Jump to content

Atlas Vs. Ratte (1000 Ton German Tank)


76 replies to this topic

#1 Phoenix Branson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,173 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 19 May 2013 - 08:10 AM

The Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte was a design for a super-heavy tank for use by Germany during World War II. At 1,000 metric tons, the P-1000 would have been over five times as heavy as the Panzer VIII Maus, the heaviest tank ever built. Thoughts/Opinions?

Specifications

Weight: 1,000 ton
Length: 35 m (115 ft)
Width: 14 m (46 ft)
Height: 11 m (36 ft)

Main armament: 2x 280 mm 54.5 SK C/34
Secondary armament: 1x 128 mm KwK 44 L/55, 8x 20 mm Flak38, 2x 15 mm MG 151/15

Engine: 8x Daimler-Benz MB501 20-cylinder marine diesel engines

Speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)

Posted Image

Posted Image

Edited by Maverick01, 19 May 2013 - 08:45 AM.


#2 Pupecki

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 81 posts

Posted 19 May 2013 - 11:11 AM

going to have to give my vote to that tank making the atlas its b**ch

#3 Kyone Akashi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 1,656 posts
  • LocationAlshain Military District

Posted 19 May 2013 - 11:22 AM

Well, the issues with this design are already discussed in its wikipedia article, which I think is where most MWO fans who have read about this beast know it from, but they are also rather obvious when you think about it from a modern point of view, and keeping in mind the experiences made in combined arms warfare of WW2 and beyond.

Its massive weight is an enormous hindrance to its operational capabilities, and as it lacks the mobility of a BattleMech's legs and instead has to rely on a set of huge and wide fixed tracks there will simply be a lot of areas where this tank is unable to move into/through. Bridge? Mountains? Forget it. Rivers? Well, if they're not too deep ... better hope the tank doesn't sink into the muddy riverbed though, if it's a large one.

The range of its cannons would surely be a boost to any frontline, but this thing is both slow and easy to spot, making it hard to get there in time and in one piece. I would imagine the Allies would have simply thrown their airpower at this ubertank, very likely conferring the same fate that has befallen so many warships on the seas. Ultimately, the massive drain on resources required to use and maintain this beast (think of the fuel requirements alone!) would have been a waste.

Don't get me wrong, though - I really like the general idea, from a "coolness" PoV, which surely stems from my love for WW2 battleships (Yamato!), yet the parallels are rather obvious.

I would still pay to see the movie about a fictional hunt for this tank, though. I'm sure it would not be too hard to draft a story around the aforementioned airstrikes against it .. kind of like that British movie that focused on the difficult bombing of some dam? :)

Actually, that does remind me of something from childhood ...

Posted Image

:D

Edited by Kyone Akashi, 19 May 2013 - 11:36 AM.


#4 Carrion Hound

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 184 posts
  • LocationThe depths of your discontent

Posted 19 May 2013 - 04:33 PM

Wow. That's all.. Wow.

The atlas is the BT "Grim Reaper" for the inner sphere pre-clan invasion. I am quite sure this thing would have been the same thing, if you disregarded airpower.

#5 Skylarr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 1,646 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationThe Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Posted 19 May 2013 - 04:35 PM

I will be looking at this from the eye of the BattleTech Universe. There are rules about vehicle from this time period.

Quote

Posted Image


Experimental Technical Readout: 1945


Iron Sights Gunnery (Air and Ground Combat)
Despite the lack of targeting technologies and advanced sensors, gunners and pilots in the days of World War II remained quite capable of hitting each other in battle. In fact, this kind of iron-sights targeting—for which all pilots and tank crews were trained—combined with the lack of targeting technologies and ambient electromagnetic interference to generate the ability to deliver attacks at far greater ranges than weapons of the ages to come.

To reflect this, the 1945 Gameplay Weapons Table provides the effective combat ranges for all featured weapons, including Short, Medium, Long, and Extreme range. (The Aerospace Max Range applies only when such weapons are mounted on airborne units, though it should be noted that tank cannons may not be mounted on airborne units, and bombs have no aerospace range as they are used only for air-to-ground attacks.)

