And now for a particularly silly notion... TANKS!!!

Larry wrote:

River Monster wrote:It occurs to me that there's now nothing preventing Charis from fielding at least crude armored fighting vehicles. We have plate armor, an engine capable of propelling it, and breech-loading guns. Certainly something like a TOG or British Mark 1 is achievable. Or perhaps something like the German A7V would be a better, for some troop mobility.

(Mind you, I'm still holding out for steampunk hydrofoils.)

Another thought. If they could develop the Oil Refining, Diesel Engines, and the Machine gun. then the French Renault FT-17 is small, fast, and mobile enough to provide assistance to the ICA. Haul to battlefield by barge or wagon and you'll shock the heck out of the AOG troops. Although I must admit its more of a rolling machine gun nest than a true tank it would do the job against the human wave attacks that Harchong would bring to bear; Of course so would interlocking Machine gun fields of fire.

However, since we have no evidence of oil refining (other than whale/kracken oil for lamps), diesel engine development, or Machine guns (yet), the whole argument is completely academic.

Larry

While the FT-17 was an adequate starter tank, something more in line with an enlarged Renault R-40 or a Vickers 6 ton would be better. The FT was extremely short ranged, had thin armor, had a miserable suspension, had no chassis as such (the body panels acted as such) and was armed with a machine gun or cannon but not both. Most importantly (and shared with the R-40) is it had a one man turret. The Track Commander had to be gunnery officer, navigator and CO all at the same time.

RFC's already commented on this matter, it's NOT happening ANY time soon, the production of steam engines is simply too low. Now something like the set up with the Bison's and Steel Mules from the Multiverse books is possible, but would lack imagination

doug941 wrote:

River Monster wrote:It occurs to me that there's now nothing preventing Charis from fielding at least crude armored fighting vehicles. We have plate armor, an engine capable of propelling it, and breech-loading guns. Certainly something like a TOG or British Mark 1 is achievable. Or perhaps something like the German A7V would be a better, for some troop mobility.

Another thought. If they could develop the Oil Refining, Diesel Engines, and the Machine gun. then the French Renault FT-17 is small, fast, and mobile enough to provide assistance to the ICA. Haul to battlefield by barge or wagon and you'll shock the heck out of the AOG troops. Although I must admit its more of a rolling machine gun nest than a true tank it would do the job against the human wave attacks that Harchong would bring to bear; Of course so would interlocking Machine gun fields of fire.

However, since we have no evidence of oil refining (other than whale/kracken oil for lamps), diesel engine development, or Machine guns (yet), the whole argument is completely academic.

Larry

While the FT-17 was an adequate starter tank, something more in line with an enlarged Renault R-40 or a Vickers 6 ton would be better. The FT was extremely short ranged, had thin armor, had a miserable suspension, had no chassis as such (the body panels acted as such) and was armed with a machine gun or cannon but not both. Most importantly (and shared with the R-40) is it had a one man turret. The Track Commander had to be gunnery officer, navigator and CO all at the same time.[/quote]

Steam powered armored vehicles are possible (and were done around WWI) with steam powered armored cars and tractors used in the Boer war and the US Army building steam powered versions of the British tanks in 1918 with a 500hp engine.
Whether you bother is debatable however.

SCC wrote:RFC's already commented on this matter, it's NOT happening ANY time soon, the production of steam engines is simply too low. Now something like the set up with the Bison's and Steel Mules from the Multiverse books is possible, but would lack imagination

Possibly, Possibly, but the new production system of Howysmyn's is very suitable for the production of diesel engines and small diesel engines are much more powerful (for the same cylinder displacement and weight) than steam engines and given that I have finally found textev that there is oil on Safehold (MT&T Page 145 of 724 in the online version in front of me where going over the idea of Zhansyn Wyllys <the distillation expert> becoming a member of the inner circle is being considered)

David Weber in Midst Toil and Tribulation wrote: "And that, given the extensive oilfields in Southern Charis and Emerald Island - and the fact that Safeholdian techniques for drilling and pumping water wells were well developed and, with Howsmyn's new steam engines, about to get even better developed - was likely to lead to an entirely new industry. One that opened all sort of interesting possibilities given that the caloric energy of oil was fifty percent greater than that of coal."

