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.

Thatguyhsagun wrote:
The Pardus Armored, on the shrineworld of Hagia, in the book The Saint (think thats the omnibus name, its the first story). They go into absolutely zero detail about the tanks which is disappointing, and apparently conqueror battle cannons (S7) have an easy time tearing through most heavy armor in the book, as at one point the pardus kill 55 ish tanks in a head-to-head fight, losing about a quarter of that in return, and overall account for more than a hundred tank kills to the 20ish conquerors, 2 Destroyers and an Executioner. I found that amusing since it can hardly scratch medium armor on TT,

In TT we don't have so much differentiation, and no lokal PVS Tank stats. And in TT we don't have ammunition types (HE and AP).

 Ignatius wrote:
It's quite clear to me that it was designed by someone who has no idea how a tank works or is intended to work. Neither do any of the writers of the fiction.

Why do you assume that in 40k they have the same knowledge level about Tank warfare as we do now? You only know it's not a good tank design because you where taught so and have seen better ones. Realworld Tanks, at some point, looked quite similar to this. If you where stuck back in that time in history you would propably think different.

Trenchwarfare and mass charges are still in favor in 40k IG doctrine, don't forget that

 Keep wrote:


Trenchwarfare and mass charges are still in favor in 40k IG doctrine, don't forget that

Yes. The vast majority of both AdMech scientists/engineers and Imperial generals are complete idiots.

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Keep wrote:


Trenchwarfare and mass charges are still in favor in 40k IG doctrine, don't forget that

Yes. The vast majority of both AdMech scientists/engineers and Imperial generals are complete idiots.

No, they are actually quite competent considering the situation they are in.

Thatguyhsagun wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:


I still completely disagree that the tank passes as any sort of advanced or even capable piece of equipment.

I dont see any lascannons lying around our military warehouses.. I dont deny that the tank itself is poorly designed and comically shaped, but the gear it mounts and what it has in it is a different story. Multi-meltas, lascannons, even heavy bolters would be amazingly powerful by modern standards and well above what we have now, and some of the equiptment must be comparable or better than what we have now. Auspex for example. It may be unreliable most times but its an amazingly advanced and complex piece of equipment

Again, I'm speaking on the design of the tank itself. Obviously an energy weapon that travels as fast as light (because it is light) in such a manner is superior. Again, simply commenting on tank design and theory.

 Keep wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:
It's quite clear to me that it was designed by someone who has no idea how a tank works or is intended to work. Neither do any of the writers of the fiction.

Why do you assume that in 40k they have the same knowledge level about Tank warfare as we do now? You only know it's not a good tank design because you where taught so and have seen better ones. Realworld Tanks, at some point, looked quite similar to this. If you where stuck back in that time in history you would propably think different.

Trenchwarfare and mass charges are still in favor in 40k IG doctrine, don't forget that

I agree that it fits the gritty trench warfare style the Imperial Guard are remembered for. However, there seems to be just as many stories about Imperial Guardsmen storming across fields and using modern war tactics as there is about the Trench warfare style. The Leman Russ is terriblly designed for anything but this trench system, which even then it isn't very well adapted for.

And sure, I've got pretty extensive knowledge about this sort of thing, but it's something that has been acquired through a few short years spending time dealing with these things. Our knowledge has come about collectively from just about exactly 100 years of using tanks. I struggle to believe that the Imperium would stick to their first design even after thousands of years of using the Leman Russ, but then again, maybe that's the point. We are always looking for ways to improve tanks and their design, regardless of our thoughts of superiority.

 Keep wrote:
Forgeworld cutaway shows that it has a suspension.
There are better tank models and suspension, clearly, but its still an improvement over WW1. And it only goes 35kph topspeed on roads.

It's pulled much higher speeds in recent fluff and some of the otehr novels. Like they recycled 2nd edition fluff from Codex Chaos in one of the Noise Marine supplements and it was pulling around 35 kph off road (rather rocky terrain at that.)

Like most things it's entirely interpretive. And this include the diagrams and artwork. For example, do we say the Russ is equipped with a 120mm smoothbore and carries 36-40 rounds of ammo, or is it actually equipped with a small sawed off battleship cannon loaded by MicroOgryn and the ammo is stored in hammerspace?

You could even argue there are two 'kinds' of Russes, the visual one (which might be built by worlds/cultures more towards a WW1 aesthetic) and what others build (and is generally more sane even if it probably doesn't approach WW2 standards.)

The joys of variable fluff mean you don't have to worry about ABSOLUTE TRUTHS in your fiction and you can adapt it to whatever you best find sensible (or however gakky you want it, especially if you happen to hate the Guard/Imperium/etc.)

 EmpNortonII wrote:
Yes. The vast majority of both AdMech scientists/engineers and Imperial generals are complete idiots.

Everyone in 40K are technically 'idiots' if we use a real life metric. For all sorts of reasons (vehicle design, doctrine, use of equipment, etc.)

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Yes. The vast majority of both AdMech scientists/engineers and Imperial generals are complete idiots.

No, they are actually quite competent considering the situation they are in.

Connor MacLeod wrote:

 Keep wrote:
Forgeworld cutaway shows that it has a suspension.
There are better tank models and suspension, clearly, but its still an improvement over WW1. And it only goes 35kph topspeed on roads.