The special LOS Range (see p. 85, TO) can even be used by gunners of particularly fearsome skill. Furthermore, since all military units built for this era are treated as though they have no intrinsic sensor technology, the usual +2 to-hit modifier for possessing No Fire Control does not apply.

1945 vs. BattleTech:
Remember, that the above benefits only apply as long as these units face one another with none of the “modern”
conveniences of BattleTech technology present. If these units are employed in games set during the Age of War and later, none of these benefits will apply, and—in addition to suffering the gunnery modifiers for lacking fire control systems—all of the weapons featured in this book will behave in accordance with their BattleTech Equivalent Weapon as noted in the construction tables.

Weapon Damage
The damage values for each weapon given in the 1945 Gameplay Weapons Table reflects the effectiveness of these weapons against other 1945 units with an armor BAR of 5. When used against vehicles with a BAR of less than 5, add 1 point of damage to each hit for every point of BAR the target has below 5. Thus, an attack that would deliver 3 points of damage to a BAR 5 target would deliver 4 points against a BAR 4 target, and 5 points against a BAR 3 target. Armor stronger than BAR 5 simply did not exist in the World War II era.

Against any target with a BAR of 6 or greater, treat the damage effects of these weapons as equivalent to their BattleTech Equivalent Weapon as noted in the construction tables.





Quote

Barrier Armor Rating
Description
A unit's Barrier Armor Rating (or BAR) is a statistic used to indicate how hardy a unit is on the battlefield. Armor types used on Combat units like BattleMechs, tanks, and AeroSpace Fighters are automaticly assumed to have a BAR of 10 because they've been constructed specifically for combat. Support units and civilian vehicles pressed into military service however, are typically not as well armored as their combat-oriented counterparts. The "armor" used by civilian and support vehicles is designed to protect them from everyday wear and tear rather than incoming missiles. The BAR provides a means to reflect the increased fragility of non-combat units in a combat area.

Basically any unit that is not built on an Armored Chassis hit by a weapon that inflicts more damage than its BAR will need to check for a critical hit, even if the weapon didn't damage internal structure. So a Silverfin coastal cutter (BAR 7) hit by a PPC blast will have to check to see if it substains a critical hit as the artificial lightning leaks through a small gap in the armor plating.
IndustrialMech Armor

IndustrialMech armor was introduced in 2439 by the Terran Hegemony. Like their military cousins, IndustrialMechs mount armor in sheets weighing a full ton or half ton. Unlike BattleMechs, IndustrialMechs are not usually designed for combat, and may have been built with armor that has a Barrier Armor Rating of less than 10. IndustrialMechs can only mount a few armor types, none of them advanced.
  • Heavy Industrial armor is functionally the same as BattleMech armor, with a stated BAR of 10.
  • Industrial armor also has a BAR of 10, but only offers 67% points per ton that Heavy Industrial armor does. Industrial armor is very similar to Primitive Armor used by the first BattleMechs.
  • Commercial armor offers 50% more protection per ton of weight, but only has a BAR of 5.






Quote

PAUL
Pretty canon, but if the material is subsequently used to beat us about the head and shoulders due to inconsistencies, that level of canonicity might sharply drop. Likewise, if it's used as a crutch to make a point about BT weaponry functionality in the 31st century...
Well, it's better if that just doesn't occur. The point is to make something fun for people to enjoy, not to make something that's then used to win debates.


Quote


Posted Image

The Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte (lit.: Land Cruiser P. 1000 "Rat") was a design for a super-heavy tank for use by **** Germany during World War II. It was designed in 1942 by Krupp with the approval of Adolf ******, but the project was canceled by Albert Speer in early 1943 and no tank was ever completed. At 1,000 metric tons, the P-1000 would have been over five times as heavy as the Panzer VIII Maus, the heaviest tank ever built.

