FA+
Shop
1605
Views
Views
86
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Artwork (Digital) / Miscellaneous
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1000 x 524
File Size 139.4 kB
Report this content
More from iPoke
Dimensions:
L: 6 m
W: 3 m
H: 2,4 m
Propulsion: 1 Rolls-Royce Charger-Mini Engine (600 PS). Battery charge for 200 hours of continuing operation. Max speed of (theoretical) 180 Kmh
Armor: 60 - 150mm of Titarminium
Armament:
7,5 mm Maritus MG3
Crew Capacity: 5 (1 driver, 3 passengers, 1 gunner)
Service Record:
The original Armadillos entered service far before the war with the Orians. They were accepted into service in 2267 and have gone through multiple changes during their career, though the Chasis has mostly stayed the same.
Most of the changes were armament, propulsion or armour related. The latest additions include an experimental heat repelling paint, that is suppose to lessen the effect of the Orians plasma-weaponry, even though it has only shown effect with small arms fire.
It can be fitted with a multitude of sensory arrays and communication gear, including millimetric wavelength radar and active 3D mapping devices, which is why it's usually used as a light scouting vehicle.
L: 6 m
W: 3 m
H: 2,4 m
Propulsion: 1 Rolls-Royce Charger-Mini Engine (600 PS). Battery charge for 200 hours of continuing operation. Max speed of (theoretical) 180 Kmh
Armor: 60 - 150mm of Titarminium
Armament:
7,5 mm Maritus MG3
Crew Capacity: 5 (1 driver, 3 passengers, 1 gunner)
Service Record:
The original Armadillos entered service far before the war with the Orians. They were accepted into service in 2267 and have gone through multiple changes during their career, though the Chasis has mostly stayed the same.
Most of the changes were armament, propulsion or armour related. The latest additions include an experimental heat repelling paint, that is suppose to lessen the effect of the Orians plasma-weaponry, even though it has only shown effect with small arms fire.
It can be fitted with a multitude of sensory arrays and communication gear, including millimetric wavelength radar and active 3D mapping devices, which is why it's usually used as a light scouting vehicle.
Category Artwork (Digital) / Miscellaneous
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1000 x 524px
File Size 139.4 kB
I'd be the gunner in that!
However in all seriousness you could add a .50 cal belt-fed minigun on the top instead of the 7.5 mm gun you have on there now.
Also (If you don't mind my input) I would have barred the windows with mesh so that enemy bullets would have a harder time entering the inside, with little to no effect on inside visibility on the driver's part. I would also add reinforced tires to help debris and such from messing up the tire; OH! or just do away with the tires all together and have tank treads for more grip, stability, and duribilty! On the under side i would add a sensor that would pick up on things below ground (ie. mines, hidden bunkers, hidden pitfalls, ect.) for a good 20 ft or so from the vehicle so that you wouldn't run over anything that you might not want to.
But really cool design at any rate! And sorry for all of that, just something you might want to think about
Also if you did indeed like my ideas, drop me a message and I'll help in anyway I can!
However in all seriousness you could add a .50 cal belt-fed minigun on the top instead of the 7.5 mm gun you have on there now.
Also (If you don't mind my input) I would have barred the windows with mesh so that enemy bullets would have a harder time entering the inside, with little to no effect on inside visibility on the driver's part. I would also add reinforced tires to help debris and such from messing up the tire; OH! or just do away with the tires all together and have tank treads for more grip, stability, and duribilty! On the under side i would add a sensor that would pick up on things below ground (ie. mines, hidden bunkers, hidden pitfalls, ect.) for a good 20 ft or so from the vehicle so that you wouldn't run over anything that you might not want to.
But really cool design at any rate! And sorry for all of that, just something you might want to think about
Also if you did indeed like my ideas, drop me a message and I'll help in anyway I can!
or you could just roll in what i roll in http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1578060/
Mebbe, though I doubt they'd take one of my designs...but hey, they actually have something similar already
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FENNEK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_Dingo
=^-^= The two vehicles I based this one on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FENNEK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_Dingo
=^-^= The two vehicles I based this one on
Nice work, the dimensions seem slightly off based on the picture but that could be from the perspective. Either way it should be wider than it is tall otherwise you get stability issues. Actually looks similar to a couple HUMVEE replacement vehicles that are just going into production. Now the armament is a bit anemic, something of that size is going to be mounting an HMG rather than a GPMG.
1.)This seems pretty good, But its going to be vulnerable to explosions below it. Theres too much flat plainer surface below it, this will either flip it, or melt it if something detonates below.
2.)You could doo away with the gunner position, and replace it with the C.R.O.W. system. It's opperated remotly with a controll panel hooked up to sensors that scan on thermal, infared, and basic visuial cameras. Its also compatable with any weapon from the SAW, Barret 50 .CAL, all the way to the Javelin missel launcher.
These are just ideas from someone obsessed with weapons and anything military.
2.)You could doo away with the gunner position, and replace it with the C.R.O.W. system. It's opperated remotly with a controll panel hooked up to sensors that scan on thermal, infared, and basic visuial cameras. Its also compatable with any weapon from the SAW, Barret 50 .CAL, all the way to the Javelin missel launcher.