It's pulled much higher speeds in recent fluff and some of the otehr novels. Like they recycled 2nd edition fluff from Codex Chaos in one of the Noise Marine supplements and it was pulling around 35 kph off road (rather rocky terrain at that.)

You can also drive other tanks with their on road speed across difficult terrain. Except not for long. The reason why they don't go full speed offroad is because of damage and passenger comfort. You will automatically slow down if it gets too rough. Just because there is no paved road doesnt mean you are "off road".
It has to have suspension to achieve higher speeds then walking speed otherwise every bump is like driving with a bike against a brick wall.

We are always looking for ways to improve tanks and their design, regardless of our thoughts of superiority.

That's the difference to 40k. In 40k innovation is looked down upon.

 Keep wrote:
You can also drive other tanks with their on road speed across difficult terrain. Except not for long. The reason why they don't go full speed offroad is because of damage and passenger comfort. You will automatically slow down if it gets too rough. Just because there is no paved road doesnt mean you are "off road".
It has to have suspension to achieve higher speeds then walking speed otherwise every bump is like driving with a bike against a brick wall.

Suspension is variable like everything else. THere is the Honour Guard quote for example:

Honour Guard wrote:The Conqueror's time-honoured torsion-bar suspension systems and high power to weight ratio meant they were more nimble than most of the adversaries they encountered, whether super-heavy monsters or lacklustre mediums like the ones the Infardi were fielding.

Or that old WD article that covered the Armoured company rules and the good old '120mm smoothbore' a small child could hide inside. There's also the old Inferno! Demolisher you can see glimpses of the suspension, and also the 'not-quite sponsons'. I especially loved the fact it used Russian composite armor and also has secondary plasma cannons in the triple digit GJ range (thats how many joules the therms work out to lmao) Oh and the autoloader.

So yeah, like most 40K 'evidence' its entirely variable due to the agglomeration of years.

That's the difference to 40k. In 40k innovation is looked down upon.

When you have factions who want to innovate opposed by factions who hate to innovate and then people generally not sharing their goodies because they don't trust each other (even amongst the AdMech) you're not likely to get any sort of standardized progress. But it still does happen (it happened even more in earlier fluff, like with the Chimera and its variants, and its origins around 2nd edition) else where did Hellfire rounds come from?

 Keep wrote:

We are always looking for ways to improve tanks and their design, regardless of our thoughts of superiority.

That's the difference to 40k. In 40k innovation is looked down upon.

I'm right there with you on that one. I understand that in-universe it's seen as the pinnacle on Battle Tank design, and used to great effect.

Out of universe however, I understand that it's actually not, and a very poor example of a battle tank. That's the separation I'm trying to highlight. That in our world, the thing is terrible.

I feel like my position has been muddled a little bit, so here's the jist of what I'm saying:

40K Leman Russ = workhorse of the Imperium and great battle tank

Reality Leman Russ = Horrible tank design

The OP came off to me as trying to claim that it was both in universe a great tank (again, I agree with), AND in our world a great tank (where I disagree).

Plus, I couldn't pass up the opportunity to use the expertise I have in the field. Dakka is full of people who are economists, managers, philosophers, etc. It's not often I get to sound smart

People's definition of 'great' tends to be highyl variable and subjective to what they think is 'true'. If you ever venture into any of the hard scifi communities try asking them what they think 'hard' scifi is (which varies from 'only a few decades/centuries from now' to 'hard as long as it doesn't have FTL and forehead aliens. Especially if it has RKVs')

40K itself is the greatest example of how subjective opinion can be with the way the different factions (and their fans) regard themselves and others.

 Ignatius wrote:



40K Leman Russ = workhorse of the Imperium and great battle tank

Reality Leman Russ = Horrible tank design


Plus, I couldn't pass up the opportunity to use the expertise I have in the field. Dakka is full of people who are economists, managers, philosophers, etc. It's not often I get to sound smart

It's mediocre, at best. It's the Sherman of 40k. Its only virtues are that it is cheap to make and an idiot can operate it.

No one in their right mind would choose to crew it over the Hammerhead or Fire Prism.

It compares pretty well to the Predator, though...

Eldar and Tau vehicles are pretty stupid as well. Lightly armored, and the antigrav means they will have an even higher line of sight elevation than a ground vehicle. And the Tau one doesn't even have the Eldar's excuse of high speed.

Let's not forget the Tau forgetting they have railguns and drones and netowrking and the indirect-fire capability they have (heck, they have NO tube artillery of any kind, which is a pretty big drawback from modern forces. There's a reason why we haven't gone with everything missiles, after all.)

The Eldar really aren't much better, given some of their artillery is silly like that monofilament nonsense.

If realism is your metric, anything modern will pretty much stomp anything 40K, and the tech difference really isn't significant enough to make a difference against the differences in doctrine and competence.

I think that a lot of people are taking the Leman Russ the wrong way.

The Imperium is a vast place, full of different cultures and people. Including people of different technological advancement.

Say you are Tank Commander Tankus Commanderus of the 678th Otathan Regiment of tank. Under your command you have the Leman Russ Battle Tank 'Fluffy'. You and fluffy have been together since she left the factories in Otathan Prime, but now it is time for the 678th Otathan Regiment to head out into battle, against some Chaos scum in the far east of the Galaxy.