Armor:
  • Ratte 150–360 mm (5.9–14 in),
  • Maus 460 mm (18 in) (in the area of the mantlet), Other areas ranged from 190mm to 250mm
  • Tiger 25–120 mm (0.98–4.7 in)




Quote

Tiger I
Mass: 57 tons

Armor Factor (BAR 5): 118points 7.5 tons
...............IS.......Armor
Front.........6.......25
R/L Side...6/6...24/24
Rear..........6.......18
Turret:.......6.......27
excerpt from TRO:1045 page 13


What would be the Ratte's Armor?
Front.........?.......75
R/L Side....?.......50
Rear..........?.......30
Turret........?.......80
I am guessing here. I never created Mechs.

The weapons should not Penetrate Mech Armor, but, those 2 Naval Guns mostly like would some damage.

2x 280 mm 54.5 SK C/34: The 283 mm SK C/34 gun was relatively fast loading, compared with other armament of this size. It could deliver a shot every 17 seconds. The ballistic properties of the guns made them effective against the new French Dunkerque class, which had an armored belt 225–283 mm, barbettes of 310–340 mm, at standard fighting distances.

1x 128 mm KwK 44 L/55: With the heavy charge, and using the PzGr.43 projectile, the PaK44 was capable of penetrating just over 200 millimetres (7.9 in) of 30 degree sloped armor at 1000 meters, and 148 millimetres (5.8 in) at 2,000 metres (2,200 yd) range.

Since both had Armor Piercing Rounds could it be consider it an AC weapon? "Autocannons range in caliber from 30mm up to 203mm".

The Reload times would be its downfall.

8x 20 mm Flak38: A wide variety of 20x138B ammunition was manufactured and used in 2 cm Flak weapons; some of the more commonly used types of ammunition are listed on the following table. Other ammunition types that existed included numerous practise rounds (marked Übung or Üb. in German notation), and a number of different AP types. A high-velocity PzGr 40 round with a tungsten carbide core in an aluminium body existed in 20x138B caliber.

20mm 2Points of damage against Armor Value 5.
TRO: 1945 page 30


2x 15 mm MG 151/15:

Could not find a reference to this MG in TRO:1945, but, it looks that it will onl do 2 points of damage to Armor Value of 5.

The 20mm and 15mm would be useless against BattleTech era vehicles.


Quote

Atlas


100 Tons
Armor: 304 points 19tons
.................................IS.......Armor
Head.........................3.........9
Center Torso.............31.....47
CT(REAR).........................14
R/L Torso..................21.....32
R/L Torso (REAR)..............10
R/L Arm....................17......34
R/L Leg:...................21......41

Armament



According to BattleTech rules anytime one of the Atlas's weapons hit the Ratte it would penetrate the Armor creating a crit roll.

Edited by Skylarr, 19 May 2013 - 04:50 PM.


#6 James Montana

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 295 posts
  • LocationAustin, Texas

Posted 19 May 2013 - 05:32 PM

Blast it in the track, take note of its position, go home, call for fire until destroyed, and sip on whiskey.

#7 Pht

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,299 posts

Posted 19 May 2013 - 05:34 PM

The atlas probably wins because it's armor is far superior and it's weapons are designed to penetrate the same sort of armor that it carries.

We are not certain, but the best guess we have is that a 155MM artillery or the best tank guns we have would register about 3 points of damage vs mech grade armor.

Mech armor is one of the "uber" things in the BTU.

#8 Psygnal

    Rookie

  • Survivor
  • 6 posts

Posted 19 May 2013 - 06:12 PM

Think how long it would take to turn those massive guns. The Atlas, if it wasn't unlucky enough to stick its head up in front of one of the guns in the first place, could just walk behind it and drill a hole in the back to stick an AC20 through.

What would be REALLY cool though, would be if you could capture it, and have your Atlas ride it into battle like a pony.

#9 Jam the Bam

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 535 posts

Posted 20 May 2013 - 07:36 AM

Well Ive always thought of the mech weights as being low as they are meant to be carried through space where weight is at a premium so its not about how many tons as much as firepower per ton. So if it was a fair fight from 2 dropships if one had brought that monster, the other would have 10 atlai :D . Chew on that Ratte.

