RPG Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-31-2020, 10:21 PM
TyCaine's Avatar
TyCaine TyCaine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Central Florida, USA
Posts: 40
Default Joint Light Tactical Vehicle stats

I'm running a Twilight story with a later timeline, and was wondering if anyone had put together stats for the various variations of the replacement for the HMMWV, the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV).

I searched through Paul's site but couldn't find anything for it.

Anyone?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_...ctical_Vehicle


~Ty
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-31-2020, 10:43 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Marana, AZ
Posts: 2,746
Default

From my 2030 campaign, C/O Spartan 117, formatted for another website:

<b>2022 Arkansas National Guard M1278 Joint Light Tactical Vehicle <i>Razorback</i></b>

<img src="https://img.ednews.net/news/2019/08/photo_384284.jpg">

<i>Razorback</i> is an Arkansas National Guard M1278 Heavy Guns Carrier Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV). The vehicle's power plant is a 6.6 L V8 turbo diesel engine mated to 6-speed automatic transmission with all-wheel drive. Unlike many newer M1278A1 vehicles which carry remote weapon stations, this M1278 is configured with an older-style Objective Gunner Protection Kit (OGPK) with installed M2HB heavy machine-gun (equipped with a Surefire HellFighter 4 Heavy Gun WeaponLight). Baseline equipment includes air conditioning system, cabin heater and runflat tires. The Oshkosh developed crew protection system includes specialized hull design, armor materials, a fire-extinguishing system, and energy-absorbing floors, seats, and restraint systems for crew members and stowage. <i>Razorback</i> has an integrated C4ISR system, however, the systems capabilities are seriously degraded in the current, post-nuclear exchange, environment.

<hr>
<b>Fuel:</b> <pre>[90/90]</pre>
<b>Cargo (500 kg Capacity)</b>
Wheeled Vehicles Tools & Common Spare Parts for M1278
2 x 50-ft Coil, Concertina Wire
Large Camouflage Net
Arkansas flag
U.S.A. flag
110 kg Total

<hr>
<b>ARNG JLTV (<i>Razorback</i>)</b>
<pre>
<i>Fire Control:</i> None <i>Travel Move:</i> 40/10 km/hr
<i>Stabilization:</i> None <i>Combat Move:</i> 111/28 m
<i>Fuel Type:</i> D, A <i>Fuel Capacity:</i> 90 L (D)
<i>Load:</i> 500 kg <i>Fuel Cons:</i> 11 L/hr
<i>Vehicle Wt:</i> 3 tons
<i>Crew:</i> 2+2 <b>Combat Statistics</b>
<i>Maintenance:</i> 8 <i>Config:</i> Stnd HF: 4
<i>Susp:</i> Off-Road HS: 4
HR: 4
Sup: 3

<b>Damage Record</b>

<i>Wear:</i> 1

<i>Crew:</i> <i>Sight/Vision:</i>
Driver [ ] Headlights [ ]
Gunner [ ]
<i>Systems:</i>
Radio [ ]
Engine [ ]
Fuel (10% each) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Suspension minor [ ] [ ] [ ]
Suspension immobilized [ ]</pre>
__________________
Dulce bellum inexpertis. - Erasmus
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-01-2020, 04:27 PM
TyCaine's Avatar
TyCaine TyCaine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Central Florida, USA
Posts: 40
Default

Looks like a good start, though the load capacity looks a little light.

The wiki page lists Payload Category A (the generic variant) as a load of 1,600 kg. Payload Category B (infantry carriers, reconnaisance, etc) as a load of 1,8002,000 kg and Payload Category C (logistics) as a load of 2,300 kg.

Am I missing something? After all a HMMWV can carry 1,250 kg, seems like it should at least be that if not more?

I'm not experienced at making stats though, nor am I experienced with the vehicle in question, so I bow to the stat masters on these forums...


~Ty
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-01-2020, 06:16 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Marana, AZ
Posts: 2,746
Default No Problem

I'm by no means a stats guy myself, but I trusted the guy that put it together. Like you said, it's a starting point. Feel free to make adjustments.

