Shipbucket

Thank you for the reaponse Trojan.

When you say latter, are you talking about the last one, rather than the second one?

I tried the LAV setup, but I didn't like it because the troops can only exit through a rear door or roof hatches.

The reason I like the last design is because the troops can exit from the rear, both sides, (and the roof) quickly and with minimal hassle.

I am also trying to stick with the rear engine setup so that I can implement a hydrojet in the back of the hull, like a BTR-80.

_________________
Salide - Denton - The Interrealms

I am not very active on the forums anymore, but work is still being done on my AUs. Visit the Salidan Altiverse Page on the SB Wiki for more information. All current work is being done on Google Docs.
If anyone wishes for their nations to interact with the countries of the Salidan Altiverse, please send me a PM, after which we can further discuss through email.

Yes I meant the last one sorry about the confusion
I think it's fine to only be able to exit from the rear or side doors
Very little capability is being lost IMO and u can still put one on the side that doesn't have an engine
Also the lav-25 uses propellers at the rear so u can still do it with an lav setup

_________________
Projects:
Zealandia AU
John Company AU
References and feedback is always welcome!

Doesn't the Israeli Achzarit have similar layout to the last version?
http://www.nimda.co.il/image/users/1990 ... id=9627670
http://files.radioscanner.ru/uploader/2011/achzarit.jpg

Also, what you could do is put the engine on the front bit. The power pack on the 2 first ones looks a bit large to begin with (assuming the vehicle isn't as ridiculously flat as Russian IFVs and APCs tend to be); what you could, maybe, do is put the power pack to the right and partly under the gunner, especially since he's going to be in an elevated position anyways. I'm assuming the turret isn't a full RWS? Is the gunner moving with the turret? If yes, I think you'll need more space than just his width with gear - the last option could be doable but not very likely. Also, is the gunner offset in the turret? Are the guns offset?

Also, exactly how are the drivers supposed to get out? Via roof hatches or hopping over their seats?

I put together a quick modification in Paint. The last one is obviously mine, sort of showing what my ideas would look in practise.


If you need more space, you could easily squeeze in a few more seats. Or lengthen the vehicle.

While doing research, I was kind of puzzled by the claims of the Sisu Pasi (Patria XA-180 and -200) holding up to 18 troops. For example, this would look extremely cramped with that many people (I count/estimate about 9 people). Same for the pics of XA-200 interior without the people in it. But then again, the XA-180 series seems to have less "individual" seats:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File: ... urku_7.JPG
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File: ... %C3%A4.jpg



Best quote found while doing research:

_________________
"Flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - D.N. Adams

The drivers will exit through roof hatches.

I like your set up as well, but I'm not sure what to do yet.

The turret is not an RWS. The gunner does move with the turret. I just put that generic circle to denote where he would go.

Concerning the side doors, they are a little large than the BTR's doors, but I will probably widen them some more.

Thank you for your responses.
Ethan

_________________
Salide - Denton - The Interrealms

I am not very active on the forums anymore, but work is still being done on my AUs. Visit the Salidan Altiverse Page on the SB Wiki for more information. All current work is being done on Google Docs.
If anyone wishes for their nations to interact with the countries of the Salidan Altiverse, please send me a PM, after which we can further discuss through email.

I'm glad that my 1st pic edit posted here wasn't a total failure. Looking at some interior shots and models of BTR-80, I can certainly see the logic in the first version. Regarding the engine placement, I'm actually interested to know if that would work at all. Atleast CV90s have room under the turret, used for ammo boxes etc.

Doesn't the 30 mm cannon-equipped turret require a somewhat larger turret ring than that of the BTR? Just regarding the clearance issues again - I'm not saying the layout is wrong or anything. Each version posted so far could work.

One thing to consider would be the seats - wide benches or indiv. seats. While the folding benches give more capacity, they might not be as road-safe. Then again, it's easier to pack people, and when folded away, you can load more material into the vehicle. Inward vs outward facing seats... due to the side doors, the inward seats loose some capacity, but offer more flexibility in terms of space usage and cargo... outward seats give you the extra benches and make the usage of firing ports (which the design lacks?) easier. Is the design for a 13-man squad or smaller, and is the crew included in the squad?

