how survivable are leman russ

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.

**thegreatchimp**

KingDeath wrote:
It is wasteful and allows for a very easy target. There is literaly no rational excuse for the leman russ except from "GW wanted it to look rugged and primitive".

Quite correct. I wouldn't waste a thought on trying to assess the practicality of 90% of stuff in 40k. It looks the way it does because its intended to be distinctive and cool.

**Ashiraya**

Edit: redundant post.

**koooaei**

Desubot wrote:
And then i just realized that lot of that IS made off world and shipped around (specific patterns and stuff)

The fact that its bigger also hurts in the world of logistics.

What's the problem, just make an even LARGER transport ship. Humanity feth yeah!

Spoiler:

**Wyzilla**

Melissia wrote:
Your hilariously insane bias against the A-10 is not based on reality, logic, or rational thought, sadly, so I'm not sure there's a reason for me to continue this conversation, however amusing it was for a while. I will however reiterate that the F-35 is an expensive piece of gak that doesn't do what it's built to do. It's an inferior air superiority plane to modern Russian and Chinese air superiority planes, it's an inferior CAS plane to any purpose-built CAS planes, and its vtol capability is pretty much worthless. The F-35 isn't even released yet, and it's already obsolete.

The Leman Russ, thankfully, does not have any of those problems, it is an effective, durable tank that does what it's built to do. It's not the MOST durable tank, but in terms of raw capacity to take damage and not give a damn, it's better than the other MBTs within 40k, which tend to prefer to avoid damage, but are far less capable of taking it.

Durability doesn't manner when it's form is so gak that in any minimally realistic setting, it would be blown apart with hilarious ease to due terrible, terrible design.

I repeat again, this is a tracked vehicle that lacks suspension. A tank that stands taller then a freaking single story house for some damn reason. There's nothing good about the entire tank, every single square inch of the Leman Russ is awful and looks straight out of WWI, which is not a good thing.

And it being "efficient" doesn't make a lick of sense considering its mass and size would make it a pain to ship in large numbers (whereas with far superior modern tanks you could probably ship those stacked atop each other like pancakes), or how the Leman Russ would need a massive support train behind it considering that due to its lack of suspension, it can only move on smooth surfaces. Put it in a muddy environment or with a lot of bumps and it will either be impossible to move at all, or the crew will all get concussions.

The design shouldn't even exist in the first place, the person who cleared its original production had to be a straight up mentally challenged child to OK that thing. Even the freaking Sherman was better designed then the Leman Russ, and it's straight out of WWII.

**Martel732**

KingDeath wrote:
Spetulhu wrote:
EmpNortonII wrote:
It does. The Tau codex indicates that Hammerheads win against LRs when outnumbered 5 to 1.

The western Allies used crappy Sherman tanks against German tanks that had better armor and guns and still won. Six Shermans to a Panther, but of those six one was working (it got the kill), three could be repaired and new ones were being shipped in faster than the Germans could replace their losses. Quantity is a quality all of it's own.

Fortunately the primary german fighting vehicle were the Panzer IV and the StuGIII, both of which werre comparable in firepower and armour to the Sherman.
The Panther itself had it's own flaws and i have yet to see a reliable source for the 5/6 M4 for one Panzer V claim. Allied losses certainly show nothing of that kind.

If the US had equipped the Sherman with AP ammo as standard issue, the long 75mm American gun had the penetration of the Soviet 85mm and both could penetrate the Panther or Tiger. The Sherman sucked mainly because all the AP ammo was given to the failed tank destroyers.

**Psienesis**

Durability doesn't manner when it's form is so gak that in any minimally realistic setting, it would be blown apart with hilarious ease to due terrible, terrible design.

Which 40K isn't. We're told that the LR is the work-horse tank of the IG, and has been used to good effect on countless battlefields across the Imperium since the time of the Great Crusade.

It's apparently "good enough" against the myriad enemies of the Imperium.

**Wyzilla**

Psienesis wrote:
Durability doesn't manner when it's form is so gak that in any minimally realistic setting, it would be blown apart with hilarious ease to due terrible, terrible design.

Which 40K isn't. We're told that the LR is the work-horse tank of the IG, and has been used to good effect on countless battlefields across the Imperium since the time of the Great Crusade.

It's apparently "good enough" against the myriad enemies of the Imperium.