You and Fluffy arrive safely arrive on the contested world of Scrabthrax, and are soon sent into battle south of Scrabthrax beta. During this battle, there is no dedicated anti-tank support, so the Tech Priests attach a pair of lascannons onto Fluffy so that she can provide anti-tank against the Chaos forces.

You succeed in the battle and Fluffy heads back into the depot for repairs, part of her transmission system has been destroyed by a lucky Chaos missile launcher. However, the mechanics back at the shop are not from Otathan, instead they are from the world Garvil VI, it's a more backwards planet, barely achieving a level of technology equal to that of inter-war Earth. However, Fluffy is so simply designed, that they are able to repair the tranmission and send her back into battle.

Next battle takes place in an urban enviroment, and Emperor be praised, there is a squadron of Vanquisher tanks giving anti-tank cover. So they replace Fluffy's lascannons with heavy flamers.

During the battle , your driver is struck by a piece of shrapnel and is declared unfit for battle. Due to a mix up in command there are no replacement Otathanian drivers available, the replacement driver comes from another planet, called Martius. Despite the fact that Martius is in Segmentum Solar, and Otathan is in Segmentum Obsurous, he knows exactly how to drive Fluffy, because the Leman Russ is built exactly the same.

I think that is why the Leman Russ is as simple as it is, an Otathanian tank crew with a Martius driver with parts from Nax XIII assembled with Garvil VI mechanic is still going to work.

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:



40K Leman Russ = workhorse of the Imperium and great battle tank

Reality Leman Russ = Horrible tank design


Plus, I couldn't pass up the opportunity to use the expertise I have in the field. Dakka is full of people who are economists, managers, philosophers, etc. It's not often I get to sound smart

It's mediocre, at best. It's the Sherman of 40k. Its only virtues are that it is cheap to make and an idiot can operate it.

No one in their right mind would pick to operate it over the Hammerhead or Fire Prism.

It compares pretty well to the Predator, though...

Imperial Guard was my first army and still near and dear to me so I may have over estimated its place in the universe a bit

But I am not at all qualified to comment on the filthy xenos tanks however.

See, this thread is going to follow a single predictable pattern, because there is this assumption there is a binary either or dynamic. Either its all good, or all bad. Even though reality doesn't really work that way even at the best of times (people try to pretend it isn't.)

I mean go into any military history forum and ask whether Soviet or NATO tanks are better in the cold war era. Or whose doctrine was superior. I've seen enough debates like that to know they'll go pretty much the same way any 'Imperium vs Alien' argument on here would go. 40K isn't about absolutes, and if you try to force it into that paradigm the debate will go nowhere. And I'm willing to bet this topic has been discussed heaps of times before over many, many years with no satisfactory conclusion.

 welshhoppo wrote:
I think that a lot of people are taking the Leman Russ the wrong way.

The Imperium is a vast place, full of different cultures and people. Including people of different technological advancement.

Say you are Tank Commander Tankus Commanderus of the 678th Otathan Regiment of tank. Under your command you have the Leman Russ Battle Tank 'Fluffy'. You and fluffy have been together since she left the factories in Otathan Prime, but now it is time for the 678th Otathan Regiment to head out into battle, against some Chaos scum in the far east of the Galaxy.

You and Fluffy arrive safely arrive on the contested world of Scrabthrax, and are soon sent into battle south of Scrabthrax beta. During this battle, there is no dedicated anti-tank support, so the Tech Priests attach a pair of lascannons onto Fluffy so that she can provide anti-tank against the Chaos forces.

You succeed in the battle and Fluffy heads back into the depot for repairs, part of her transmission system has been destroyed by a lucky Chaos missile launcher. However, the mechanics back at the shop are not from Otathan, instead they are from the world Garvil VI, it's a more backwards planet, barely achieving a level of technology equal to that of inter-war Earth. However, Fluffy is so simply designed, that they are able to repair the tranmission and send her back into battle.

Next battle takes place in an urban enviroment, and Emperor be praised, there is a squadron of Vanquisher tanks giving anti-tank cover. So they replace Fluffy's lascannons with heavy flamers.

During the battle , your driver is struck by a piece of shrapnel and is declared unfit for battle. Due to a mix up in command there are no replacement Otathanian drivers available, the replacement driver comes from another planet, called Martius. Despite the fact that Martius is in Segmentum Solar, and Otathan is in Segmentum Obsurous, he knows exactly how to drive Fluffy, because the Leman Russ is built exactly the same.

I think that is why the Leman Russ is as simple as it is, an Otathanian tank crew with a Martius driver with parts from Nax XIII assembled with Garvil VI mechanic is still going to work.

Sure, all that.

But what does it have to do with the actual design of the tank? I get the standardization of the equipment and everything, but why does it have flat, tall sides? Why does it lack suspension in any meaningful form? Why does it lack sloped armor that deflects a round to a place where it won't cause even more damage? Why does it lack rear armor? For what purpose does it have sponsons (terrible idea really)? Why is it so darn big? There are tons of problems with it design wise that makes zero sense.

