed the military makes changes, probably not ever - the nukes falling before anything could really be implemented, totally changing the playing field).

While these problems aren't really an issue if we're talking future technology or what may be available in a future setting, it's increasingly an issue for games such as T2K or anything set further back in history.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 07-24-2009, 01:41 AM
leonpoi leonpoi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 171
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoender View Post
Here is the answer: not that hard. In addition, what was stated it that Germany modified tanks they had. As I pointed out, this is only valid for v2.2. It doesn't apply to the v1.0 time setting.

The Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau has developed a T-72 tank main armament upgrade package which envisages use of a 120mm gun and NATO-standard ammunition.

It is possible to fit the T-72 tank with a 120-140mm main guns; in so doing, the scope of required re-designing is rather small, as these guns have the overall dimensions similar to those of the guns 2A46, 2A46M and KBA3. The breech-part of the offered 120mm KBM2 gun with a quick-replacement barrel has a high degree of commonality with the breech-part of the original gun of the T-72 tank.

In order to be able to use 120mm NATO-standard fixed ammunition, the automatic loader of the gun is installed in an isolated self-contained compartment in the turret bustle. The level of armour protection of the automatic loader compartment is analogous to that of the Leopard and Abrams tanks.

The total allowance of ammunition of the tank includes 40 rounds, of which 22 are positioned in the automatic loader.

http://www.morozov.com.ua/eng/body/t72-120.php
Also, and it would make the tank very limited in ROF, I assume that the round could be loaded by hand in the same way as the missile is. Loading time would obviously be somewhere between the autoloader and missile load times (2 & 6 if I remember), so maybe somewhere around 4.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 07-24-2009, 05:16 AM
Mohoender's Avatar
Mohoender Mohoender is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Near Cannes, South of France
Posts: 1,653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker View Post
When was this developed?
If it was after 1997 and you're using 1.0 or 2.0/2.2 timelines, chances are it's still barely somebody's fantasy.
Development year was 1998 with help from GIAT industries (Cocorico). As a result, this should be somebody's fantasy (the game designer's fentasy as a matter of fact if my memory is not betraying me).

I know that many among us like to have some kind of realistic setting (count me among them) but that's what is nice about RPG, they leave room for fantasy. The questions were: is it possible? and is it worth it?. Leg, I agree with you (and mean no offense), it could be somebody's fantasy but so are many vehicles depicted in the various sourcebooks (I rule many out and first among them: the LAV-75).

The answers are:
It is possible! If that was done only in 1998 is not a problem of technology (GIAT industries had a 120mm gun in the early 80's and the autoloader seems to remain the original one with some changes to adapt the new caliber) but a problem of history. IRL, only Ukraine had a true interest in that project. In the case of T2K, Germany could have been interested (at least in v2.2). Highly unlikely in v1.0 IMO.

However, I'm not sure if it's worth it. From what I read in all our posts both side have strong points behind them. Therefore, it up to the GM choice.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 07-24-2009, 05:23 AM
Mohoender's Avatar
Mohoender Mohoender is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Near Cannes, South of France
Posts: 1,653
Default Specification of the 125mm to compare with the 120mm

Specifications of the gun
Designation KBA3
Calibre 125 mm
Type smoothbore gun
Breech-block type semiautomatic with horizontal placement of the wedge
Gun length 6678 mm
Barrel length 6000 mm (L48)
Normal recoil length 260 to 300 mm
Maximum possible recoil length (STOP) 310 mm
Initial pressure in the recuperator 59 to 62 kgf/cm2
Number of recoil brakes 2
Placement of recoil brakes symmetrical relative to the gun bore axis
Number of recuperators 1
Resistance to recoil 98000 kgf
Gun weight 2500 kg
Weight of gun recoiling part 1900 kg
Muzzle velocity (when firing 3VBM17 "MANGO" armour-piercing round) 1700 m/s
Maximum acceptable calculated gas pressure in charge chamber 6500 kgf/cm2
Gas pressure in charge chamber (when firing 3VBM17 "MANGO") 5660 kgf/cm2 (at t=15°C)
Horizontal dispersion (APDSFS and HEAT at 2000m range) 0.2 mils
Vertical dispersion (APDSFS and HEAT at 2000 m range) 0.2 mils