Which doesn't speak well about the competency of anyone.

At all.

**The Imperial Answer**

They must be competent enough to use the thing given the Imperium's been beating the enemy with the russ club for 10,000 years.

**Melissia**

And that's ALL of the enemies of the Imperium, too, not just chaos cultists, but also wayward space marines, tyranids, orks, elda, and the like.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wyzilla wrote:
I repeat again, this is a tracked vehicle that lacks suspension.

No, it doesn't. Cut-out art of it has depicted it with an internal suspension in the past.

Wyzilla wrote:
A tank that stands taller then a freaking single story house

Depends on the artwork. Some actually have it bigger htan that, and some have it smaller. THough for the life of me, I don't know why you think this is unusual, considering the Abrams isn't much shorter than that at eight feet. That's taller than the room I'm in right now.

Wyzilla wrote:
a pain to ship in large numbers

You're talking about the same Imperium of Man that has ships with a crew population bigger than most cities, and some ships with more floorspace, too.

No.

Wyzilla wrote:
, it can only move on smooth surfaces

Citation needed.

Wyzilla wrote:
Even the freaking Sherman was better designed then the Leman Russ, and it's straight out of WWII.

The Sherman was one of the best tank designs in WWII-- frankly, it was better designed than anything the Germans had due to their tendency to overengineer things and make them far more complex, expensive, and maintenance-intensive than necessary, and only the T-34 was arguably better than the Sherman as an MBT.

The Leman Russ being compared to the Sherman is not the insult you think it is.

**Psienesis**

Wyzilla wrote:
Psienesis wrote:
Durability doesn't manner when it's form is so gak that in any minimally realistic setting, it would be blown apart with hilarious ease to due terrible, terrible design.

Which 40K isn't. We're told that the LR is the work-horse tank of the IG, and has been used to good effect on countless battlefields across the Imperium since the time of the Great Crusade.

It's apparently "good enough" against the myriad enemies of the Imperium.

Which doesn't speak well about the competency of anyone.

At all.

... and? Hardly any species in this setting is coming out ahead of its own power-curve, excepting the Tau.

The Necrons are clinging to an empire 60 million years gone. The Eldar are the remnants of a dying race. The Dark Eldar are so culturally fethed up that they cannot hope to advance... eventually, something is going to be the spark to the powderkeg of Commoragh, and then it's Game Over for the Dark Eldar as we know them. The Tyranids are beginning to run out of options, tactics and evolutionary steps. The means of their functions have been divined, and there's a clear (though difficult) path seen towards their defeat (the resources are another matter). The Imperium is, well, the Imperium. It's been on a decline for a long, long time. The Orks have been stagnant since the War in Heaven. The Tau are the only ones who are in a time of ascension... but they are such minor players in the galactic game that it wouldn't take much, from any faction, to really just end them.

**Vaktathi**

Wyzilla wrote:
Melissia wrote:
Your hilariously insane bias against the A-10 is not based on reality, logic, or rational thought, sadly, so I'm not sure there's a reason for me to continue this conversation, however amusing it was for a while. I will however reiterate that the F-35 is an expensive piece of gak that doesn't do what it's built to do. It's an inferior air superiority plane to modern Russian and Chinese air superiority planes, it's an inferior CAS plane to any purpose-built CAS planes, and its vtol capability is pretty much worthless. The F-35 isn't even released yet, and it's already obsolete.

The Leman Russ, thankfully, does not have any of those problems, it is an effective, durable tank that does what it's built to do. It's not the MOST durable tank, but in terms of raw capacity to take damage and not give a damn, it's better than the other MBTs within 40k, which tend to prefer to avoid damage, but are far less capable of taking it.

Durability doesn't manner when it's form is so gak that in any minimally realistic setting, it would be blown apart with hilarious ease to due terrible, terrible design.

I repeat again, this is a tracked vehicle that lacks suspension. A tank that stands taller then a freaking single story house for some damn reason. There's nothing good about the entire tank, every single square inch of the Leman Russ is awful and looks straight out of WWI, which is not a good thing.

And it being "efficient" doesn't make a lick of sense considering its mass and size would make it a pain to ship in large numbers (whereas with far superior modern tanks you could probably ship those stacked atop each other like pancakes), or how the Leman Russ would need a massive support train behind it considering that due to its lack of suspension, it can only move on smooth surfaces. Put it in a muddy environment or with a lot of bumps and it will either be impossible to move at all, or the crew will all get concussions.

