Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I think that's the general consensus.

Personally, I'd like to see an embiggened Russ tank.

A land raider is bigger because it's got to hold all those troops. If you make the russ just as big, then we'll need a bigger land raider. don't ya think?

GW is definitely going to hit us with a price increase on the new Russ.

John, I do like the old predator, probably more than I should for such a simple model. Sometime soon I am planning to build a modified russ with a better track system and turrets I'm snatching from some russian tanks. I'm working on my adeptus mechanicus count as IG army and I wanted to do 3 leman russ tanks to represent the original Leman Russ tank prototypes that the Adeptus mechanicus helped build for Leman Russ. I wanted them to have that feel of having been pieced together hastily with pre-existing technology, so I wanted a turret that was reminiscent of the original Predator. Give it the immediately identifiable feel that its from the same time.

Would you give comments on the t-34 esque concept I did? http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/30533-.html?w=600
If (when) I ever do a second squadron I'm thinking something like this would be a possibility.

Nazis, Communist only difference is who they hate and who they blamed. At least the Nazis had Wagner.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I think that's the general consensus.

Personally, I'd like to see an embiggened Russ tank.

I think land raider foot print at the most. Definitely not the height, you agree?

Yea!

Durandal wrote:The current Russ design is based off of a French WWII design. It had a smaller main gun and turret and a larger central turret. GW added the sponsons and altered the turret, and called it a day.

I would like to see something beefier in line with the mini-baneblades posted earlier in the thread, or a Halo-Scorpion style tank with side mounted guns as smaller turrets on the top center section.

You have stumbled upon something there i high lighted in bold.

I have absolutely nothing against them , but i know many americans do.
And i should use that as advantage and spread the word. hopefully when it gets bad enough
GW will consider changing the design asap :"D

Ironhide wrote:Are ya'll saying a Russ should be as big as a Land Raider?

That would be horrible, and not make any sense. The Leman Russ does not have to look big enough to transport 8 terminators or 16 marines. The Leman Russ just needs to hold 4 guardsmen. Making it as large as the Land Raider would be completely ridiculous.

Ironhide wrote:A land raider is bigger because it's got to hold all those troops. If you make the russ just as big, then we'll need a bigger land raider. don't ya think?

Well...
- A M1 Abrams MBT hull footprint is 26' x 12', for a total weight of nearly 70 tons
- A M2 Bradley IFV hull footprint is 22' x 12', for a total weight of roughly 30 tons

Ordnance-class Guns take up space!

So I can see a Russ being similar in footprint to a Land Raider. The Russ would have a shorter Hull, because the Turret makes up a bunch of height, but the overall volume would still be less.

____

aka_mythos wrote:John, I do like the old predator, probably more than I should for such a simple model.

Would you give comments on the t-34 esque concept I did? http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/30533-.html?w=600

Nazis, Communist only difference is who they hate and who they blamed.

OK, no problem.

While not for me, that version is very Soviet-looking, but you need the rear fuel tanks to really sell it. The semi-exposed road wheels are a given at this point, as is the extended length. The rear deck is a bit "off", and the leading wheels should be more exposed. The sponson, of course, is problematic on your model due to the low skirt height - perhaps style after the Pred or Land Raider for better results?

Either way, they're consistent with the Imperium's Fluff themes.
____

aka_mythos wrote:I think land raider foot print at the most. Definitely not the height, you agree?

Total height including Turret? Probably about the same. Footprint might be inset on the hull, like the Baneblade and current Russ.

____

LunaHound wrote:

Durandal wrote:The current Russ design is based off of a French WWII design.

You have stumbled upon something there i high lighted in bold.

I've always seen the Russ as a gaming-simplified WW1 British Mk.V Tank, hence the trapezoidal overrunning tracks, box sponsons, and inset hull. Where GW went horribly wrong with the design was slapping a Turret on the thing.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Ironhide wrote:A land raider is bigger because it's got to hold all those troops. If you make the russ just as big, then we'll need a bigger land raider. don't ya think?

Well...
- A M1 Abrams MBT hull footprint is 26' x 12', for a total weight of nearly 70 tons
- A M2 Bradley IFV hull footprint is 22' x 12', for a total weight of roughly 30 tons

Ordnance-class Guns take up space!

So I can see a Russ being similar in footprint to a Land Raider. The Russ would have a shorter Hull, because the Turret makes up a bunch of height, but the overall volume would still be less.

