FA+
Shop
16573
Views
Views
1481
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Artwork (Traditional) / All
Species Vulpine (Other)
Size 1000 x 751
File Size 206.4 kB
Report this content
★
More from Kacey
A commission for 
the_evil_fox of his character Scarlet Darkpaw sitting atop the IFV she works with (a CV 9030FIN)
I normally place my greyscale works in scraps, but there was so much work put into this one that I felt it deserved to be out in my main gallery. This is also my first time drawing a tank/IFV.
Done with micron inks, copic markers and a little white acrylic on 9"x12" bristol board.
the_evil_fox of his character Scarlet Darkpaw sitting atop the IFV she works with (a CV 9030FIN)I normally place my greyscale works in scraps, but there was so much work put into this one that I felt it deserved to be out in my main gallery. This is also my first time drawing a tank/IFV.
Done with micron inks, copic markers and a little white acrylic on 9"x12" bristol board.
Category Artwork (Traditional) / All
Species Vulpine (Other)
Size 1000 x 751px
File Size 206.4 kB
done that way to ensure protection against capture. No one person knows the -exact- mixture of the armor, hell, at times I wonder if the guys that initially designed the various NATO tanks even know the mix. After all, the last thing we need is the Chinese copying it and selling it to countries our guys will have to face. Russia's wised up, and just offers their old crap (which is still quite capable) while they upgrade their military.
The picture absolutely deserves to be in your main gallery. Great Caeser's Ghost, that is magnificent! At a minimum, the technical detail is incredible. Your work has always been amazing with form, layout and technique. I've always marveled at your background work. A room setting to a fully-detailed vehicle is a big jump in my mind and wow, you cleared it with feet to spare.
In other words, I think it's amazing.
In other words, I think it's amazing.
As its been stated, a tank is a very complex piece of machinery to draw, especially when one is used to more 'tame' environments. This has been brilliantly done, for a mo there I thought it was a Warrior... ah well, its almost as good as one ;D
Seriously though, brilliant job on a tough piece to draw. oh, and nice vixen ;D but its the IFV that steals the show!
Brilliant :)
Seriously though, brilliant job on a tough piece to draw. oh, and nice vixen ;D but its the IFV that steals the show!
Brilliant :)
Holy Mother of God.. @_@ This is so damn epic! So many friggin tiny, awesome details! Those great shades and neat curves! It's a superb work, sweets. The kind of work, when it'll be better to stay uncolored, 'cuz it's amazing as it is! If i have could fave it more than once, i would do it!
VERY nice detail.
[Gun Nerd Activate]
I prefer the original 40mm Bofors. The 30mm Bushmaster is just a solution looking for a problem. While the 30mm cartridge is a big improvement over the 25mm, it suffers from the same flaws. Requires electrical power to operate and a very slow rate of fire, slower than the newer 40mm variants. When you're firing "small" rounds you generally compensate by increasing the rate of fire. Non-Bushmaster cannons on vehicles generally have a cyclic of 800-1000 rpm for 20mm, 600-800 for 25mm, 300-600 for 30mm and 200-400 for 40mm. Sometimes you need to to unload a lot of lead quickly and the Bushmaster just doesn't do that. It has other issues too, at least regarding the 25mm that may carry over to the 30mm.
The original point of the ground vehicle chain gun was that it was supposed to be easier to keep fumes from entering the fighting compartment, but that is still an issue with Bushmaster armed vehicles.
[Gun Nerd Activate]
I prefer the original 40mm Bofors. The 30mm Bushmaster is just a solution looking for a problem. While the 30mm cartridge is a big improvement over the 25mm, it suffers from the same flaws. Requires electrical power to operate and a very slow rate of fire, slower than the newer 40mm variants. When you're firing "small" rounds you generally compensate by increasing the rate of fire. Non-Bushmaster cannons on vehicles generally have a cyclic of 800-1000 rpm for 20mm, 600-800 for 25mm, 300-600 for 30mm and 200-400 for 40mm. Sometimes you need to to unload a lot of lead quickly and the Bushmaster just doesn't do that. It has other issues too, at least regarding the 25mm that may carry over to the 30mm.