Why can't there be a standard tank design that is actually a GOOD one?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Connor MacLeod wrote:
See, this thread is going to follow a single predictable pattern, because there is this assumption there is a binary either or dynamic. Either its all good, or all bad. Even though reality doesn't really work that way even at the best of times (people try to pretend it isn't.)

I mean go into any military history forum and ask whether Soviet or NATO tanks are better in the cold war era. Or whose doctrine was superior. I've seen enough debates like that to know they'll go pretty much the same way any 'Imperium vs Alien' argument on here would go. 40K isn't about absolutes, and if you try to force it into that paradigm the debate will go nowhere. And I'm willing to bet this topic has been discussed heaps of times before over many, many years with no satisfactory conclusion.

Why bother with anything? Just because it's been debated before doesn't mean we can't. That sounds terribly nihilistic.

Connor MacLeod wrote:


I mean go into any military history forum and ask whether Soviet or NATO tanks are better in the cold war era. Or whose doctrine was superior.

Unlike the Imperium, NATO and the Soviets created new tank designs on a regular basis. They advanced in technology.

... it's also part of the setting that they're losing territory overall and that the AdMech is so tradition-bound that innovation takes thousands of years, if it happens at all.

 Ignatius wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:
I think that a lot of people are taking the Leman Russ the wrong way.

The Imperium is a vast place, full of different cultures and people. Including people of different technological advancement.

Say you are Tank Commander Tankus Commanderus of the 678th Otathan Regiment of tank. Under your command you have the Leman Russ Battle Tank 'Fluffy'. You and fluffy have been together since she left the factories in Otathan Prime, but now it is time for the 678th Otathan Regiment to head out into battle, against some Chaos scum in the far east of the Galaxy.

You and Fluffy arrive safely arrive on the contested world of Scrabthrax, and are soon sent into battle south of Scrabthrax beta. During this battle, there is no dedicated anti-tank support, so the Tech Priests attach a pair of lascannons onto Fluffy so that she can provide anti-tank against the Chaos forces.

You succeed in the battle and Fluffy heads back into the depot for repairs, part of her transmission system has been destroyed by a lucky Chaos missile launcher. However, the mechanics back at the shop are not from Otathan, instead they are from the world Garvil VI, it's a more backwards planet, barely achieving a level of technology equal to that of inter-war Earth. However, Fluffy is so simply designed, that they are able to repair the tranmission and send her back into battle.

Next battle takes place in an urban enviroment, and Emperor be praised, there is a squadron of Vanquisher tanks giving anti-tank cover. So they replace Fluffy's lascannons with heavy flamers.

During the battle , your driver is struck by a piece of shrapnel and is declared unfit for battle. Due to a mix up in command there are no replacement Otathanian drivers available, the replacement driver comes from another planet, called Martius. Despite the fact that Martius is in Segmentum Solar, and Otathan is in Segmentum Obsurous, he knows exactly how to drive Fluffy, because the Leman Russ is built exactly the same.

I think that is why the Leman Russ is as simple as it is, an Otathanian tank crew with a Martius driver with parts from Nax XIII assembled with Garvil VI mechanic is still going to work.

Sure, all that.

But what does it have to do with the actual design of the tank? I get the standardization of the equipment and everything, but why does it have flat, tall sides? Why does it lack suspension in any meaningful form? Why does it lack sloped armor that deflects a round to a place where it won't cause even more damage? Why does it lack rear armor? For what purpose does it have sponsons (terrible idea really)? Why is it so darn big? There are tons of problems with it design wise that makes zero sense.

Why can't there be a standard tank design that is actually a GOOD one?

I imagine that it has more to do with the type of opponents that the Imperium tends to face en masse, the followers of Chaos, who use similar equipment, or Orks, who use crude technology. It is a terribly designed tank, but I think the problem with designing a new one is down to the size of the Imperium. A new-variant of a Leman Russ might break down on a planet where they use the old one, so they new one can'y be repaired. Plus, even modern day tanks love to break down an awful lot.

 EmpNortonII wrote:
Unlike the Imperium, NATO and the Soviets created new tank designs on a regular basis. They advanced in technology.

And how long have the Tau been using the hammerhead? Or the Eldar their tanks? How does this change my point about 'from a realism standpoint everyone in 40K is a complete moron?'

... it's also part of the setting that they're losing territory overall and that the AdMech is so tradition-bound that innovation takes thousands of years, if it happens at all.

Alot of things are 'part of the setting' depending on which fluff you're referring to. Its sort of all about interpretation. Trying to insist that there is one truth is pretty silly in a setting that has tried to do the exact opposite for literally years now.

 Ignatius wrote:
Why bother with anything? Just because it's been debated before doesn't mean we can't. That sounds terribly nihilistic.

For amusement. Because you want to be right. Because you have a 'point' to prove. Lots of reasons I can imagine depending on the kind of person you are. I enjoy an interesting technical discussion and learning new stuff about science and technology and all that techno-fetishist stuff. I have sort of lost my taste for dogmatic MY TRUTH AND NO OTHER type stuff that characterizes alot of factional-oriented debates, especially since its largely interpretation anyhow. And lot's of threads like this tend to become factionalized because it involves people's likes or dislikes and then you get people badmouthing one faction or another (if its not going to be the Imperium or some facet of it, it will be the Tau. Or the Eldar, or some other faction.)

