This tank, dedicated to our great leader [insert name here], is designed with one purpose and that is maximal operational range. As written by a great general in his treatise two centuries ago: "An army marches on its stomach. The army with the smallest baggage train to support and the one that is not halted not by lack of food but by engagement will increase fighting strength at key battles."

Armor and range of firepower is as well a great asset, used by the barbarian hordes centuries ago to win victoriously over much of the known world. Modern tank engagements distances and fire control systems however have reduced the viability of speed as a form of armor.

The turret uses an electric drive.

Turret Armament: 115mm Gun L/58, 6.5mm coaxial gast gun

Years of Production: 2001 - ?
Cost: roughly prae’s weight in gold
Crew: 2 (driver, commander/gunner)

Height: 2.4m
Length: 8.8m
Width: 3.8m

Frontal armor: ~750mm RHAe composite, slat armor
Side Hull Armor: ~450mm RHAe composite, slat armor

Weight: ~50 tonnes

Transmission: CVT
Engine: 800 hp, 1190 kg, Model '97b 12-cylinder diesel
Power/weight ratio: ~16 hp/tonne
Fuel Capacity: 1300 liters
Fuel Consumption: ~1.3 liters/km
Maximum Speed: ~60 km/h
Cross-country: ~25 km/h
Operational Range: 950 km road, 640 km cross-country


Munitions: HESH, APFSD with either Osmium or Depleted Uranium sabots, canister shot, HEAT AT missile, etc, carries 50 rounds within turret, 750 6.5mm rounds
Firecontrol/sensor: Optics, radar, ballistics computer, radar/network-link capability
NBC: Overpressure filters, etc

Internals: Engine, then crew-less turret, then the crew compartment followed by rear-exit door.

If autoloader jams, whole turret has to be replaced by crane. There is an internal system to clear the autoloader for minor failures. Many parts of the autoloader system cannot be reached from the crew compartment.

The autoloader uses several ammunition trays to load a revolver magazine using robotic arms. Individual ammunition is kept track via an inventory RFID system, allowing the commander to choose the next round to fire from the revolver via console.

Grenade launcher system mounted on turret.

1.3 Litres / km from a marine diesel? Nah.

Also just noticed this: a 600hp marine diesel will weigh about 1500kg at the very least such is their design.

CVT

immediate gay

*removed marine

the fuel consumption per km seems okay compared to other tank engines on a l/hp/km/h basis.

Added more on autoloading system.

so what's this got over a rooikat

Wut?

It is named after glorious leader [insertnamehere] instead of a pussy.

Needs moar ramming-speeds.

Because you'll run outta ammo eventually.

May as well go nuclear-powered, if you really wanted range.

Great Leader approves

engine still looks too light, DD16 is a 600hp diesel and its 1300kg, and no it isnt a marine diesel.

What engine are you basing yours off of, or if you made it from scratch how are accounting for such a light weight?

For whatever reason it may be, cannot stop laughing.
>doesnt know what cvt transmission is

In RandCland, commanders can multitask due to advances in technology resulting in $1000 computers.

You're forgetting to include the weight of the tank as a factor. Litres per hp is irrelevant unless the weights of the tanks scale the same.

Fuel consumption is going to go through the roof when your tank crew has to throttle it for minutes on end to accelerate to a reasonable speed. Forget about getting idealic cruise consumption becuase the engine will be working far too hard to deliver good figures. The only place where you're going to save fuel is at idle.

I looked at a few other tank engines, and recalculated weight and fuel consumption based on those engine's horsepower. Maybe I made a math error...

What exactly is an ideal speed? My tank doctrine is a bit different then yours. I also prefer to have my tanks go as fast as a WWII German heavy tank.

So 25mph tops?

Also two crewmen is going to extend the baggage train with more mechanics in the rear rather than shorten it.

What engines are you looking at? What I'm seeing you doing is near halving the fuel consumption of an existing RL tank of comparable weight with your explanation being taking 400 horsepower away so it has a far worse power to weight ratio (torque is probably also terribly low). No engine is economical when you have to run it at full throttle almost all the time.

Ideal speed? Well, you don't need lolspeed (anything in the current bracket of modern battle tank speeds is perfectly fine), what you really want is low-end torque and the ability to accelerate from idle rapidly.

To be fair, a T-90 variant uses a 840 hp engine, and I don't think acceleration is that key.

adjusted engine weight, apparently I was using gasoline engines

going to calculate actual volumes next and possibly finalize design

To be fair, T-90 won't get close to 1.3L/km in proper tanking conditions. You've still somehow pulled 1.3 Litres out of your ass by reducing power and increasing weight; if anything this would increase consumption.

T-72 manages 2.6 L/km with a 740hp engine and 40 tonnes. So somehow you managed to halve T-72's consumption while adding ten tonnes.