_________________
"Flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - D.N. Adams

Current seating practice in more modern AFVs is a canvas seat suspended from the ceiling and tethered to the floor to minimize movement. It reduces injury to the crew from mines and IEDs from transmitted explosive energy.

_________________
Redhorse

Current Projects:
Republic of Texas Navy
FD Scale F-14s

I based the turret off of the BTR-3 turret. The turret ring I have drawn is 5ft in diameter, but I am not sure if that is large enough.

One of the reasons I want to put the engine in the rear is to keep the turret close to the front. I don't know why, but having at the front end is really cool. When I saw that the VAB had the engine offset to the side, and had an open space on the opposite side, I figured I could do that and make something pretty cool.

The seats will be indivdual seats that can fold up. I will most likely face them inward, to maximize interior space. I think I may increase the length by a foot or so, even though that means it will be longer than most 8x8 APCs.

The 13 man squad consists of 3, 4 man fireteams and the commander. I was going to have the driver as a part of the squad, and the squad commander in shotgun.
What are your opinions on this?

I am probably going to stick with the 3rd setup, with the rear and side doors.


Thanks for that little informative piece Redhorse. That's smart.

-Ethan

_________________
Salide - Denton - The Interrealms

I am not very active on the forums anymore, but work is still being done on my AUs. Visit the Salidan Altiverse Page on the SB Wiki for more information. All current work is being done on Google Docs.
If anyone wishes for their nations to interact with the countries of the Salidan Altiverse, please send me a PM, after which we can further discuss through email.

I would keep the driver and commander as part of the vehicle crew and have them stay in the vehicle unless its an emergency. Without the commander and driver the effectiveness of the APC decreases significantly and the gunner can't do much without a driver and commander. Also the training is very different I am sure and it would complicate training quite a bit to train men as infantry and vehicle crews. So I would keep it to a 3 man crew and 10 personal carried as is common practice

_________________
Projects:
Zealandia AU
John Company AU
References and feedback is always welcome!

AFAIK, Finnish Army has the squad, plus the vehicle crew. So with Pasi-equipped units it's a 7+1 man squad (although squad size of 6 is also given, and should be 8 nowadays), and with BMPs and CVs I'd assume they are 6+3. If the design is more IFV-oriented, having a dedicated crew would be a good idea. A vehicle commander is not necessary, but reduces the workload.

The Shkval module seems to take up slightly more space than the BTR-80 setup, although not much:
http://www.ukrspecexport.com/images/cat ... shkval.jpg
http://www.morozov.com.ua/images/mtlb5l.jpg
http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/2558/moduls3zs.gif

Didn't realize it earlier, but does the South African Ratel IFV have any influence on the 3rd design? Both look extremely similar in general configuration.

The circles were, what, 24 inches? 60 cm? So the interior is about the width of a man's length? And the whole vehicle is 3 meters wide? Seems reasonable, interesting to see where this goes.

_________________
"Flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - D.N. Adams

The circles were 24 inches, yes. They 24 inches to represent the shoulders. The legs are not calculated into the circles but they should not be much more than 30 inches.

Yes, it does have influence from the Ratel IFV. It mostly has influence from the BTR-80, 90 and BTR-3, with some aspects from the VAB, and the Ratel IFV.

This is the APC that I will use, and then when I design an IFV, I'll allow for a separate crew.

Here is a updated version, that is a little longer. The side door is 2 inches larger, and I increased the size of the turret to minimize the penetration into the troop area.

The first one is normal configuration, the second one is configured for swimming.
The green is the turret ring.
Comments?
-Ethan

_________________
Salide - Denton - The Interrealms

I am not very active on the forums anymore, but work is still being done on my AUs. Visit the Salidan Altiverse Page on the SB Wiki for more information. All current work is being done on Google Docs.
If anyone wishes for their nations to interact with the countries of the Salidan Altiverse, please send me a PM, after which we can further discuss through email.