#10 Sephlock

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 10,817 posts

Posted 20 May 2013 - 10:46 AM

Atlas due to lasers, lrms, and the fluff here:

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Light_Rifle

Also:

Giant Humanoid ftw.

#11 Kyone Akashi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 1,656 posts
  • LocationAlshain Military District

Posted 20 May 2013 - 11:11 AM

Hmm, there also is the Heavy Rifle ... (even with the penalty against BattleMechs, that'd be 6 points of damage anyway)

... but of course that one still uses futurespace propellant, materials and ballistic knowhow, so one shouldn't jump to conclusions there, even if we were to assume the Heavy Rifle and the Rat's main guns had the same caliber. "Just" counting the 60 years since WW2, the changes and developments that have found their way into artillery and tank armor and armaments are impressive!

Though just for laughs, worst case scenario means our Atlas has to essentially face a pair of AC/5's.

Edited by Kyone Akashi, 20 May 2013 - 11:13 AM.


#12 Skylarr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 1,646 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationThe Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Posted 20 May 2013 - 03:12 PM

View PostKyone Akashi, on 20 May 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

Hmm, there also is the Heavy Rifle ... (even with the penalty against BattleMechs, that'd be 6 points of damage anyway)


Quote

The Heavy Rifle is the largest Rifle in the family. The precursor to the modern Autocannon, the Rifle was based on the main guns used by tanks on pre-spaceflight Terra. The Heavy Rifle used heavier rounds and larger propellant loads to fire its shells.


So is the Ratte's 280 mm 54.5 SK C/34 and 20 mm Flak38 as strong or stronger than a Pre-Flight Era tank? I am guessing many will think this is sensles speculation. I do find it interesting.

Catalyst did hint at the possibility they may put out another TRO: 1945. I am hoping they do and that they include Warships. I would like to see their idea of what the stats would be for the USS Iowa (BB-61) and the Yamato-class battleship.

#13 Nerroth

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 82 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 20 May 2013 - 05:20 PM

Perhaps a closer comparison in BT terms might be with something like this.

#14 Kyone Akashi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 1,656 posts
  • LocationAlshain Military District

Posted 21 May 2013 - 04:36 AM

Yeah, if the tank would be build with BT future technology. Question is, do people wish to compare its original design, or how it would look like in Battletech? :D

And good point, Skylarr-san - the cannons of this beast would probably resemble a ship's more than a normal tank's, sporting a much heavier caliber. Its rounds would remain plagued by inferior materials and propulsion, but still.
I haven't taken a look into that Apri's Fools PDF yet .. they don't happen to have that huge railroad artillery in there, too, do they? "Gustav" or however it was called. That might be a comparable weapon of the era.

Edited by Kyone Akashi, 21 May 2013 - 04:37 AM.


#15 Phoenix Branson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,173 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 21 May 2013 - 07:30 PM

View PostKyone Akashi, on 21 May 2013 - 04:36 AM, said:

they don't happen to have that huge railroad artillery in there, too, do they?


The Landkreuzer P1500 Monster was a German prototype super heavy artillery in WW2. I'm sorry, that weapon would blow a hole through the Atlas or at least severely cripple it!

Autocannons range in caliber from 30 mm up to 203 mm.
The main armament on that thing is 800 mm! What is that an AC/100?
Posted Image

Edited by Maverick01, 21 May 2013 - 07:47 PM.


#16 Kyone Akashi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 1,656 posts
  • LocationAlshain Military District

Posted 21 May 2013 - 08:09 PM

View PostMaverick01, on 21 May 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:

Autocannons range in caliber from 30 mm up to 203 mm.
The main armament on that thing is 800 mm (what is that an AC/100?)!
That's dismissing the likely difference in kinetic power (as influenced by the propellant type) and shell interior plus material, though. Caliber isn't everything.