The design shouldn't even exist in the first place, the person who cleared its original production had to be a straight up mentally challenged child to OK that thing. Even the freaking Sherman was better designed then the Leman Russ, and it's straight out of WWII.

I would agree with this, the basic Leman Russ really has no real basis in functionality. Hell, its turret wouldn't be big enough for the breach and a single crewman, much less three of them, particularly on the Ordnance bearing models with those gigantic nearly meter-wide-looking bores. Not to mention only having one hatch...

They're cartoony and ww1-steampunky looking, which fits the 40k aesthetic, but the Leman Russ just doesn't work from any sort of realistic perspective. That said, neither do most things in 40k, a Land Raider would have trouble navigating a parking lot speed bump given that it's got basically zero ground clearance.

**CREEEEEEEEED**

I've calmed down enough to just spit AV 14 in the general direction of Wyzilla, then hopefully leave this thread for good.

**Redcruisair**

CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
leave this thread for good.

Goodbye.

**thegreatchimp**

Vaktathi wrote:
Leman Russ tanks at one point were actually the heaviest armored tanks in the game (including side/rear) and Leman Russ turret armor was superior to any armor facing on a Land Raider.

Yep. 25 front turret and 22 side and rear, whereas the land raider was 22 front hull and 20 side/rear. Don't ask me how I can remember that from 15 years ago, but can't remember college stuff I studied 6 months ago

**The Imperial Answer**

thegreatchimp wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
Leman Russ tanks at one point were actually the heaviest armored tanks in the game (including side/rear) and Leman Russ turret armor was superior to any armor facing on a Land Raider.

Yep. 25 front turret and 22 side and rear, whereas the land raider was 22 front hull and 20 side/rear. Don't ask me how I can remember that from 15 years ago, but can't remember college stuff I studied 6 months ago

That's pretty good for a light tank.

**Vaktathi**

thegreatchimp wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
Leman Russ tanks at one point were actually the heaviest armored tanks in the game (including side/rear) and Leman Russ turret armor was superior to any armor facing on a Land Raider.

Yep. 25 front turret and 22 side and rear, whereas the land raider was 22 front hull and 20 side/rear. Don't ask me how I can remember that from 15 years ago, but can't remember college stuff I studied 6 months ago

I don't remember squat from most of my grad school courses, but I can still remember most points costs of almost anything in the twelve year old 3.5E CSM codex

**EmpNortonII**

Melissia wrote:
Don't think there is such a thing as an MBT better than the LRBT in the anti-infantry role.

A tank doesn't have to be great when its facing infantry.

In the Iran-Iraq war, T-55s performing very well, despite being completely obsolete against modern tanks.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
I've calmed down enough to just spit AV 14 in the general direction of Wyzilla, then hopefully leave this thread for good.

Speed counts a lot more for survivability than armor does in the face of melta weapons.

**SagesStone**

It's a fine tractor.

**The Imperial Answer**

If the old lore is to be believed, the Leman Russ would be considered a light tank. So it survives about like it should.

That is the old epic lore about the baneblade being a medium tank, thus making anything below it a light tank.

**Furyou Miko**

If the middling old lore is to be believed, the Leman Russ is a heavy tank... the Predator is a light tank. The difference in armour? 1 point. And this was in an article talking about the search for the elusive medium tank...

**thegreatchimp**

Furyou Miko wrote:
If the middling old lore is to be believed, the Leman Russ is a heavy tank... the Predator is a light tank. The difference in armour? 1 point. And this was in an article talking about the search for the elusive medium tank...

I always understood the pred to be a medium, since 2nd ed anyway, with the Russ and Land Raider being Heavy and the Hellhound, Razorback and Chimera being lights. (I know some of these are IFVs, rather than strictly tanks). But their max armour values correspond to that classification anyway (14 Heavy 13 Medium 12 Light)

**Melissia**

I kind of understood it that way too. 14 heavy, 13 medium, 12 light tank / heavy IFV, 11 IFV/APC, 10 civilian equivalent.

All of it rather abstracted of course.

**Ashiraya**

Trukks are civilian vehicles?

...Well, by ork standards, I guess they are.