The original point of the ground vehicle chain gun was that it was supposed to be easier to keep fumes from entering the fighting compartment, but that is still an issue with Bushmaster armed vehicles.
Yeah, I agree with you that the rate of fire is a bit slowish, but to me it seemed fast enough on the live fire exercises that we did. If you're on the receiving end, it's all the same if the hits come at 200rpm or 600rpm considering that our main adversiary would be soft vehicles, light fortifications, infantry and other IFVs. The penetration is sufficient to turn them all into swiss cheese slightly slower, not to mention that we're firing HEI-T rounds at the softer targets. Something I like to call "Tele-barbeque".
There is a manual backup crank should there be no electricity (the CV has 4 seperate battery banks so not likely) to turn the gun, but then the RoF will be reduced to abour 30-40 rpm depending on the user's muscle.
I was under the assumption that the 40 uses manually loaded clips of X shells to operate the gun? Necetating a reload after every so-many shots influencing the rate of fire.
The 30mil uses 2 belts of 80 shells increasing the time of sustained fire but making the reload process more complex and significantly longer. This is why the 30mil always made more sense to me, fire slower, but with a bigger ammo capacity.
There is a manual backup crank should there be no electricity (the CV has 4 seperate battery banks so not likely) to turn the gun, but then the RoF will be reduced to abour 30-40 rpm depending on the user's muscle.
I was under the assumption that the 40 uses manually loaded clips of X shells to operate the gun? Necetating a reload after every so-many shots influencing the rate of fire.
The 30mil uses 2 belts of 80 shells increasing the time of sustained fire but making the reload process more complex and significantly longer. This is why the 30mil always made more sense to me, fire slower, but with a bigger ammo capacity.
Actually, the main point of the chaingun over manually firing guns is that the chaingun is more compact (fits more easily into the cramped confines of a turret) and the rate of fire is more easilly varied. While the Bofors hits harder, the clip-system feed is bulky, especially when the mount is under armor.
Also while3 the Bofors 40mm does use 4-round clips, two can be fed into the guide at the same time. However this requires either a complex automatic system (more bulk) or a loader to keep dumping clips into the top guide (WAY more bulk). Both of which are less than optimal for use inside a space-critical AFV.
PS- For more reading, I highly recommend the book 'Rapid Fire' by Anthony G. Williams, ISBN 1 84037 122 6
Also while3 the Bofors 40mm does use 4-round clips, two can be fed into the guide at the same time. However this requires either a complex automatic system (more bulk) or a loader to keep dumping clips into the top guide (WAY more bulk). Both of which are less than optimal for use inside a space-critical AFV.
PS- For more reading, I highly recommend the book 'Rapid Fire' by Anthony G. Williams, ISBN 1 84037 122 6
Now that I think of it, I think we were told at some point during technical training that the rate of fire of the bushmaster is only dependant on the speed at which the electric motor turns the mechanism. Shouldn't be much of a hassle to increase its rpm, but how the rest of the mechanism will hold is another story. Would probably overheat the barrel pretty easily with such field-modifications.
Actually the CV-90 40mm uses a relatively straightforward 24 round magazine that is divided into three 8 round magazines that the gunner can choose at will. (They did have to mount the gun upside down to get it to fit.) Rounds are loaded one at a time into the magazine. The 40mm simply gives you far more options: MUCH better airbursting munitions than the 30mm, better against structures, While still maintaining a decent number of rounds.
It should also be noted that an increasing number of IFVs are proofed against 30mm on the frontal arc, like the BMP3.
As for the chain gun being more compact and selectable rates of fire......In theory yes, but in practice not really, the 25mm M242 weighs 8 pounds more then the 2A42 30mm cannon used on the BMP-2 and Mi-28 has two selectable rates of fire, up to 550-800 rpm. The difference is not that great and you incur extra liabilities by going to an electric drive. The actual problem is that, chain gun or not, your gun receiver and feed system can't be any shorter than the length of the cartridge. The M242 is only more compact than the 2A42 because it fires a shorter cartridge. There is research going on with telescoping ammunition that could result in more compact designs, but last I heard it is still in the R&D phase.