The history of war has been dominated by a constant race between the penetration of weapons and the protection of armor. Gun gets invented, armor to stop or soften its projectiles gets invented, better gun gets invented, better armor gets invented ... if caliber would be everything that matters, today's tanks would be unable to actually harm each other because they'd need weapons they cannot carry. For a relatively recent example, the Abrams tank was considered "invincible" against infantry RPGs - until the Soviets deployed the RPG-29 with a tandem charge. The RPG-29 isn't larger, it just uses advanced technology and more complicated workings to overcome the protection of its target. The same applies to tank and artillery shells. Those WW2 cannons surely did not have depleted uranium penetrators, for example.

Or, to look at Battletech, take the background of the BattleMech Rifle weapon that Sephlock-san linked. This weapon is, in terms of size, comparable to an Autocannon. Yet it lacks the same sophistication and so incurs a -3 penalty to damage when used against 'Mech armor, which leads to the Light version (which is still described as being larger than the tank guns of old) causing no damage at all. All this whilst the Rifle is still more modern and powerful than contemporary tank weapons. What do you think would the penalty be for an ancient WW2 era shell that is millennia behind "contemporary" armor technology, from a 3050s point of view?

From TechManual page 33:

Standard BattleMech armor consists of multiple layers. Only two of these layers are armor in the truest sense - the other two layers play supporting roles:

The outer layer of armor is an extremely strong, extremely hard iron alloy - a steel. It is intended to fragment projectiles and/or ablate protectively in the face of energy attacks. The grains of steel, that is, its crystals, are carefully aligned for maximum strength and radiation-treated to further hardness and strength. Though phenomenally strong and hard, the steel pays for these properties by being quite brittle. In fact, the steel is brittle enough that the second layer of armor that backs the steel is a ceramic, cubic boron nitride.

The point of the boron nitride layer is to act as a catcher's mitt for the fragments and plasma of the steel. Another very strong, very hard material with a brittleness problem, boron nitride is carefully processed to avoid any porosity and incorporates an additional web of artificial diamond fibers to make the ceramic a fine backstop for the steel outer layer.

The next layer below the boron nitride is a titanium alloy honeycomb. The honeycomb provides no armor protection per se, but is instead used to support the armor layers. The first and second armor layers are very thin - in terms of millimeters and centimeters - because 'Mechs have a lot of surface area to cover with only a proportionally light quantity of armor. Because this tends to make armor surprisingly thin for its length and width, much like a large pane of glass, the titanium honeycomb keeps the armor in place and prevents it from flexing too much under stress.

Finally, there's a polymer sealant layer. Because the armor is configured into multiple, separately replacable panels, this sealant is needed to keep the 'Mech air- and water-tight. The polymers chosen for the rule usually have some self-sealing capability, enough to handle small punctures and gaps. Though this pales in comparison to the Clan HarJel system, it is this layer that allows BattleMechs to operate underwater and in vacuum.

Additionally, armor over the actuators can be a wide range of protective materials, from ballistic/ablative fabrics to carefully articulated plates of standard armor. Cockpit canopies use a wide range of transparent armor combinations, with anything from ferroglass to alternating diamond and polymer sheets.

On a sidenote - ablative armor is a concept that wasn't even around during WW2, first introduced around the 1970s by the Soviets, and the increase in armor protection above conventional plating was obvious enough to lead to widespread usage amongst modern military forces across the globe.


View PostMaverick01, on 21 May 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:

Autocannons range in caliber from 30 mm up to 203 mm.
There are larger ones, actually. ER3052 mentions a 300mm AC20, for example.

I'm not sure regarding the upper limit, although I would agree that it likely wouldn't approach 800mm due to the "hard cap" on 200kg ordonance weight ... unless we assume that the soft classification goes beyond the 10 second span by also counting heavier/larger projectiles that just take longer to fire, such as an AC that fires 400kg rounds, but only one per 20 seconds.
If I did not miscalculate, the Schwerer Gustav would actually be classified as an AC5 as its firepower is equivalent to about ~40 kg per 10 seconds. Obviously, the AC classification system was not intended to include uberheavy guns that take more than half an hour to reload ... :P

But all that doesn't mean much, anyways. Size and weight are just two out of four factors that are important for how well a projectile will penetrate and how much damage it will cause - the others being velocity (Gauss Rifle!) and hardness. Not counting potential further increases via technological "tricks" such as aforementioned RPG-29's tandem charge, of course.

