Alternative History Armoured Fighting Vehicles Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tidbit on "shitboxes":

So I found a nice series of articles on the Swedish Pbv 302 IFV, namely the specifications of the REMO mid-life upgrade tested in December 1979 but never purchased because "the vehicles would still work until they are retired". The upgrade included:

- the same automatic Allison gearbox found on the Ikv 91
- the same uprated Volvo THD 100 diesel engine found in the related Bgbv 82, which had 310hp instead of 270hp on the basic version for the Pbv 302, which would neatly make up for the increased weight of this variant
- doubled front armor (sic!)
- an observation cupola for the infantry squad leader
-umbrella position for the commander's hatch

pbv_302-32.jpg


In parallel, they also worked on improved turrets with a 25mm gun, either the Oerlikon KBA or the Mauser MK25E. Since the Swiss Spz 63 and Norwegian NM135 used that turret, they could have been upgraded with the same armament too. Considering how hopelessly weak the Swedish 20mm gun was (Hispano aircraft gun), this would have neatly solved a major firepower problem. Conversely, the Swedish and Swiss vehicles could have got the same more powerful 20mm Rh 202 gun as the Norwegian one.

Other point: the Spz 63/89 from 1993 and the Danish M113G3 from 1999 both used the same American P900 addon armor kit available since 1989-90. So in theory they could have done the upgrade sooner. In general, any M113 operator would have enjoyed having the full A3 upgrade with that armor pack...

Random Swedish thoughts:

I heard the Ikv 91 hulls were also quite worn out (bent) by 25 years of use...Makes sense because when I look at the armor thicknesses, the steel is too thin to provide adequate rigidity/stiffness in places. The early CV90 also had similarly thin armor.

So for atl-Ikv 91 and CV90: make them out of aluminium, which would greatly increase rigidity and potentially increase protection against certain threats as well (or allow a smallweight reduction with the same protection). It would be extra amazing if they also did it for the superstructures of the Lvrbv 701 and Pvrbv 551 light weapon carriers.
 

marathag

Banned
USA ISOT Hybrid AFV's of the early 1940's
View attachment 820705
Top, M10 hull and chassis with M4 turret. The first AFV made by the US using ideas and tech from the ISOT.
Below, M3 IFV/APC, an old design of mine but I thought it fit in here.

The US IMO would probably build direct copies of late era WWII AFV's after experimenting with some early designs.

Next, the Axis.
What the Israelis did with front motor Sherman
2f97ba354e72aebeed323b306ce4f49e.jpg
 
ISOT Hybrid AFV's of the early 1940's, Japan Pt.1
ISOT=Mod-WWII=Japan 2.png

Top;
Type-97 Chi-Ha medium tank.
Suspension came from a Type-61 MBT minus one roadwheel, hull and turret from a Type-3 Chi-Nu.
The 3 three in type-3 refers to the year in the Japanese Calendar which would be 1936 so the alt-Ch-Nu here could see combat against the Soviet T-40 in the first battle between ISOT AFV's.

The Chi-nu here would be IMO as good as a Sherman or T-34, sloped armour, decent gun and a reliable engine, the T-40 has a better gun though and would probably outnumber the Chi-Nu.

Bottom;
Type-97 TD, designed and built simultaneously as the Chi-Nu, the Japanese wanted a tank with the more powerful 90mm gun but Japanese engineers convinced their superiors to use the 90mm for a simpler tank destroyer design using the same chassis as the Chi-Nu first so they could obtain valuable experience with the new technology now available to them.

The two Type-97's would make for formidable fighting duo.
 

Attachments

  • ISOT=Mod-WWII=Japan.png
    ISOT=Mod-WWII=Japan.png
    250.9 KB · Views: 120
ISOT Hybrid AFV's of the early 1940's, Japan Pt.
ISOT=Mod-WWII=Japan.png

Top;
Type-96 Ho-Ha APC. Again the Japanese choose to use the modified Type-61 suspension an armoured personal carrier. The Ho-Ha was a simple and reliable APC and was converted to several variants which included a SPAAG armed with a quad 20mm's* and an SPG armed with a 110mm howitzer**.

* The quad 20 here is Soviet gun, couldn't find any line pics of Japanese AA guns.
** The howitzer here is either a British or Russian gun, not sure but use your imagination that it's Japanese.
 