The 30mm Bushmaster II weighs 90 pounds more than the 2A42 and is actually larger than it as well, assuming my sources are correct.
My thought is, if you're gonna bother with a 2 man turret then it should be carrying a weapon that requires a 2 man turret. Otherwise you should just mount a one-man "Sharpshooter"turret on your up-armored M113 and call it a day, as the Bushmaster II can technically be mounted in a Sherpshooter, though most countries go with the 25mm. Heck, you can mount an ASP-30mm autocannon on anything that can mount a M2 50BMG.
/Good discussion we are having here. Great to hear everyone's input.
//Cat wants attention. Not sure if I'll be able to comment further.
It should also be noted that an increasing number of IFVs are proofed against 30mm on the frontal arc, like the BMP3.
As for the chain gun being more compact and selectable rates of fire......In theory yes, but in practice not really, the 25mm M242 weighs 8 pounds more then the 2A42 30mm cannon used on the BMP-2 and Mi-28 has two selectable rates of fire, up to 550-800 rpm. The difference is not that great and you incur extra liabilities by going to an electric drive. The actual problem is that, chain gun or not, your gun receiver and feed system can't be any shorter than the length of the cartridge. The M242 is only more compact than the 2A42 because it fires a shorter cartridge. There is research going on with telescoping ammunition that could result in more compact designs, but last I heard it is still in the R&D phase.
The 30mm Bushmaster II weighs 90 pounds more than the 2A42 and is actually larger than it as well, assuming my sources are correct.
My thought is, if you're gonna bother with a 2 man turret then it should be carrying a weapon that requires a 2 man turret. Otherwise you should just mount a one-man "Sharpshooter"turret on your up-armored M113 and call it a day, as the Bushmaster II can technically be mounted in a Sherpshooter, though most countries go with the 25mm. Heck, you can mount an ASP-30mm autocannon on anything that can mount a M2 50BMG.
/Good discussion we are having here. Great to hear everyone's input.
//Cat wants attention. Not sure if I'll be able to comment further.
According to our officers, during the trials they had before ordering the CVs, they tried its firepower agaist it's principal enemy, the BMP-2. Apparently, even through the training round doesn't have enough penetration to reliably penetrate the amour of a BMP-2, it has enough kinetic energy to break the welds between the hull panels, essentialy shaking the BMP to pieces with each hit.
I remember sitting in the turret of a BMP-2 once, and I was in awe how much space the gun took inside the turret in relation to the CV.
I remember sitting in the turret of a BMP-2 once, and I was in awe how much space the gun took inside the turret in relation to the CV.
That's not surprising, as the BMP-2 is only armored against 12.7mm on the frontal arc. If all they were worried about was a BMP-2 they could have just mounted a 20mm.
Interesting how both the BMP-2 and CV-9030 both have complains about taking a long time to reload the main gun, You would have thought that the designers of the CV-9030 would have noted that issue with the BMP-2.
I remember sitting in the turret of a BMP-2 once, and I was in awe how much space the gun took inside the turret in relation to the CV.
I believe that was required in order to get the 74 degree maximum gun elevation that the BMP-2 has, the commanders sight is designed for anti-aircraft use. That extra elevation also proved handy in urban and mountainous combat.
The sources I have show the CV-9030 to only have a 45 degree maximum elevation, though it does have -10 degree depression vs the BMP-2, which only has -5. So it seems it was a matter of design choices, roomier turret in the CV vs better gun elevation in the BMP. Neither one is right, but neither one is wrong.
/again, great discussion here.
Interesting how both the BMP-2 and CV-9030 both have complains about taking a long time to reload the main gun, You would have thought that the designers of the CV-9030 would have noted that issue with the BMP-2.
I remember sitting in the turret of a BMP-2 once, and I was in awe how much space the gun took inside the turret in relation to the CV.
I believe that was required in order to get the 74 degree maximum gun elevation that the BMP-2 has, the commanders sight is designed for anti-aircraft use. That extra elevation also proved handy in urban and mountainous combat.