My main concern is that the land raider is about 6.5 inches, which scales up to just over 32'. In my mind 32' might be a bit to large for a main battle tank. As it is a leman russ scales to between 21' to 23' obviously that's on the smaller side; I think the overall volume is right so if we lower the center of mass a bit you can spread the volume length wise a bit. I'd say it should be in 25' - 28' range, but that may just be me. If the model were 5" then it represents a 25' length while if its 5.6" its about a 28' foot length. That's one inch shorter than a land raider but still pretty substantial.

Also I think the battle cannon needs to shrink a bit, so the fact its currently over sized doesn't in and to itself justify a landraider sized chassis.

Here are more of the round shape i like
( ignore the size issue )

To accomplish the rounded ends like that you want the drive wheels to be large and the same size as each other and in direct alignment with each other. You could pick up a large sized tank model to get the wheels or maybe use large lego gears or wheels to make them.

I had a few ideas I sketched out, but I lack the autocad program required to actually do out the full 3d build and prints with dimensions like I would want, but here's an extremely basic version of something I think might be a little more appealing while still retaining the russ appearance.

Taking inspiration from the panzer IV

Hull: widen only slightly, shorten overall height, lengthen considerably, expand the vent to cover most of the space available. Drivers hatch/area needs expanded would add scopes akin to a modern stryker or abrams, hull mount shortened and very panzerIV.

Turret: widen, elongate, steepen the angles, add gunner sight, two hatches instead of one. longer, narrower barrel, smaller muzzlebreak, maintain large recoil mech.

Very very rough concept I threw together real quick, skirts are grey transparant, hull isn't the exact shape I wanted, needs to be closer to the center point of the roadwheels, more dramatic slope on the front end. Don't have time to throw together a 3-view.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Ironhide wrote:A land raider is bigger because it's got to hold all those troops. If you make the russ just as big, then we'll need a bigger land raider. don't ya think?

Well...
- A M1 Abrams MBT hull footprint is 26' x 12', for a total weight of nearly 70 tons
- A M2 Bradley IFV hull footprint is 22' x 12', for a total weight of roughly 30 tons

Ordnance-class Guns take up space!

So I can see a Russ being similar in footprint to a Land Raider. The Russ would have a shorter Hull, because the Turret makes up a bunch of height, but the overall volume would still be less.

Not a good comparison. A M1 Abrams has a jet turbine engine, which when taken out takes up a little over a third of the hull. Not counting the 2 huge fuel tanks they have. M2 Brad has a diesel engine and the transport capacity is 3 crew + 6 dismounts. M2 Bradley is a better comparison for the razorback.

Land Raider has 2 TL lascannons and a TL heavy bolter, better armor, plus the ability to carry 12 people. There is no way a Russ should be of comparable size to it.

Ironhide wrote:Land Raider has 2 TL lascannons and a TL heavy bolter, better armor, plus the ability to carry 12 people. There is no way a Russ should be of comparable size to it.

Indeed. And, in the case of the crusader which has hurricane bolters, a multi melta, and an assault cannon, it can still carry 16 people. And not just ordinary humans, but marines, which happen to be about 8 feet tall and 4 or so wide.

aka_mythos wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:So I can see a Russ being similar in footprint to a Land Raider. The Russ would have a shorter Hull, because the Turret makes up a bunch of height, but the overall volume would still be less.

My main concern is that the land raider is about 6.5 inches, which scales up to just over 32'.

That's one inch shorter than a land raider but still pretty substantial.

IMO, scaling doesn't work - these aren't scale models, if so, GW does a crappy job of scaling... IMO, tanks should be scaled to other models in the same system. Anyhow, a Land Raider is 7" long, and a Baneblade is over 9" long. I've got superheavy conversions planned with hulls nearly 11" long. So in that context a 6.5+" Leman Russ isn't out of the question. Especially with the Baneblade running parallel, and extended tracks that overrun the central hull.
____

LunaHound wrote:
Here are more of the round shape i like

Those are very cute. The mecha designer did some really good work there.
___

Ironhide wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:
- A M1 Abrams MBT hull footprint is 26'
- A M2 Bradley IFV hull footprint is 22'

So I can see a Russ being similar in footprint to a Land Raider. The Russ would have a shorter Hull, because the Turret makes up a bunch of height, but the overall volume would still be less.

Not a good comparison. A M1 Abrams has a jet turbine engine, which when taken out takes up a little over a third of the hull.

Land Raider has 2 TL lascannons and a TL heavy bolter, better armor, plus the ability to carry 12 people.

Not a good critique. A M1 needs a larger, more powerful engine because it weighs more than twice as much. Which illustrates the difference between AV14 and AV12.