I mean you can debate stuff without it becoming about one side winning, or being better than the other, or having it otherwise binary. 40K isn't terribly binary anyhow (it would be rather boring if it was.)

Connor MacLeod wrote:

 Keep wrote:
You can also drive other tanks with their on road speed across difficult terrain. Except not for long. The reason why they don't go full speed offroad is because of damage and passenger comfort. You will automatically slow down if it gets too rough. Just because there is no paved road doesnt mean you are "off road".
It has to have suspension to achieve higher speeds then walking speed otherwise every bump is like driving with a bike against a brick wall.

Suspension is variable like everything else. THere is the Honour Guard quote for example:

I know that the conqueror supposedly has torsion bars. I haven't seen a Leman Russ description that says it has no suspension which mr wyzilla here was claiming.

Connor MacLeod wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:
Unlike the Imperium, NATO and the Soviets created new tank designs on a regular basis. They advanced in technology.

And how long have the Tau been using the hammerhead? Or the Eldar their tanks? How does this change my point about 'from a realism standpoint everyone in 40K is a complete moron?'

A complete lack of innovation is fine when nothing is better than what you have.

Connor MacLeod wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:
Why bother with anything? Just because it's been debated before doesn't mean we can't. That sounds terribly nihilistic.

For amusement. Because you want to be right. Because you have a 'point' to prove. Lots of reasons I can imagine depending on the kind of person you are. I enjoy an interesting technical discussion and learning new stuff about science and technology and all that techno-fetishist stuff. I have sort of lost my taste for dogmatic MY TRUTH AND NO OTHER type stuff that characterizes alot of factional-oriented debates, especially since its largely interpretation anyhow. And lot's of threads like this tend to become factionalized because it involves people's likes or dislikes and then you get people badmouthing one faction or another (if its not going to be the Imperium or some facet of it, it will be the Tau. Or the Eldar, or some other faction.)

I mean you can debate stuff without it becoming about one side winning, or being better than the other, or having it otherwise binary. 40K isn't terribly binary anyhow (it would be rather boring if it was.)

Wait so you do want to have a discussion? I'm confused now. Your last comment just seemed like you didn't want to have this discussion.

I'm just following the typical debate format, where one side makes a statement, and waits for the other to refute it.

But I'm with you on the whole "everyone in 40k is a moron thing when it comes to this kind of thing".

Hm. I regret not changing my LR tracks to be like a shermans

Connor MacLeod wrote:

 Keep wrote:
Forgeworld cutaway shows that it has a suspension.
There are better tank models and suspension, clearly, but its still an improvement over WW1. And it only goes 35kph topspeed on roads.

It's pulled much higher speeds in recent fluff and some of the otehr novels. Like they recycled 2nd edition fluff from Codex Chaos in one of the Noise Marine supplements and it was pulling around 35 kph off road (rather rocky terrain at that.)

It probably has speed limiters just like M1 Abrams.

 Ignatius wrote:
I agree that it fits the gritty trench warfare style the Imperial Guard are remembered for. However, there seems to be just as many stories about Imperial Guardsmen storming across fields and using modern war tactics as there is about the Trench warfare style. The Leman Russ is terriblly designed for anything but this trench system, which even then it isn't very well adapted for.

And sure, I've got pretty extensive knowledge about this sort of thing, but it's something that has been acquired through a few short years spending time dealing with these things. Our knowledge has come about collectively from just about exactly 100 years of using tanks. I struggle to believe that the Imperium would stick to their first design even after thousands of years of using the Leman Russ, but then again, maybe that's the point. We are always looking for ways to improve tanks and their design, regardless of our thoughts of superiority.

The Imperium doesn't design tanks it digs out ancient STCs plans. Leman Russ and Malcador are heavy infantry tanks. Imperial Guard is stuck with Leman Russ as "battle tank" because it lost access to Predator which is a tank for doing manoeuvre warfare and to Land Raider heavy IFV.

In the dark age of technology you'd have Predator and Land Raider for manoeuvre warfare and Leman Russ for when you get bogged down in a war with millions of greenskins. All of them used by ordinary humans, not Marines.
During Horus Heresy, large part of advanced facilities manufacturing Predators and Land Raiders was lost and Space Marines got exclusive right to them. Imperial Army had to regress to using Malcador and later Leman Russ as their only tanks.

 Ignatius wrote:
I'm right there with you on that one. I understand that in-universe it's seen as the pinnacle on Battle Tank design, and used to great effect.

Out of universe however, I understand that it's actually not, and a very poor example of a battle tank. That's the separation I'm trying to highlight. That in our world, the thing is terrible.

I feel like my position has been muddled a little bit, so here's the jist of what I'm saying:

40K Leman Russ = workhorse of the Imperium and great battle tank

Reality Leman Russ = Horrible tank design

The OP came off to me as trying to claim that it was both in universe a great tank (again, I agree with), AND in our world a great tank (where I disagree).

I mean that it's a decent tank design for what it was designed to do.

 Ignatius wrote:
Sure, all that.