**EmpNortonII**

Melissia wrote:
I kind of understood it that way too. 14 heavy, 13 medium, 12 light tank / heavy IFV, 11 IFV/APC, 10 civilian equivalent.

All of it rather abstracted of course.

The wrong way. Armor doesn't make a tank light, medium, heavy, etc. Speed does.

Light tanks are light tanks because they're fast enough to be used to flank enemy armored formations. You get rid of the armor so they can do that. The Baal-Pattern Predator is a light tank.

The LR is too slow to be used as anything but infantry support against non-human tanks.

**Melissia**

EmpNortonII wrote:
Armor doesn't make a tank light, medium, heavy, etc. Speed does.

In that case, the Leman russ used to be lighter than the Predator because it could move more while still firing its weapons.

**The Imperial Answer**

Well at one point, the standard for "light tank to medium tanks" in the Imperium was the Baneblade according to the old Epic lore. So there is no telling what the Russ is supposed to be.

**Furyou Miko**

The article I'm referring to was the old Vehicle Design Rules in White Dwarf, and it was only a throwaway comment, so take it as you wish.

**thegreatchimp**

EmpNortonII wrote:
Armor doesn't make a tank light, medium, heavy, etc. Speed does.

True, but in most cases -as you've pointed out-that speed is achieved by limiting armour, so there is usually a correlation between tonnage / armour of vehicles of different designated weight categories, often weaponry too. Where this gets muddled is in comparing tanks of different times (a 1939 Char B heavy tank having lighter armour and wepons than a Panther medium tank of 1945)

**Connor MacLeod**

Melissia wrote:
EmpNortonII wrote:
Armor doesn't make a tank light, medium, heavy, etc. Speed does.
In that case, the Leman russ used to be lighter than the Predator because it could move more while still firing its weapons.

Used to be pretty speedy in 2nd edition as well :lol:

Codex Chaos page 80 wrote:The Leman Russ batlte tank rumbled along the pass, its tracks squealing in protest as the vehicle was driven at speed over the rocky terrain. The steep sides of the gorge rose up menacingly on either side, the black volcanic wlals leaving the pass in permamant shadow. Behind the battle tank came a short column of Imperial Chimeras, the armoured troop carriers multi-lasers swivelling to cover the sides of the pass in case of enemy attack.

...

"How far now?" he continued, trying to put the thought of dameons out of his head.

"Thirteen klicks, sir." the Guardsman replied, checking the instruments in front of him.

"Estimated time till arrival?"

"Eleven minutes, sir."

The battle tank was suddenly shaken by a deep, rumbling blast as a weapon was fired into the pass. Looking through the sights Rosman saw a section of the gulley wall to the right erupt. Much of that part of the gorge wall proceeded to give way, chunks of rock as big as the Leman Russ tumbling down into the pass, partially blocking the reinforcements' route.

A second blast, like a thrumming boom, rocked the tank and over the comm-link Rosman heard a cry of anguish from one of the other vehicles. The tank commander scanned the sides of the pass through the tank's sights but could see nothing. Simultaneously the cliff face behind the tank crumbled, separating the Leman Russ from the rest of the cavalcade.

13 km in 11 minutes works out to ~71 kph. Off road, quite likely. Maybe it ran off the same nuclear powerplant some Chimeras supposedly did at that era.

As far as speed vs armour, that tends to depend on what is favored and a bunch of other factors (like what you're willing to give up to achieve it - firepower, higher costs, etc.) Amazingly, US tanks haven't given up the concept of armour (so much that we've contemplated 70-80 ton Infantry Fighting Vehicles, as I recall) even though you periodically get those ultra-light/fast FCS concepts cropping up from time to time that tries to render armour obsolete.

**EmpNortonII**

Connor MacLeod wrote:

As far as speed vs armour, that tends to depend on what is favored and a bunch of other factors (like what you're willing to give up to achieve it - firepower, higher costs, etc.) Amazingly, US tanks haven't given up the concept of armour (so much that we've contemplated 70-80 ton Infantry Fighting Vehicles, as I recall) even though you periodically get those ultra-light/fast FCS concepts cropping up from time to time that tries to render armour obsolete.

Yeah... someone needs to take those Army generals who think that you can replace tanks with armored cars into an alley and beat the stupid out of them.

Maybe follow that up with the Air Force generals that want to replace the A-10.