HOME | DD
VoughtVindicator β Corporate Abrams
by
Published: 2012-04-14 01:47:17 +0000 UTC; Views: 43973; Favourites: 379; Downloads: 444
Redirect to original
Description
After the downfall of nations, most major corporations have some sort of private military detail under their command to defend their installations, personnel and subsidiaries. However, the corporate militaries, radically fine-tuned to fight low-intensity, urban fourth generation warfare, are an extremely expensive enterprise.Thus, much of the equipment of defunct national militaries is used and modified to fit the new nature of warfare to fit R&D costs. While not as effective as specifically designed machines, the upgrades to old equipment are cheaper. Consolidated Defense And Resources, an American industrial supercorporation originating in California that controls most of the former US tri-state area and the rust belt, has upgraded the old M1A2 Abrams tanks of the army of its former nation to adapt to this new form of warfare and form the backbone of its relatively small tank force.
Modifications include:
*Stripping most of the armor and lightening of the chassis. The tank is now largely armored by titanium plating ceramic composite blocks and NERA, after having its depleted uranium strike plates removed.
*Replacement of the Honeywell ATG gas turbine with two twin air-cooled three-phase 1210hp electric engines driven by large banks of lithium batteries arranged throughout the tank.
*Upgrading of the turret to be unmanned as well as to include an autoloader for the new 110mm smoothbore ETC gun. Now all crewmembers sit side-by-side in the frontal chassis section.
*Radical upgrading of the tank's C4ISR capabilities to include live-update battlefield networking with units from all branches as well as allied armies.
*Addition of Boomerang and BOSS surveillance systems.
* Replacement of the M2HB with an M312, integration of a CROWS mount.
*Addition of active infrared camouflage.
Related content
Comments: 70
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 1 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 0
Have you been going through this guy's vehicles with a fine toothed comb or something?
π: 0 β©: 1
Nah. Just this one. I do that with other people lol, and only in private.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh lol I saw your comments on a lot of their works.
π: 0 β©: 1
wait, shit, i've been discovered. oh nuggets
π: 0 β©: 1
There is no hiding from Brijeka!
π: 0 β©: 1
Nice design!! I like the new improved version of the Abrams!
π: 0 β©: 0
Now that I think about it, why does the tank need to be lighter? Is it because of weight crushing the roads or something?
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, plus it has better mobility over bridges and in aircraft
π: 0 β©: 0
Semi-futuristic version of Earth ruled by private corporations, there's a WIP timeline in the same gallery section
π: 0 β©: 1
Are you making more of this gloriousness?
Infantry?
π: 0 β©: 1
I've drawn infantry, they look fairly normal
here's the other stuff
voughtvindicator.deviantart.coβ¦
π: 0 β©: 2
Can we get a rip in the chat for this thing?
π: 0 β©: 0
Nah, as I said I don't find much of a point in doing JG sprites of the infantry when they look basically identical to modern regulars or civilians.
π: 0 β©: 1
So no round change or different scopes or different body armor or different camo? What about helmets?
π: 0 β©: 0
I was thinking the Abrams' cannon should be replaced with the more powerful rail gun. Yeah, I've been playing Command & Conquer...!
Anyway, awesome work!
π: 0 β©: 1
There's no real need for a railgun considering the tank will spend very little time fighting against other MBTs (the only target armored enough to warrant a railgun) and the vast majority of its time supporting infantry un urban environments, where the slightly shorter, less powerful but faster-firing and simpler ETC gun will come in handy
π: 0 β©: 2
What I was thinking was the imaginative and fictional one.
Still, a nice tank BTW!
π: 0 β©: 0
Well, it's imaginative. It's also subjective too.
π: 0 β©: 1
What's subjective? Not sure I get you lol
π: 0 β©: 1
We all have different perspectives on things. One can agree to what I say while the other says otherwise.
You say a rail gun isn't needed, but I think otherwise. Whether having a rail gun in an imaginary military tank is up to interpretation. That is subjective. Get me?