Edited by Kyone Akashi, 21 May 2013 - 08:47 PM.


#17 Just wanna play

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,520 posts
  • LocationInside the Womb of a Great Turtle

Posted 21 May 2013 - 08:15 PM

lol i bet that tanks main gun at least shoots further then an ac/20 (stupid ballistics ranges in this game)

#18 Rushin Roulette

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • WC 2018 Top 12 Qualifier
  • WC 2018 Top 12 Qualifier
  • 3,514 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 22 May 2013 - 04:35 AM

View PostMaverick01, on 21 May 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:


The Landkreuzer P1500 Monster was a German prototype super heavy artillery in WW2. I'm sorry, that weapon would blow a hole through the Atlas or at least severely cripple it!

Autocannons range in caliber from 30 mm up to 203 mm.
The main armament on that thing is 800 mm! What is that an AC/Urbanmech?


Corrected that for you. It would be firing Urbanmechs at any Atlas trying to stand in the way..... Supersonic Urbies... now thats a sight to behold.

#19 Skylarr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 1,646 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationThe Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Posted 22 May 2013 - 09:12 AM

View PostMaverick01, on 21 May 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:


The Landkreuzer P1500 Monster was a German prototype super heavy artillery in WW2. I'm sorry, that weapon would blow a hole through the Atlas or at least severely cripple it!

Autocannons range in caliber from 30 mm up to 203 mm.
The main armament on that thing is 800 mm! What is that an AC/100?



We were talking about the P1000 Ratte not the P1500 Monster. But, let us take a look at the Monster.

Quote


The Landkreuzer P 1500 Monster was a German pre-prototype super-heavy artillery designed during World War II, representing the apex of the German extreme tank designs.

Posted Image

Type Proposed super-heavy tank
Weight 1,500 t (1,700 short tons; 1,500 long tons)
Crew 100+

Armor 250 millimetres (9.8 in) (hull front)
Main Armament 1x 800 mm K (E) gun
Seconadary Amament ROF 1 Shell every 35 to 45 Minutes or 14 a day.


Conception

On 23 June 1942 the German Ministry of Armaments proposed a 1,000 tonne tank – the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte. Adolf ****** himself expressed interest in the project and go-ahead was granted. In December the same year, Krupp designed an even larger 1,500 tonne tank – the P 1500 Monster.

In 1943, Albert Speer, the Minister for Armaments, cancelled both projects.


Purpose

This "land cruiser" was a self-propelled platform for the 800mm Schwerer Gustav artillery piece also made by Krupp – the largest artillery guns ever fired for effect. Their 7 tonne projectiles fired up to 37 km (23 mi) and were designed for use against heavily fortified targets.
Specification


The Landkreuzer P. 1500 Monster was to be 42 m (138 ft) long, weighing 1500 tonnes, with a 250 mm hull front armor, 4 MAN U-boat (submarine) diesel engines, and an operating crew of over 100 men.

The main armament was to be an 800 mm Dora/Schwerer Gustav K (E) railway gun, and with a secondary armament of two 150 mm sFH 18/1 L/30 howitzers and multiple 15 mm MG 151/15 autocannons. The main armament could have been mounted without a rotating turret, making the vehicle a self-propelled gun rather than a tank. Such a configuration would have allowed the P.1500 to operate in a similar manner to the original 800mm railroad gun and Karl 600mm self-propelled mortars, launching shells without engaging the enemy with direct fire.
Issues

Development of the Panzer VIII Maus had highlighted significant problems associated with very large tanks, such as their destruction of roads, their inability to use bridges and the difficulty of strategic transportation by road or rail. The bigger the tank, the bigger these problems became, to the point where they were insurmountable.

Propulsion had also proved problematic in the development of the Maus: The prototype had failed to meet its specified speed requirements which meant that even larger tanks such as the P 1500 were likely to be slow-moving and, due to its massive size, it would be a major target to Allied aircraft.