These are just ideas from someone obsessed with weapons and anything military.
or you could just roll in what i roll in http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1578060/
1. How do you know it's flat, it's just the skirts that make it look that way ;3
2. There's not much of a point to make it have a V shape below it to protect against mines, because a) it's hard to place mines inside a paved road and b) Orians have never used those kinds of weapons, so it would just complicate pointlessly
3. Regardless of how useful the CROW System might be, one EM strike or malfunction in the system and the vehicles armament is useless
2. There's not much of a point to make it have a V shape below it to protect against mines, because a) it's hard to place mines inside a paved road and b) Orians have never used those kinds of weapons, so it would just complicate pointlessly
3. Regardless of how useful the CROW System might be, one EM strike or malfunction in the system and the vehicles armament is useless
or you could just roll in what i roll in http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1578060/
ha those army POS? here ill let you compare them http://www.globalsecurity.org/milit.....ground/iav.htm thats for the stryker.... http://www.globalsecurity.org/milit.....ground/lav.htm thats for the LAV no notice that on the LAV page it has all info on the variations on right hand side....the family of LAV's would rape the stryker series ANY Day...this is just for fun http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d-v2XDpLAo anyway have a good day!
The things you seem to overlook here though is that ;
a) the LAV has been in service since the mid 80's, so it's just logical that it has more variants
b) you're trying to make me compare information on two weaponsystems who's articles (the ones linked by you) are written so horribly variant that it's impossible to try and make a fair comparison in the first place.
c) thanks to the "age" of the two systems, the Stryker's gonna be around for a quite a while to come still as compared to the LAV, because no mater how many GEN X upgrade packs you make for a vehicle, they become obsolete at one point or another
But hell, it's not like I'm gonna start arguing. I generally don't "like" combat vehicles with wheels unless it has max. 4 of them and is just a bit larger than a van or a large SUV
a) the LAV has been in service since the mid 80's, so it's just logical that it has more variants
b) you're trying to make me compare information on two weaponsystems who's articles (the ones linked by you) are written so horribly variant that it's impossible to try and make a fair comparison in the first place.
c) thanks to the "age" of the two systems, the Stryker's gonna be around for a quite a while to come still as compared to the LAV, because no mater how many GEN X upgrade packs you make for a vehicle, they become obsolete at one point or another
But hell, it's not like I'm gonna start arguing. I generally don't "like" combat vehicles with wheels unless it has max. 4 of them and is just a bit larger than a van or a large SUV
The 7.5 is heavy enough for the vehicle...as for mines; I've stated before, protecting against something which your enemy doesn't use is pointless, but I'll just put in as a point that this vehicle is heavily based on the KMW FENNEK, which has actually run over and survived a number of mines, so far (or at leas the crew has)
Nah, they're technically still normal electronic motors, just far more advanced. Technically it's just just a huge ass battery, the real motors as such are in the wheels to allow them to work completely independantly and to avoid having the engine overly vulnerable.
Most vehicles are protected against events like that with a farraday-cage (or however the fuck you spell that) so most of the systems, if not directly exposed will stay opperational.
And it says (theoretical) 180km ;3 the engine is powerful enough, but the cut of the vehicle creates too much resistance for those speeds. 140-150 is what's been measured in action
And it says (theoretical) 180km ;3 the engine is powerful enough, but the cut of the vehicle creates too much resistance for those speeds. 140-150 is what's been measured in action
Good rendering of the vehicle.
The body armor on the person isn't quite right. It's too much like football gear versus actual body armor. Body armor doesn't bulk the shoulder's like that as it's designed to lie flat against the body and is denser than football gear so it drapes down. Also, the legs are too thick and would encumber movement too much if it were real armor. You might want to look up some photos of military body armor. Also Dylan's High Guard armor from the TV series Andromeda would make a good model.
The body armor on the person isn't quite right. It's too much like football gear versus actual body armor. Body armor doesn't bulk the shoulder's like that as it's designed to lie flat against the body and is denser than football gear so it drapes down. Also, the legs are too thick and would encumber movement too much if it were real armor. You might want to look up some photos of military body armor. Also Dylan's High Guard armor from the TV series Andromeda would make a good model.
First of all, thanks for the comment, I'm glad I could entice you to some critique.
I do have to oppose the opinion though. I know what modern day bodyarmor looks like and my opinion on all of them is that soldiers are severely under-armored.
I realize the suit isn't as mobile as say, the Interceptor, but then the materials aren't the same either. You have to considder these concepts are thought in timeframes of about 400 years from now after a semi-nuclear third world war.
Dragonskin might be an exception to this, but then it only protects the torso.
I know the advantages and disadvantages of both concepts, but I'll gladly sacrifice some speed and agility if it means that shots that hit me wont be fatal.
That said, most of my concepts are completely unrealistic and useless, but with designs for comics and entertainment I have to take into account what looks realistic and what looks good and finding a balance between them is difficult at best. This is the same reason why you have partially unnecessary equipment put on picatinny rails in movies ;3
I do have to oppose the opinion though. I know what modern day bodyarmor looks like and my opinion on all of them is that soldiers are severely under-armored.
I realize the suit isn't as mobile as say, the Interceptor, but then the materials aren't the same either. You have to considder these concepts are thought in timeframes of about 400 years from now after a semi-nuclear third world war.
Dragonskin might be an exception to this, but then it only protects the torso.
I know the advantages and disadvantages of both concepts, but I'll gladly sacrifice some speed and agility if it means that shots that hit me wont be fatal.
That said, most of my concepts are completely unrealistic and useless, but with designs for comics and entertainment I have to take into account what looks realistic and what looks good and finding a balance between them is difficult at best. This is the same reason why you have partially unnecessary equipment put on picatinny rails in movies ;3
Comments