π: 0 β©: 0
This could be used as a piece of humor entitled 'Difference between the Army and paid Mercenaries' with the humor being the overuse of warning labels all over compromising the camouflage of the tank.
I like the idea of an additional 50 cal machine gun on the main gun, with its position it will have to be remotely fired from inside.
The tanks I draw in [link] , [link] and [link] have the driver and commander/gunner (2 people) in the hull with the turret and all its weapons fully automated with an auto-loader mechanism resembling that of a giant revolver for faster firing. Apart from that its a mix between the Abrams and Leopard.
π: 0 β©: 0
Turret makes me think of the early versions of the Leopard 2.
π: 0 β©: 1
Indeed, was inspired by that; the shape owes to that it's basically filling in the slope of Abrams' frontal turret armor with NERA since the core of its armor -the DU strikeplates- got removed to save weight
π: 0 β©: 1
I still think it might be a good idea to retain the slope of the armor as much as possible. How well does titanium hold up versus the Abrams' real armor, anyway? I really have no clue. 
π: 0 β©: 1
Titanium is far less resistant than depleted uranium; the only place where it's used as armor is in close air support aircraft (like the AH-64, Su-25, A-10, etc.) because it's resistant yet lightweight so that it doesn't stop the planes from flying. However, tanks don't need to fly and almost always use much heavier and more resistant materials like depleted uranium, boron carbide, etc; since titanium doesn't really have a chance of surviving against an RPG or tank shell hit.
This thing uses titanium as armor component to save weight so that it is more easily transported to wherever it needs to be deployed, to be able to move over roads repeatedly without damaging them and to be much less costly to manufacture and maintain. The titanium offers some protection against machineguns and autocannons, anything else more powerful is supposed to be absorbed by the non-reactive armor or destroyed by the Active Defense System.
Also, sloping isn't as useful as it's said to be nowadays, as long-rod kinetic energy penetrators are capable of 'veering' against the slope. This tank though keeps the slope of the Abrams, except now it's buried underneath a rather beefy layer of non-explosive reactive armor to be more protected against HEAT warheads.
π: 0 β©: 1
I've heard depleted uranium isn't so.... healthy.... though.
Ah, so it only LOOKS flat. Sorry, my modern armor/weapons knowledge is somewhat lacking; I'm more familiar with WWI and WWII tanks and such.
π: 0 β©: 1
Nah, the one that's unhealthy is enriched uranium, seeing how it's highly radioactive. Depleted uranium is chemically toxic when you touch it, but the crewmembers of the tank never come into direct contact with the armor of their tank anyways.
And I can see where you're coming from, sloped armor used to be the big thing in WWII designs
π: 0 β©: 1
The crews might come in contact if pieces of it get blown off! lol
As far I can tell, it was an effective and proven asset then.... and weapon warheads weren't near the sophistication that they are today. Heh, one of my favorite things, though, is that (from what I read) just the kinetic energy from a JSU-152's main round was enough to rip a Tiger's turret clean off!
π: 0 β©: 1
It was the explosive energy of its HE shells, as far as I know the ISU-152 didn't have any kinetic energy warhead. Its munitions carried so much explosive that they didn't even need to pierce the armor of enemy tanks, they just outright demolished their structure on detonation.
Also, if the armor got pierced and the crew cabin got filled with shrapnel, inhaling DU is the least of the crew's problems, lol
π: 0 β©: 1
I thought there was naturally kinetic energy involved.... o_O But yeah, that 152 seemed (to me) to be a real monster regardless.
I was reading something about there being some 'denied' health problem with depleted uranium, and knowing the military/government I wouldn't be surprised.
No offense, but isn't your namesake also known as the 'wind-indicator' ?
π: 0 β©: 0
Β΄pderosos esos tanques asi quiero tener mi ejercito con estas bellezas
me recordo a bart simpson en el general jejee
π: 0 β©: 0
Hey, this is JG style! What's your JG user name?
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>