Quote

Schwerer Gustav (English: Heavy Gustaf, or Great Gustaf) and Dora were the names of two German 80 cm K (E) ultra-heavy railway guns. They were developed in the late 1930s by Krupp as siege artillery for the explicit purpose of destroying the main forts of the French Maginot Line, the strongest fortifications then in existence. The twin guns weighed nearly 1,350 tonnes, and could fire shells weighing seven tonnes to a range of 47 kilometers (29 mi). The guns were designed in preparation for the Battle of France, but were not ready for action when the battle began, and in any case the Wehrmacht's Blitzkrieg offensive through Belgium rapidly outflanked and isolated the Maginot Line's World War I-era static defenses, forcing them to surrender uneventfully and making their destruction unnecessary. Gustav was later used in the Soviet Union at the siege of Sevastopol during Operation Barbarossa, with good effect, including destroying a munitions depot buried in the bedrock under a bay. They were moved to Leningrad, and may have been intended to be used in the Warsaw Uprising like other German heavy siege pieces, but the rebellion was crushed before they could be prepared to fire. Gustav was later captured by US troops and cut up, whilst Dora was destroyed near the end of the war to avoid capture by the Red Army.

It was the largest-calibre rifled weapon ever used in combat, and fired the heaviest shells of any artillery piece. It is only surpassed in calibre by the British Mallet's Mortar and the American Little David mortar (both 36 inch; 914 mm).


Krupp built a test model in late 1939 and sent it to the Hillersleben firing range for testing. Penetration was tested on this occasion. Firing at high elevation, the 7.1 tonne shell was able to penetrate the specified seven meters of concrete and the one meter armour plate. When the tests were completed in mid-1940 the complex carriage was further developed. Alfried Krupp, after whose father the gun was named, personally hosted ****** at the Rügenwald Proving Ground during the formal acceptance trials of the Gustav Gun in early 1941.

Two guns were ordered. The first round was test-fired from the commissioned gun barrel on 10 September 1941 from a makeshift gun carriage on the Hillersleben firing range. In November 1941 the barrel was taken to Rügenwald, where 8 further firing tests were carried out using the 7,100 kilogram armor-piercing (AP) shell out to a range of 37,210 meters.

In combat, the gun was mounted on a specially designed chassis, supported by eight bogies on two parallel sets of railway tracks. Each of the bogies had 5 axles, giving a total of 40 axles (80 wheels). Krupp christened the gun Schwerer Gustav (Heavy Gustav) after the senior director of the firm, Gustav Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach.

The gun could fire a heavy concrete-piercing shell and a lighter high-explosive shell. A super-long-range rocket projectile was also planned with a range of 150 km, that would require the barrel being extended to 84 meters.

In keeping with the tradition of the Krupp company, no payment was asked for the first gun. They charged seven million Reichsmark for the second gun Dora, named after the senior engineer's wife.

High Explosive
  • Length
  • Weight 4,800kg
  • Muzzle Volocity 820 m/s (2,700 ft/s)
  • Crater size:
    9.1 m (30 ft) wide 9.1 m (30 ft) deep (This is smaller than a BattleTech Hex)



So, if the Atlas stood abloslutely still it would be blown to pieces. Otherwise the crew would have a hard time targeting the Atlas. As for the range? That spotter better be dam good and on the move constantly adjust his plot point.

I belive that according to BattleTech Rules Artie cannot direct Fire and can only do AOE damage.

#20 McMurl

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Ominous
  • The Ominous
  • 186 posts
  • LocationEdmonton

Posted 29 May 2013 - 01:39 AM

View PostPsygnal, on 19 May 2013 - 06:12 PM, said:

Think how long it would take to turn those massive guns. The Atlas, if it wasn't unlucky enough to stick its head up in front of one of the guns in the first place, could just walk behind it and drill a hole in the back to stick an AC20 through.

What would be REALLY cool though, would be if you could capture it, and have your Atlas ride it into battle like a pony.



you sir, are a mad genius





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users