Between the development of the assembly line and the potential for refined oil and the advantages of the diesel over steam, small (thus not needing lots of steel) rolling pillboxes like the Renault FT-17 are possible. Assuming that at the same time the ICA develops the machine gun.
Now whether that's a good idea or not I don't know. Frankly I think tractors, either diesel or steam are a better idea than tanks. If nothing else they are more versatile than tanks. They improve both the logistics capabilities as well as well as providing a versatile farm implement to increase food production.
On the other hand the development of a tracked carriage for construction equipment might also be valuable.

Some things to consider anyway.

Larry

I would foresee the construction of fairly modular designs, with the base carriage being shared between tractors, construction vehicles and tanks. Not that that would last all that long, not once more diverse manufacturers come online, but I could see five or more years of production with a common base. Put armor and a turret on it and it's a tank, no turret and it's a combat engineering support vehicle, no armor or turret and it's a farm vehicle, while with a backhoe it's a construction vehicle.

My own opinion is that the best use for the first diesel "tanks" would be armored personnel carriers with a light cannon to take out heavier walls and a machine gun or three against infantry.

Larry wrote:

SCC wrote:RFC's already commented on this matter, it's NOT happening ANY time soon, the production of steam engines is simply too low. Now something like the set up with the Bison's and Steel Mules from the Multiverse books is possible, but would lack imagination

Possibly, Possibly, but the new production system of Howysmyn's is very suitable for the production of diesel engines and small diesel engines are much more powerful (for the same cylinder displacement and weight) than steam engines and given that I have finally found textev that there is oil on Safehold (MT&T Page 145 of 724 in the online version in front of me where going over the idea of Zhansyn Wyllys <the distillation expert> becoming a member of the inner circle is being considered)

David Weber in Midst Toil and Tribulation wrote: "And that, given the extensive oilfields in Southern Charis and Emerald Island - and the fact that Safeholdian techniques for drilling and pumping water wells were well developed and, with Howsmyn's new steam engines, about to get even better developed - was likely to lead to an entirely new industry. One that opened all sort of interesting possibilities given that the caloric energy of oil was fifty percent greater than that of coal."

Between the development of the assembly line and the potential for refined oil and the advantages of the diesel over steam, small (thus not needing lots of steel) rolling pillboxes like the Renault FT-17 are possible. Assuming that at the same time the ICA develops the machine gun.
Now whether that's a good idea or not I don't know. Frankly I think tractors, either diesel or steam are a better idea than tanks. If nothing else they are more versatile than tanks. They improve both the logistics capabilities as well as well as providing a versatile farm implement to increase food production.
On the other hand the development of a tracked carriage for construction equipment might also be valuable.

Some things to consider anyway.

Larry

Larry wrote:Possibly, Possibly, but the new production system of Howysmyn's is very suitable for the production of diesel engines and small diesel engines are much more powerful (for the same cylinder displacement and weight) than steam engines and given that I have finally found textev that there is oil on Safehold (MT&T Page 145 of 724 in the online version in front of me where going over the idea of Zhansyn Wyllys <the distillation expert> becoming a member of the inner circle is being considered)

Still not happening. It's a production quantity issue and nothing else, and switching to diesel only makes it worse, not better because the steam engine production lines (As such) already exist

SCC wrote:

Larry wrote:Possibly, Possibly, but the new production system of Howysmyn's is very suitable for the production of diesel engines and small diesel engines are much more powerful (for the same cylinder displacement and weight) than steam engines and given that I have finally found textev that there is oil on Safehold (MT&T Page 145 of 724 in the online version in front of me where going over the idea of Zhansyn Wyllys <the distillation expert> becoming a member of the inner circle is being considered)