Specifications of the gun
Designation KBM2
Calibre 120 mm
Type smoothbore gun
Breech-block type semiautomatic with horizontal placement of the wedge
Gun length 6903 mm
Barrel length 6000 mm (L50)
Normal recoil length 260 to 300 mm
Maximum posible recoil length (STOP) 310 mm
Initial pressure in the recuperator 59 to 62 kgf/cm2
Number of recoil brakes 2
Placement of recoil brakes symmetrical relative to the gun bore axis
Number of recuperators 1
Gun weight 2600 kg
Weight of gun recoiling part 2115 kg
Muzzle velocity (when firing OFL 120F1 armour-piercing round) 1790 m/s
Maximum acceptable calculated gas pressure in charge chamber 7200 kgf/cm2
Horizontal dispersion 0.2 m (APFSDS, R=3,000 m)
0.25 m (HEAT, R=2,000 m)
Vertical dispersion 0.2 m (APFSDS, R=3,000 m)
0.25 м (HEAT, R=2,000 m)
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 07-24-2009, 06:31 AM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 5,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoender View Post
Development year was 1998 with help from GIAT industries (Cocorico).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoender View Post
...(GIAT industries had a 120mm gun in the early 80's and the autoloader seems to remain the original one with some changes to adapt the new caliber)
So technologically it was possible but as only the Ukraine IRL showed any interest in it, the chances of it actually being implemented are on the far side of slim (for 1.0 at least).

Personally I've no problem with this having occured in a 2.0/2.2 timeline. It's the insistance of players, and a lesser extent (hopefully) GMs to use technologies that didn't even hit the drawing board until the last decade that I find difficult to swallow.
It's a bit like insisting that the M60 machinegun was available for use (if only on a limited basis ie only available to PCs) in 1944 just because the M60 design incorporates elements of machineguns of that era!

Stinks of munckinism to me.

__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 07-24-2009, 08:26 AM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Southern AZ
Posts: 4,224
Default

Mo, I had completely forgotten about the Ukranian T-72 upgrades. It can be done (maybe not by '97, but that's not my point). But (you had to know a "but" was coming!), I'm certain that the new gun and modified loader took at least a couple of years to design, test, install, etc.

The German army simply wouldn't have time to do this when its troops and armor were already engaged with Soviet and Pact forces. They would need those tanks at the front.

Here's a compromise solution that incorporates your prefered v2.2 statement that German T-72s have been "modified".

As soon as the German army was "unified", R&D (research and development) began on upgrading the T-72's main gun to NATO 120mm and modifying the autoloader accordingly.

Germany's T-72s, however, were not pulled off the line immediately. Badly needed on the front lines, they served with their original 125mm guns. A year or so into the conflict, once the 120mm gun and autoloader had been developed, tested, and produced en masse, remaining German T-72s were rotated back to the factory to be retrofitted with the new 120mm gun system. By the TDM, most, if not all of the T-72s in the German army had been modified in this way.

How's that?
__________________
Author of Twilight 2000 adventure modules, Rook's Gambit and The Poisoned Chalice, the campaign sourcebook, Korean Peninsula, the gear-book, Baltic Boats, and the co-author of Tara Romaneasca, a campaign sourcebook for Romania, all available for purchase on DriveThruRPG:

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...--Rooks-Gambit
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...ula-Sourcebook
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...nia-Sourcebook
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...liate_id=61048
https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/...-waters-module
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 07-24-2009, 08:41 AM
Mohoender's Avatar
Mohoender Mohoender is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Near Cannes, South of France
Posts: 1,653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
Mo, I had completely forgotten about the Ukranian T-72 upgrades. It can be done (maybe not by '97, but that's not my point). But (you had to know a "but" was coming!), I'm certain that the new gun and modified loader took at least a couple of years to design, test, install, etc.

...How's that?
Of course I expected the "But" (I would have been more than disapointed if you didn't come up with it) and I have to confess that I have to agree with it..

The way you put things seems very nice to me.

One last point: I used my own timeline as I never liked any of the original ones. I simply could'nt identify myself with any of the two. I usually refer to the v2.2 simply because I have a paper copy of it (not true for the v1.0).
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 07-25-2009, 01:20 AM
JimmyRay73's Avatar
JimmyRay73 JimmyRay73 is offline
Player to be named later
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 61
Default

In the old campaign I played with my cousins our philosophy was "If it ain't nailed down steal it, if you can't steal it blow it up so nobody else can steal it and use it against you." At times we used captured vehicles ranging from ZSU's to BTR's to the occasional BMW, and even some mining equipment. Oh yeah, a couple of GAZ's decked out as ambulances made for a great covert insertion to a Soviet cantonment...

We tended to only take certain weapons though, as things like maps and medical gear were deemed to be more important when space/carrying capacity was limited. We always tried to make room for spare 7.62R ammo or extra AK mags, and 12 gauge shells as well. That stuff was common enough to be very useful for either combat or trade.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
vehicles


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Civilian vehicles? Mohoender Twilight 2000 Forum 30 07-17-2016 08:58 AM
Vehicles and EMPs? Mohoender Twilight 2000 Forum 65 12-23-2013 10:51 PM
Top Ten Post-apoc Vehicles (civilian) General Pain Twilight 2000 Forum 1 07-14-2009 07:01 AM
Modified Vehicles in T2K Raellus Twilight 2000 Forum 8 01-03-2009 04:18 PM
The Ten Best Post-Apocalyptic Survival Vehicles General Pain Twilight 2000 Forum 0 11-25-2008 04:05 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.