Modelling > Land
Unmanned Turret, Oscillating Turret, and Low-Profile Turret for AFVs
dy031101:
--- Quote from: jcf on March 15, 2016, 02:43:07 AM ---If the turret is unmanned, autoloading and oscillating, NBC defense would be fairly simple. The turret would sit in
a well completely separated from the crewed area.
--- End quote ---
The turret in this case seems still manned, just the turret roof over the gun gets elevated and depressed with it. Either that, or the gun might be further isolated from the rest of the turret.
jcf:
--- Quote from: dy031101 on March 15, 2016, 03:44:35 AM ---
--- Quote from: jcf on March 15, 2016, 02:43:07 AM ---If the turret is unmanned, autoloading and oscillating, NBC defense would be fairly simple. The turret would sit in
a well completely separated from the crewed area.
--- End quote ---
The turret in this case seems still manned, just the turret roof over the gun gets elevated and depressed with it. Either that, or the gun might be further isolated from the rest of the turret.
--- End quote ---
Sorry, I wasn't speaking of the turret in the photo, I was referring to a generic conception.
Rickshaw:
Normally, for a split turret like the model has, an over-pressure system is usually considered sufficient to protect the fighting compartment if it is exposed when the gun is depressed. It needs to be quite strong though, as I understand it. As has been suggested, isolating the autoloader from the crew is however considered a better idea if possible for NBC defence.
Early oscillating turrets had considerable problems with NBC defence with the quite considerable range of movement. This is what led their major exponents, the French to largely abandon their use after the AMX-13. However, they didn't stop working on them and by the late 1980s they were back on the market in a range of smaller, APC based turrets mounting up to about a 90mm gun. They claimed they had beaten the problem with sealing the turret but I never learnt how. Perhaps again it was use of a large over-pressure? As far as I am aware, no one, not even the French Army bought any though...
The use of a cloth/leather/etc. cover would help considerably. Making it bullet/splinter resistant would help even further. However, until the 1990s, the cost of using synthetics was against widespread use by most military forces. That it was also resistant to stretching would I feel tend to tell against it's use as well.
dy031101:
Modern tank guns tend to use combustible cartridge cases that would be consumed during firing, leaving only the base. Is there a typical pattern for turrets that have an autoloader (Leclerc, Kyu-Maru, T-72, ZTZ-99, and etc.) to have the cartridge bases ejected from the turret i.e. if I should place an ejection port for cartridge bases on the turret depicted in the thread OP, where would such a port typically be?
Rickshaw:
--- Quote from: dy031101 on March 22, 2016, 10:17:00 AM ---Modern tank guns tend to use combustible cartridge cases that would be consumed during firing, leaving only the base. Is there a typical pattern for turrets that have an autoloader (Leclerc, Kyu-Maru, T-72, ZTZ-99, and etc.) to have the cartridge bases ejected from the turret i.e. if I should place an ejection port for cartridge bases on the turret depicted in the thread OP, where would such a port typically be?
--- End quote ---
Depends on whether you're using an autoloader or not. With an autoloader, the ejection port would be near to the end of the autoloading cycle. Without an autoloader, it would be situated near where the human loader stood/sat in the vehicle. Typically, in a human loaded vehicle, there is sufficient space for 10-20 round bases to be stored in the vehicle and they are ejected when there is time between engagements by the human loader. This could be through a dedicated hatch or the loader's hatch in the turret roof.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version