Still not happening. It's a production quantity issue and nothing else, and switching to diesel only makes it worse, not better because the steam engine production lines (As such) already exist

Steam engines are actually more powerful than the equivalent displacement diesels - if they are running the cylinder pressures possible with modern technology. Diesels run at at around 20 bar (300 psi)vs steam engines at 40 to 150bar (600 to 2000 psi). The boiler however weighs a lot and this is a limiting factor.
Fuel consumption of steam engine is around half of that of an equivalent power diesel as losses are lower (60% vs 30%) if a condensing engine is used. (Which is why your lights are probably lit by a steam turbine rather than a diesel generator).
Diesels big advantages are in rapid start from cold (a significant issue for military use) and lower thermal signature (other than an exhaust at 400C). Turbochargers help but pumping (inlet combustion gas compression) losses are still significant. (Gas turbines have the same problem).

Weird Harold wrote:

n7axw wrote:The specific discussion here started with the example of Hussite war wagons. If we are talking about using cannon, it seems to me that by the time you armor it and get the noise down to acceptable levels for the dragons, you probably have a structure that has too much mass for the dragons to deal with, at least for more than short periods of time.

And this doesn't even consider how utterly clumsy it would be off of a hard surface road.

According to Wikipedia, Most war wagons featured at least hand-cannon. A Dragon is capable of hauling 40,000 pounds, IIRC; That gives around 80,000 pounds to play with because rear drive can't be done with a single dragon. That much mass to play with should allow for at least moderate armor, reasonable sound-proofing, AND one or two cannon.

As for "clumsy" I did say my opinion of most likely failure point was "steering" -- With wheels big enough for off-road capability and no power-assist, steering is going to require Popeye and a barrel of spinach, or a lot of teamwork.

FWIW, I'm arguing "possible" rather than "Practical." IMHO, There is no "practical" tank design possible within the Proscriptions.

Ok. Possible I will give you. As far as the proscriptions go, they are already being bent like a pretzel.

Don

n7axw wrote:Ok. Possible I will give you. As far as the proscriptions go, they are already being bent like a pretzel.

Don

"Practical" has nothing to do with the Proscriptions. Nothing suggested as far as dragon-powered tanks comes close to even stressing the Proscriptions, let alone violating them.

n7axw wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:
According to Wikipedia, Most war wagons featured at least hand-cannon. A Dragon is capable of hauling 40,000 pounds, IIRC; That gives around 80,000 pounds to play with because rear drive can't be done with a single dragon. That much mass to play with should allow for at least moderate armor, reasonable sound-proofing, AND one or two cannon.

As for "clumsy" I did say my opinion of most likely failure point was "steering" -- With wheels big enough for off-road capability and no power-assist, steering is going to require Popeye and a barrel of spinach, or a lot of teamwork.

FWIW, I'm arguing "possible" rather than "Practical." IMHO, There is no "practical" tank design possible within the Proscriptions.

Ok. Possible I will give you. As far as the proscriptions go, they are already being bent like a pretzel.

Don

Of course with a steam engine, noise is optional. Condensing steam engines are quiet (exhaust steam is fully contained so no exhaust noise). Steam locomotives are noisy because they use a steam blast as an induced draft blower, if you go forced draft with a fan, all you hear is the fan and the shaft and valve noise.
A steam powered truck would be practical now using engines used for steam launches combined with a small (possibly flash) boiler like a Foden or Sentinel or even a steam car. The trade-off with diesel is the hour it takes to get up steam in the morning balanced against the higher efficiency of a steam engine. This could be shortened by using a Kalin cycle engine to get things moving faster. (BTW an open cycle steam engine is about as efficient as a turbo charged diesel, the condenser is vital to extract the last drop of power from the steam).
If you have paved road (or at least one suitable for wagons) a steam truck can use it. The advantage of a steam truck is that it can burn wood and so is not tethered to a supply train unless you are in a desert.