But what does it have to do with the actual design of the tank? I get the standardization of the equipment and everything, but why does it have flat, tall sides? Why does it lack suspension in any meaningful form? Why does it lack sloped armor that deflects a round to a place where it won't cause even more damage? Why does it lack rear armor? For what purpose does it have sponsons (terrible idea really)? Why is it so darn big? There are tons of problems with it design wise that makes zero sense.

Why can't there be a standard tank design that is actually a GOOD one?

Because it was designed for fighting the most common enemy in the Wh40k setting - a horde of hyper-aggressive giant subhumans armed with inferior weapons, driving ramshackle vehicles. Sponsons are for providing multiple sources of fire from a single tank. A reasonable thing when one is massively outnumbered by a hyper-aggressive enemy.
If Predator's thin but fancy armour was enough to allow massive victories against orks, Leman Russ'es thick but flat armour was also enough. I suspect that being very big may somehow help fighting an opponent that likes melee fighting.

The springs in that image are a part of suspension:


"This armour is thickest on the tank's front, with decreasing thickness along the sides and rear, to prevent the engine from overheating or over-straining of the transmission."
I don't know how much the thickness of the rear armour decreases. Possibly no more than in real life tanks. I doubt it doesn't have rear armour.

I think it's quite reasonable to use this:


When living in a galaxy where most common life form is this:

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:



40K Leman Russ = workhorse of the Imperium and great battle tank

Reality Leman Russ = Horrible tank design


Plus, I couldn't pass up the opportunity to use the expertise I have in the field. Dakka is full of people who are economists, managers, philosophers, etc. It's not often I get to sound smart

It's mediocre, at best. It's the Sherman of 40k. Its only virtues are that it is cheap to make and an idiot can operate it.

No one in their right mind would choose to crew it over the Hammerhead or Fire Prism.

It compares pretty well to the Predator, though...

Contrary to the bs hype the History Channel gives to German tanks, Shermans were actually pretty damn good and at least to my knowledge, extremely hard to penn the front armor until you get to the crazy later tanks. But it was exceptionally good for its time.

 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:

Connor MacLeod wrote:

 Keep wrote:
Forgeworld cutaway shows that it has a suspension.
There are better tank models and suspension, clearly, but its still an improvement over WW1. And it only goes 35kph topspeed on roads.

It's pulled much higher speeds in recent fluff and some of the otehr novels. Like they recycled 2nd edition fluff from Codex Chaos in one of the Noise Marine supplements and it was pulling around 35 kph off road (rather rocky terrain at that.)

It probably has speed limiters just like M1 Abrams.

 Ignatius wrote:
I agree that it fits the gritty trench warfare style the Imperial Guard are remembered for. However, there seems to be just as many stories about Imperial Guardsmen storming across fields and using modern war tactics as there is about the Trench warfare style. The Leman Russ is terriblly designed for anything but this trench system, which even then it isn't very well adapted for.

And sure, I've got pretty extensive knowledge about this sort of thing, but it's something that has been acquired through a few short years spending time dealing with these things. Our knowledge has come about collectively from just about exactly 100 years of using tanks. I struggle to believe that the Imperium would stick to their first design even after thousands of years of using the Leman Russ, but then again, maybe that's the point. We are always looking for ways to improve tanks and their design, regardless of our thoughts of superiority.

The Imperium doesn't design tanks it digs out ancient STCs plans. Leman Russ and Malcador are heavy infantry tanks. Imperial Guard is stuck with Leman Russ as "battle tank" because it lost access to Predator which is a tank for doing manoeuvre warfare and to Land Raider heavy IFV.

In the dark age of technology you'd have Predator and Land Raider for manoeuvre warfare and Leman Russ for when you get bogged down in a war with millions of greenskins. All of them used by ordinary humans, not Marines.
During Horus Heresy, large part of advanced facilities manufacturing Predators and Land Raiders was lost and Space Marines got exclusive right to them. Imperial Army had to regress to using Malcador and later Leman Russ as their only tanks.

 Ignatius wrote:
I'm right there with you on that one. I understand that in-universe it's seen as the pinnacle on Battle Tank design, and used to great effect.

Out of universe however, I understand that it's actually not, and a very poor example of a battle tank. That's the separation I'm trying to highlight. That in our world, the thing is terrible.

I feel like my position has been muddled a little bit, so here's the jist of what I'm saying:

40K Leman Russ = workhorse of the Imperium and great battle tank

Reality Leman Russ = Horrible tank design

The OP came off to me as trying to claim that it was both in universe a great tank (again, I agree with), AND in our world a great tank (where I disagree).

I mean that it's a decent tank design for what it was designed to do.

 Ignatius wrote:
Sure, all that.

But what does it have to do with the actual design of the tank? I get the standardization of the equipment and everything, but why does it have flat, tall sides? Why does it lack suspension in any meaningful form? Why does it lack sloped armor that deflects a round to a place where it won't cause even more damage? Why does it lack rear armor? For what purpose does it have sponsons (terrible idea really)? Why is it so darn big? There are tons of problems with it design wise that makes zero sense.

Why can't there be a standard tank design that is actually a GOOD one?

Because it was designed for fighting the most common enemy in the Wh40k setting - a horde of hyper-aggressive giant subhumans armed with inferior weapons, driving ramshackle vehicles. Sponsons are for providing multiple sources of fire from a single tank. A reasonable thing when one is massively outnumbered by a hyper-aggressive enemy.
If Predator's thin but fancy armour was enough to allow massive victories against orks, Leman Russ'es thick but flat armour was also enough. I suspect that being very big may somehow help fighting an opponent that likes melee fighting.