The sources I have show the CV-9030 to only have a 45 degree maximum elevation, though it does have -10 degree depression vs the BMP-2, which only has -5. So it seems it was a matter of design choices, roomier turret in the CV vs better gun elevation in the BMP. Neither one is right, but neither one is wrong.
/again, great discussion here.
Actually, the CV's turret has less free room for the crew than the BMP's. The turret might seem big on the outside, but it's firstly made of thicker stuff and secondly, the interior is loaded with electronics and other hardware.
The BMP can only seat 6 infrantrymen with discomfort in the transport compartment, while the CV can load up to 8 fully-geared infantrymen in a ventilated and heated transport compartment with room to spare.
It looks like the deginers of the BMP traded passenger space for crew space, while the CV desginers did it the other way around. The driver's compartments on them both are very spacious and I was glad to be the dude behind the wheel in my personal little domain in the hull. :)
The BMP can only seat 6 infrantrymen with discomfort in the transport compartment, while the CV can load up to 8 fully-geared infantrymen in a ventilated and heated transport compartment with room to spare.
It looks like the deginers of the BMP traded passenger space for crew space, while the CV desginers did it the other way around. The driver's compartments on them both are very spacious and I was glad to be the dude behind the wheel in my personal little domain in the hull. :)
Lots of people - including a significant number of "Figure" or "Character" artists - are surprised when someone who proves to be good at mechanical drawing ("Drafting" or "Technical Drawing") is also skilled with figure drawing, and vice-versa.
...But having seen your skills in other examples - I'm not surprised in the least. "Can Kacey draw Furry Creatures mounted upon or languidly draped over complex or exotic machines?" "But of course!"
******
...Although when I saw the title, I was half expecting a Kacey-version of LFiHT...or wondering if you might attempt an imaginary vehicle, like the "Ace of Spades" from Chris Grant's "EMPIRES".
...But having seen your skills in other examples - I'm not surprised in the least. "Can Kacey draw Furry Creatures mounted upon or languidly draped over complex or exotic machines?" "But of course!"
******
...Although when I saw the title, I was half expecting a Kacey-version of LFiHT...or wondering if you might attempt an imaginary vehicle, like the "Ace of Spades" from Chris Grant's "EMPIRES".
hot :3
realy good looking
the tank is beautiful
but without the nice looking lady on the front of the tank relaxing it would be just another tank
the girl realy finishes the lovely drawing :3
i'm myself a militair fan
i like there transport equipment and there guns and all the other stuf the army uses
but you made it look a lot beter by putting a sexy girl ontop of it :D
nice job
and damn every time i see your art i'm like
damn i need to get a paypal account and get some damned money for one of your beautiful commissions
hope to see more of your lovely art in the future
Fox GoldEye, signing off
realy good looking
the tank is beautiful
but without the nice looking lady on the front of the tank relaxing it would be just another tank
the girl realy finishes the lovely drawing :3
i'm myself a militair fan
i like there transport equipment and there guns and all the other stuf the army uses
but you made it look a lot beter by putting a sexy girl ontop of it :D
nice job
and damn every time i see your art i'm like
damn i need to get a paypal account and get some damned money for one of your beautiful commissions
hope to see more of your lovely art in the future
Fox GoldEye, signing off
again... this is great. if I may ask the grey scale is all done with indian ink or watercolor black dilution on dry paper right? or is it something else. or maybe markers guessing by the rigid color borders... I really ate them those markers I like the brush ones they are a bit more soft though Xp
While the rest of the piece is excellent, the tread on the left isn't quite right; the wheels on that side don't seem parallel with the side of the hull, and the tread doesn't really meet up with the drive sprocket (there's an uneven space between the links there, and the front run seems to cut into the front of the sprocket rather than resting against it). I've done 3D work on a tank model before and I found the best way to get treads right is to get yourself a model kit. Tamiya's go together very nicely, and while the treads are rubber belts, they're molded in enough detail to see the individual plates. It's really hard to get a feel for how the links articulate by just looking at a photograph.
Comments