ISOT Hybrid AFV's of the early 1940's, Japan Pt.
View attachment 821097
Top;
Type-96 Ho-Ha APC. Again the Japanese choose to use the modified Type-61 suspension an armoured personal carrier. The Ho-Ha was a simple and reliable APC and was converted to several variants which included a SPAAG armed with a quad 20mm's* and an SPG armed with a 110mm howitzer**.

* The quad 20 here is Soviet gun, couldn't find any line pics of Japanese AA guns.
** The howitzer here is either a British or Russian gun, not sure but use your imagination that it's Japanese.
Rather than 20mm, the Japanese used 25mm AA which were either the same as or based on the French 25[1]. They were probably more suited to being a twin rather than a quad gun.

[1] falling neatly between the good points of both the 20 and 37mm AA guns, but it probably looked like a good idea at the time.
 

Ramontxo

Donor
ISOT Hybrid AFV's of the early 1940's, Japan Pt.
View attachment 821097
Top;
Type-96 Ho-Ha APC. Again the Japanese choose to use the modified Type-61 suspension an armoured personal carrier. The Ho-Ha was a simple and reliable APC and was converted to several variants which included a SPAAG armed with a quad 20mm's* and an SPG armed with a 110mm howitzer**.

* The quad 20 here is Soviet gun, couldn't find any line pics of Japanese AA guns.
** The howitzer here is either a British or Russian gun, not sure but use your imagination that it's Japanese.
Wouldn't they use the 25mm Hotchkiss derived gun?

WNJAP_25mm-60_mg_pic.jpg
 
Rather than 20mm, the Japanese used 25mm AA which were either the same as or based on the French 25[1]. They were probably more suited to being a twin rather than a quad gun.

[1] falling neatly between the good points of both the 20 and 37mm AA guns, but it probably looked like a good idea at the time.
The Japanese here received tech from the future so they came to the conclusion that 20mm was better than 25 but the main reason I used a 20mm was because I couldn't find a line drawing of the Japanese 25mm gun.
I was just going to say the in the pic was a25mm but people here are very knowledgeable about weaponry so I would've ended up answering posts abouts about how "that's not a Japanese Type-95mm"!
so I just wanted to avoid but oh well.
 

Ramontxo

Donor
Thanks for the answer. But OTL the Japanese got a license for the 25 mm (and also for the 13mm) from Hotchkiss in 1935. So ITL they should have it available.
On the other hand it was an naval weapon and getting the Army to use it may not be easy.

 
Last edited:
Rather than 20mm, the Japanese used 25mm AA which were either the same as or based on the French 25[1]. They were probably more suited to being a twin rather than a quad gun.

[1] falling neatly between the good points of both the 20 and 37mm AA guns, but it probably looked like a good idea at the time.
Wouldn't they use the 25mm Hotchkiss derived gun?

View attachment 821106
LOL!!!
I just found a line drawing of a type 98 20mm gun!
So here's a new pic of the type-96 Ho-Ha with the type 98 20mm gun. :cool:
ISOT=Mod-WWII=Japan   type-1-ho-ha_Japanese Type 98 AA gun (20mm).png
 
Super Patton
M60 Super Patton.png


Inspired by a chat I had with pattontank12 about the M48 Super Patton, I decided to make an M60 Super Pat.
M1A1 suspension (minus 1 roadwheel), reconfigured engine deck for a more powerful engine and armed with the Abrams 120mm cannon.
IIRC we had a chat here a while back were it was discussed that a 120mm gun could fit in most tanks designed to carry a 110mm gun, I hope the M60 is one of those tanks.
:)
 
Super Patton
View attachment 821465

Inspired by a chat I had with pattontank12 about the M48 Super Patton, I decided to make an M60 Super Pat.
M1A1 suspension (minus 1 roadwheel), reconfigured engine deck for a more powerful engine and armed with the Abrams 120mm cannon.
IIRC we had a chat here a while back were it was discussed that a 120mm gun could fit in most tanks designed to carry a 110mm gun, I hope the M60 is one of those tanks.
:)
Any 105mm gun of the L7 family in fact, and technically also the 90mm/20pdr mounts since the L7 replaced those without taking much more room.

The M1A1 suspension and more powerful engine is exactly how the US contemplated some deeper upgrades, and is exactly what I would expect from the US.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top