The springs in that image are a part of suspension:

Spoiler:

"This armour is thickest on the tank's front, with decreasing thickness along the sides and rear, to prevent the engine from overheating or over-straining of the transmission."
I don't know how much the thickness of the rear armour decreases. Possibly no more than in real life tanks. I doubt it doesn't have rear armour.

I think it's quite reasonable to use this:

Spoiler:

When living in a galaxy where most common life form is this:

Spoiler:

Sponsons are moronic because they weaken the flank armor and make it extremely easy for enemy armor or AT weapons to penn the sides. The only time when sponsons make "sense" is when they aren't sponsons, they're just remote controlled turrets stuck on the side of the tank, like a pintle mounted browning with the ammunition stored outside. Thus it's just bolted onto the flank armor rather than you gutting the flank armor to fit the sponson, which is an armored hole leading to the belly of the tank. You don't mount sponons to deal with massed infantry threats like Orks, that's what the infantry escort is there to do. You don't stick heavy bolters or lascannons on the flanks of the Leman Russ, you hand those to the Guardsmen squads serving as the infantry escort. If infantry is still a problem, then you just load cannister shells and turn the charging Orks into a giant pulpy mass of green goo.

Also, you have a terrible understanding of Orks if you think they're mindless brutes who zergrush the enemy with zero tactics in an all-or-nothing charge. Orks practice combined arms, just like the Imperium, and assault with massive armor columns, infantry, scouts, mechanized infantry, and fly air support constantly. There is zero reason for the Leman Russ to exist besides rule of cool and GW not having a damned clue as to what a good tank would look like. Even the Eldar and Tau, who have fantastic vehicles in terms of mobility and armament, stiff suffer from idiodic design at times. Like putting a cockpit on your tank that's exposed to enemy fire.

Tau are bit better, but their armor is certainly built like a glass cannon looking at those engines.

The Sherman was a solid tank up to the point it met a Panther or Tiger. But considering the workhorse tank of the Nazis was the Pz. IV series, meeting Panthers and Tigers weren't as nearly as common as films like to make it seem.

And the Sherman did pretty well again the Pz. IV series with them being fairly on par with one another.

That aside, it is still a pretty crummy design and any no reasonable amount of RH steel you slap (i.e. To the max amount its frame and engine and treads can take) onto it, the likes of HEAT and SABOT are still going to give it a bad day with that lack of slope.

And about "super metals/composites" the M1 Abram's composite armor ranges between ~20-50 mm (I haven't looked at the stats all too recently so I could be off by a bit) but is equivalent to 600mm RHA.

If i ever get my hands on a leman Russ, I'll probably convert it into something similar to the ARL 44. For me, that's a much more tolerable design.

 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:
I mean that it's a decent tank design for what it was designed to do.

No it isn't. It's an utterly terrible tank that only "works" because of the sheer quantity of them the IG can throw at an enemy. It has major design flaws that even a WWI-era tank designer would recognize as unbelievably stupid, and only continues to exist in its current state because the Imperium is limited to cargo-cult "engineering" and blindly following what their religious texts tell them to do.

And no, the most common enemy being orks doesn't change this problem. Even if the LRBT is slightly less awful than some ork tank design the LRBT still sucks. It just gets away with sucking because the enemy is even worse. A properly-designed tank would still work much better in that situation.

The springs in that image are a part of suspension:

And the point is that they don't work. The tracks are narrower than the side armor plates, and if the "suspension" springs compress more than an inch or so the metal plates adjacent to the tracks will touch the ground. On hard surfaces the constant scraping will slow the tank down, on anything less than a high-quality paved road it will dig in and immobilize itself almost immediately. The LRBT's "suspension" is actually worse than having no suspension at all because it adds weight and complexity without providing any benefit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wyzilla wrote:
Tau are bit better, but their armor is certainly built like a glass cannon looking at those engines.

To be fair, a Hammerhead is more like a helicopter gunship than a modern tank, and aircraft almost inevitably have exposed engine bits to shoot at. In a "real" battle, unlike on the tabletop, it should use helicopter-style tactics like hiding behind a hill and only popping up for a few seconds to railgun a target. And in that kind of fight tank-level armor on most of its hull should more than offset having slightly larger engine intakes than a real-world helicopter.

 Wyzilla wrote:
Sponsons are moronic because they weaken the flank armor and make it extremely easy for enemy armor or AT weapons to penn the sides. The only time when sponsons make "sense" is when they aren't sponsons, they're just remote controlled turrets stuck on the side of the tank, like a pintle mounted browning with the ammunition stored outside. Thus it's just bolted onto the flank armor rather than you gutting the flank armor to fit the sponson, which is an armored hole leading to the belly of the tank.

Original Leman Russ from space Marine looked more like a remotely controlled external turret. The old Demolisher cutout that I posted seems to have them as remotely operated weapon stations with the operators sitting inside. Currently the sponson is mounted over second access hatch. I don't think they actually cut it out.