All of the Land Raider weapon systems are externally-mounted, whereas the Leman Russ holds all of its hull and turret weapons internally. As the Russ is also AV14, the weight, and therefore, engine should be roughly comparable. Also, as it is turreted, a bunch of space is "wasted" in the turret mechanism and articulation requirements.

Also, just as contemporaneous M1 and M2 use different armor and engine technology, Land Raider and Leman Russ could also have a technology difference which results in the Land Raider being more highly space/size-optimized to support rapid insertion via Thunderhawk Transporter, along with far higher-capability Techmarine support vs more ordinary Enginseer support...

JohnHwangDD wrote:Not a good critique. A M1 needs a larger, more powerful engine because it weighs more than twice as much. Which illustrates the difference between AV14 and AV12.

All of the Land Raider weapon systems are externally-mounted, whereas the Leman Russ holds all of its hull and turret weapons internally. As the Russ is also AV14, the weight, and therefore, engine should be roughly comparable. Also, as it is turreted, a bunch of space is "wasted" in the turret mechanism and articulation requirements.

The Leman Russ is AV 14... front. The Land Raider is AV 14 all around. The Land Raider is significantly larger and much more heavily armed, meaning it needs a larger engine. A Leman Russ is a slow moving tank that uses DAoT technology, a low powered engine using highly advanced technology would certainly be much, much smaller than a modern tank's engine.
I think it's safe to assume that most of the side sponson machinery is contained within the sponson, due to the fact that there are both sponson and non-sponson variants of the tank, they would not want to have there be a significant waste of interior space on the non-sponson versions.
The fact remains that the Leman Russ is less armored, smaller, and slower than the land raider (meaning less engine space required). The Land Raider has a very large amount of space taken up by transporting 8 suits of tactical dreadnought armor.

Honestly, do you really think that "heavy armor on all sides, transport capacity for 8 terminators, larger engine" and "has to have some amount of turret articulation within the hull" are equivalent? Odds are, the entirety of turret control, interior sponson machinery, and the whole IG crew take up less space than 2 terminators. Sure, maybe you could argue that the Leman Russ could be a little bit bigger, but Land Raider size? Come on.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Also, just as contemporaneous M1 and M2 use different armor and engine technology, Land Raider and Leman Russ could also have a technology difference which results in the Land Raider being more highly space/size-optimized to support rapid insertion via Thunderhawk Transporter, along with far higher-capability Techmarine support vs more ordinary Enginseer support...

Quite. Space Marine vehicles follow an entirely different, more sophisticated design paradigm. It stands to reason that they were designed in the height of Man's technological golden age, whereas the LR is a product of a much more debased, degenerate humankind.

JohnHwangDD wrote:IMO, scaling doesn't work - these aren't scale models, if so, GW does a crappy job of scaling... IMO, tanks should be scaled to other models in the same system. Anyhow, a Land Raider is 7" long, and a Baneblade is over 9" long. I've got superheavy conversions planned with hulls nearly 11" long. So in that context a 6.5+" Leman Russ isn't out of the question. Especially with the Baneblade running parallel, and extended tracks that overrun the central hull.

I understand scaling doesn't work as an absolute, but there is some genera; scale even if it isn't consistent. That is why most of the dimensions I gave for the Russ were ranges. Super heavies can be whatever size so really that's moot. In a more relativistic term at 6.5+" your looking at about 50% increase in volume. It seems to me that you want your Leman Russ to be a Malcador or a Macharius. I've voiced my opinions on that vague region between large tank and small super heavy, I think a 6.5+" Russ only grays that line.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
As the Russ is also AV14, the weight, and therefore, engine should be roughly comparable.

The Leman Russ either has an undersized engine or is over armored that is kinda the point with Lumbering behemoth. Thus the engines are not that immediately comparable. Also if the Leman Russ struggle with heavy armor only on the front and sides it only adds to the fact that its engine isn't anywhere near the power or sophistication of a land raider.

I think the relationship between an M1 and M2 is more important at looking at the size difference between the Chimera and the Leman Russ. Both pairs are constrained by their technologies but the relationships between each should hold true. Between a M1 and M2 your looking at foot print difference of 7%. If you made a Leman Russ 6.5+" the difference between Russ and Chimera would be almost 50%. Since both are built by the same technology the context of that technological similarities between the two dictate that the two have some relationship between form and function. You can make the argument that the chimera is undersized, but it wouldn't be as substantial as a 50% increase to size. Its important to remember there is some grounding to the size of things and that the context of that dictates a relationship.