-
__________________
Dulce bellum inexpertis. - Erasmus
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-01-2020, 09:34 PM
StainlessSteelCynic's Avatar
StainlessSteelCynic StainlessSteelCynic is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,953
Default

From a brief look at the Wiki page and checking the info given by Raellus, I would tentatively say that Razorback probably has a lower cargo capacity due to the ancillary systems installed e.g. the weapons mount, the C4ISR gear and so on.
I'm of the understanding that the payload capacity listed on Wiki is before such systems are installed. I seems that because there's so many sub-configurations of the three main variants that nobody has (unsurprisingly) listed the different weights with all the different equipment load-outs.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-01-2020, 11:56 PM
Vespers War Vespers War is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 144
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic View Post
From a brief look at the Wiki page and checking the info given by Raellus, I would tentatively say that Razorback probably has a lower cargo capacity due to the ancillary systems installed e.g. the weapons mount, the C4ISR gear and so on.
I'm of the understanding that the payload capacity listed on Wiki is before such systems are installed. I seems that because there's so many sub-configurations of the three main variants that nobody has (unsurprisingly) listed the different weights with all the different equipment load-outs.
Even still, 500 kg seems light unless the vehicle is up-armored and carrying a heavy weapon, and the vehicle weight is also very light. It's quoted in the stat block as 3 tons, but the GVW is 10,266 kilograms, with a payload of 2,318 kg for the two-door (Combat Support Vehicle) and 1,590 kg for the four-door (Combat Tactical Vehicle). That GVW is with a load, since the curb weight for a bare-bones vehicle is supposed to be 6,400 kilograms, but the vehicle's certainly not 3 tons, and if it's in a 6.5 ton configuration, the payload should be at least triple.

There are four variants - the CTV comes in General Purpose, Heavy Guns Carrier, and Close Combat Weapons Carrier, while the CSV is a Utility vehicle that can carry a shelter (the Shelter is sometimes mentioned as a fifth variant, but that just seems to be kit that the Utility can have). Only three vehicle platforms exist, because the Heavy Guns Carrier is a package configuration for the General Purpose vehicle. As an M1278, the Razorback is a CTV, General Purpose vehicle platform, Heavy Guns mission package.

The base vehicle is defined as having an A-kit armor package, while a B-kit of modular armor can be added, as well as an anti-RPG cage. They can use various turrets and remote weapon stations, with possible payloads including (but not limited to) M240 or M2 machine guns, the M230 30mm chain gun, TOW missile launchers, and Mk 19 grenade launchers (I'm sure other weapons can also be fitted, but those are the ones I've either seen pictures of or seen mentioned in writings about the vehicle).

We've got beaucoup possible weights, since there are four variants that can each be bare or uparmored, might or might not have a cage, and can have different mountings with different weapons. Even when hard information starts coming out on weights, there'll need to be good detail to specify exactly how it's configured (armor package, weapons station, and weapon) or else it won't be maximally useful data.

As a spitball estimate, if the Razorback is properly up-armored and armed, it's probably close to 8 tons without cargo.
__________________
The poster formerly known as The Dark

The Vespers War - Ninety years before the Twilight War, there was the Vespers War.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-02-2020, 07:32 PM
CDAT CDAT is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 335
Default

Now I do not have first hand experience with them, but as I was getting out they were starting to field them, and some of the units near mine had them. Talking with some of the troops that did have them, the biggest issue they all had was that they were small. By that they were saying that there was less room inside, and they could not carry near as much stuff as the HMMWV. The numbers that I heard was that you could only fit about four troops, maybe five if you cram them in, and about 1/4 of the total weight.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-03-2020, 01:25 AM
StainlessSteelCynic's Avatar
StainlessSteelCynic StainlessSteelCynic is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,953
Default

That raises an interesting question. Perhaps the guy who wrote up Razorback was aware that internal stowage space was limited in size and wrote the stats to reflect that?
It also begs the question (but this is a "can of worms" type question) of listing internal and external stowage as separate figures rather than just dumping them both into "cargo". That would make things a bit more realistic but it's a lot of extra work and not something I'd encourage unless you really want to do it.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.