 Wyzilla wrote:
You don't mount sponons to deal with massed infantry threats like Orks, that's what the infantry escort is there to do. You don't stick heavy bolters or lascannons on the flanks of the Leman Russ, you hand those to the Guardsmen squads serving as the infantry escort. If infantry is still a problem, then you just load cannister shells and turn the charging Orks into a giant pulpy mass of green goo.

Infantry would probably get suppressed due to the amount of dakka Orks pack.

 Ignatius wrote:
Also, you have a terrible understanding of Orks if you think they're mindless brutes who zergrush the enemy with zero tactics in an all-or-nothing charge. Orks practice combined arms, just like the Imperium, and assault with massive armor columns, infantry, scouts, mechanized infantry, and fly air support constantly.

That's 40k. I'm talking about the times when STC were designed - the Dark Age of Technology. According to Predator fluff, back then Orks were much weaker technologically and more mindlessly aggressive.

 Ignatius wrote:
Even the Eldar and Tau, who have fantastic vehicles in terms of mobility and armament, stiff suffer from idiodic design at times. Like putting a cockpit on your tank that's exposed to enemy fire.

Tau are bit better, but their armor is certainly built like a glass cannon looking at those engines.

I think the basic problem with Eldar and Tau vehicles is that in tabletop game they can't really use their mobility. They are built more like helicopters or planes than tanks. It suggests that they should do pop-up or high speed hit and run attacks.

People seem to think of WW1 designs as terrible... They serve their purpose better than a Russ would (Russ however has Space magic on his side).

The WW1 tanks legitimately had nearly nothing that could appose it. Infantry had to resort to using ditches and flame throwers to halt Tanks. Tanks eventually carried mini bridges on their backs to counter this. The first turret tanks also came in WW1.



What makes the Leman Russ design silly (beyond the fact that its space magic, from the materials to the engine, and to the weaponry) is the shape. With such a large silhouette it presents a large target, with little for it to hide behind.

Its gun looks very low velocity and likely would be used to lob shells. It carries too much weaponry to be useful (assuming at full loadout) means the commander will have a hard time directing and commanding his tank.

The commander is further impeded by the fact he appears to be the one firing and loading the gun, as the turret clearly only has him in it. This means he is trying to do many many jobs, resulting in poor combat showings.

The exposed tracks is also not ideal.

7 Crew at max would make this vehicle very, very cramped. Many crew would die as a result, since bailing from the vehicle is not possible for most crew (but its the imperium...) and replacing a lost crew member (as rare as that will be) would result even less combat efficiency than we already have.

The shape of the tank, is also not ideal.

I guess we have no real comment on the weapons, the materials and engine since its all space magic, but what we can say for sure is that they are most definitely not put to good use.

Its a pity though, I dont know about any one else, but to me the Imperial Tanks look more like a cartoon than anything worth being a tank. (same for all the tanks in 40k... except being alien gives them a pass).

On the plus side, the space magic gives them a huge edge. How many times have armored thrusts had to lose momentum because of a lack of fuel? Many I can recall. Logistics through the use of Space magic gives the Imperial Guard a lot of edge, but like the leman russ, its not used very efficiently, which makes the space magic end up being very negligible to its overall design.

Overall, I think the mighty Bob Semple tank of New Zealand is one of the few tanks that appears to be worse than the Leman Russ. Which doesnt say a lot for the russ.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:
I mean that it's a decent tank design for what it was designed to do.

No it isn't. It's an utterly terrible tank that only "works" because of the sheer quantity of them the IG can throw at an enemy. It has major design flaws that even a WWI-era tank designer would recognize as unbelievably stupid, and only continues to exist in its current state because the Imperium is limited to cargo-cult "engineering" and blindly following what their religious texts tell them to do.

And no, the most common enemy being orks doesn't change this problem. Even if the LRBT is slightly less awful than some ork tank design the LRBT still sucks. It just gets away with sucking because the enemy is even worse. A properly-designed tank would still work much better in that situation.

The thing is that Leman Russ is a high tech version of an Interwar heavy infantry tank design. The difference is that instead of being challenged by WWII Germans, the correctness of the design was confirmed by Orks which were on lower tech level.
Also, I think that a WWI-era tank designer would be amazed by its reliability, ability to accept various fuel types, life-support, electronic devices, weapons, etc.

That said, in 41st millennium it's an outdated design. The Imperium lost ability to anything about it, though. They can't design a new tank and they can't bring Predators and Land Raiders back to the Guard. Personally, I think it's more of a PDF-level tank that due to unfortunate circumstances ended up in Guard than a proper Guard tank.

 Swastakowey wrote:
People seem to think of WW1 designs as terrible... They serve their purpose better than a Russ would (Russ however has Space magic on his side).

The WW1 tanks legitimately had nearly nothing that could appose it. Infantry had to resort to using ditches and flame throwers to halt Tanks. Tanks eventually carried mini bridges on their backs to counter this. The first turret tanks also came in WW1.

My point is that Leman Russ is like it is because it was designed and initially operated in conditions similar to WW1. Predator has weaker armour and it was greatly successful against early Orks due to its near-invulnerability to Ork weapons. Masses of Leman Russ tanks would enjoy similar supremacy against the Orks when their STC design was created (and didn't need adamantium and ceramite and was easier to use for untrained personnel).