Troz wrote:I had a few ideas I sketched out...

I like it. I've been doodling about with some ideas and some of them were similar to this. The only problem I ultimately had was in dealing with the fact that in being a Leman Russ you had to design in the secondary weapons, which struggle to fit into these profiles.

I think in the end its a matter of coming up with a good way of mounting sponson weapons in such a way as to not break up the profile badly.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I think that's the general consensus.

Personally, I'd like to see an embiggened Russ tank.

No not in the least. There's absolutely no reason to make the vehicle that large. The landraider is the largest model in 40K that I am aware of.

But there is also no reason why Russ cant be gigantic!

i have 2 reasons why it should be ok!

1) Lumbering BEHEMOTH rule ( must be big right )

2) Its named after a Primarch who is if im not mistaken
giant among other primarchs. Wont imperium feel its an insult if they have a tiny little tank?

I have three problems with the Russ.

1. Lack of gunnery and recoil space for the main gun. - This to me is the big problem.

2. Oversized heavy bolters and lascannon. - Especially when compared to new kits. This is easily rectifiable with a knife.

3. Large flat sides. - Only an issue if you dont add sponsons, and the main reason I always found the excuse to add sponsons even in v3 rules.

aka_mythos wrote:
The only problem I ultimately had was in dealing with the fact that in being a Leman Russ you had to design in the secondary weapons, which struggle to fit into these profiles.

I think in the end its a matter of coming up with a good way of mounting sponson weapons in such a way as to not break up the profile badly.

I figured a sponson would mount at the forward edge of the center skirt plate without much disruption of the design format.

Going to see if I can't procure some cad software and model it true 3d.

*H.B.M.C. looks at his three Armoured Companies*

Yeah I kinda like the Russ the way it is.

Do we have any news at all to around what month can we expect to see some picture of the new Russ?

H.B.M.C. wrote:*H.B.M.C. looks at his three Armoured Companies*

Yeah I kinda like the Russ the way it is.

er i see, thats very insightful ty.

LunaHound wrote:
Do we have any news at all to around what month can we expect to see some picture of the new Russ?

Late summer, early fall is what I've heard.

LunaHound wrote:But there is also no reason why Russ cant be gigantic!

i have 2 reasons why it should be ok!

1) Lumbering BEHEMOTH rule ( must be big right )

2) Its named after a Primarch who is if im not mistaken
giant among other primarchs. Wont imperium feel its an insult if they have a tiny little tank?

Up until the valkyrie I would have said the main reason is its suppose to maintain some degree of practicality and fit on the table, especially with it being in squadrons.

The point I've tried to make time and time again is that when you take the distorted scale of these things into consideration the Leman Russ is not "tiny" nor is it huge. Its pretty basic in size, a wee bit on the smaller side, but generally close to what it should be. The land raider is based on a Mark 1 Tank, for the most part, the model scales to being 32' long the same length as a Mark 1, is that just coincidence? These relative scales aren't perfect but they sure tell us that a main "battle tank" isn't going to be more than 5.5" or so. There is wiggle room to build it a little large, but if the thing were sitting next to you in real life it'd still dwarf you even without a change in dimensions.

Its more than just name after Leman Russ, he developed the tank.

Also, just as contemporaneous M1 and M2 use different armor and engine technology, Land Raider and Leman Russ could also have a technology difference which results in the Land Raider being more highly space/size-optimized to support rapid insertion via Thunderhawk Transporter, along with far higher-capability Techmarine support vs more ordinary Enginseer support...

Not a good critique on you part either. ;-) A person can actually get a good idea on how big the engine on a Land Raider is, and we can determine the size from where the engine is on a Leman Russ. The Russ has a smaller engine. Also not taking into account how much space the machine spirit takes up.

Techmarines and Engiseers are both trained on Mars, but the enginseer is actually part of the Mechanicum so his knowledge would be more than a Techmarines. Do you really think the Mechanicum is going to give all of its secrets away to someone who's loyalty is not to them?

I think the relationship between an M1 and M2 is more important at looking at the size difference between the Chimera and the Leman Russ. Both pairs are constrained by their technologies but the relationships between each should hold true. Between a M1 and M2 your looking at foot print difference of 7%. If you made a Leman Russ 6.5+" the difference between Russ and Chimera would be almost 50%. Since both are built by the same technology the context of that technological similarities between the two dictate that the two have some relationship between form and function. You can make the argument that the chimera is undersized, but it wouldn't be as substantial as a 50% increase to size. Its important to remember there is some grounding to the size of things and that the context of that dictates a relationship.

This was along the line I was thinking of as far as comparisons go.

The biggest problem I have with a Russ, is the fact it is an one-man turret. How exactly is the man in the turret supposed to fire the main gun and fire a Heavy Stubber or Storm Bolter?. The turret should at least be big enough for two hatches and the hull should be wider.

aka_mythos wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:IMO, scaling doesn't work Anyhow, a Land Raider is 7" long, and a Baneblade is over 9" long. So in that context a 6.5+" Leman Russ isn't out of the question.

I understand scaling doesn't work as an absolute,

Super heavies can be whatever size so really that's moot.

In a more relativistic term at 6.5+" your looking at about 50% increase in volume.

the Leman Russ struggle with heavy armor only on the front and sides it only adds to the fact that its engine isn't anywhere near the power or sophistication of a land raider.

Between a M1 and M2 your looking at foot print difference of 7%.

If you made a Leman Russ 6.5+" the difference between Russ and Chimera would be almost 50%.

OK, good that we at least agree that GW models aren't scale models. After all, if you look at the artwork, one readily concludes that a Leman Russ is 16 to 20 feet tall and over 30 feet wide...

IMO, the current Baneblade is getting close to that limit. If you were to upscale the Baneblade by 50%, or more, it'd just be Orky-silly.

6.5" long vs 5" long isn't a 50% increase in length, it's a 30% increase in length. Increasing the volume by 50% would be OK, as then the total enclosed interior volume would be comparable to the total volume of the Chimera. That would be about right.

Also, good that we agree that the Land Raider has a better engine.

How are you getting only 7%? The widths are about the same, but the M1 is 26' long and the M2 is 22' long. That's nearly 20% longer for 20% greater footprint. I think your math is iffy.

And how are you getting 50%? At 5" long, the Chimera would be within 25% of the length of a 6.5" long Russ. Within the Russ chassis, the enclosed interior volume would be about the same as the Chimera's interior. Extended tracks running ahead and behind the main tank hull could easily account for nearly an inch of the Russ' overall body length, and would be consistent with the current design cues.
____

Frazzled wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Personally, I'd like to see an embiggened Russ tank.

There's absolutely no reason to make the vehicle that large. The landraider is the largest model in 40K that I am aware of.

If you're talking about non-FW GW models for 40k, the Baneblade is clearly larger as Tanks go, along with the Stompa and Valkyrie...
____

Ironhide wrote:

Also, just as contemporaneous M1 and M2 use different armor and engine technology, Land Raider and Leman Russ could also have a technology difference which results in the Land Raider being more highly space/size-optimized to support rapid insertion via Thunderhawk Transporter, along with far higher-capability Techmarine support vs more ordinary Enginseer support...

Not a good critique on you part either. ;-)

A person can actually get a good idea on how big the engine on a Land Raider is, and we can determine the size from where the engine is on a Leman Russ. The Russ has a smaller engine.

Also not taking into account how much space the machine spirit takes up.

Techmarines and Engiseers are both trained on Mars, but the enginseer is actually part of the Mechanicum so his knowledge would be more than a Techmarines. Do you really think the Mechanicum is going to give all of its secrets away to someone who's loyalty is not to them?

The biggest problem I have with a Russ, is the fact it is an one-man turret. How exactly is the man in the turret supposed to fire the main gun and fire a Heavy Stubber or Storm Bolter?.

But you're comparing the Mk.1 Russ & engine to the Mk.2 Raider. How big is the original Mk.1 Raider engine?

As we see with the Chaos Land Raider compared with the Dark Angel Land Raider, the Machine Sprit takes up no space. In the case of the Ultramarines, they obviously like to get closer to one another, riding on each others laps, when the ride turns bouncy...

The Enginseer is just an Motor Pool Mechanic, not a Defense Contractor Design Engineer - he knows no secrets. Besides, it's the Techmarines who keep making up new vehicles (Vindicator, Crusader, Redeemer, Storm), so they must know something more...

The biggest problem I have with the current turret is how the gun recoils when someone is looking out the hatch... Seems like "beef stew for dinner!"

No more math while I'm doing other things...

Lengths and widths might be close on an M1 and M2, but the M2 is taller.

Let's not even bring the Mk 1 Land Raider into this. That thing was so off scale it was ridiculous even for 40k.

I think the Leman Russ would be better if you widen the hull by about 1/4 of an inch, and lengthen it by about 1/2 inch. Fix the turrent. Smaller height on the turret with more width to add a second hatch.