What if

Hot Research Topics => Aircraft, Armor, Weapons and Ships by Topic => Topic started by: Aircav on December 06, 2011, 11:47:20 PM

Title: Scorpion Family
Post by: Aircav on December 06, 2011, 11:47:20 PM
Spotted this Scorpion based thing fitted with a 105mm gun and a Curtis-Wright RC1-350 engine, was the US Army looking at getting some I wonder.

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi137.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fq201%2Faircav14%2Ftank.jpg&hash=646c6c02267e24165db56df27d6f75a3cae4cf37)

http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,34099.msg538781.html#new
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: dragon on December 07, 2011, 12:26:07 AM
Interesting.
The biggest gun I have seen on a Scorpion to date is a 90mm Cockerill on the Venezuelan Army Scorpions.
:cheers:
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on December 07, 2011, 02:05:35 AM
I think you'll find that is a Stormer, not a Scorpion.  Yes, it was proposed to the US Army at one point as a competitor for the M8 system, just as the Stormer APC was once proposed as an alternative to the LAV-25.  Basically a Scorpion has 5 road wheels while a Stormer has 6.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Mossie on December 07, 2011, 03:02:13 AM
Your both right, it's a Scoprion/Scimitar superstucture adapted to fit a Stormer chassis.

Great find Steve! :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on December 07, 2011, 04:51:58 AM
Having had a bit of a hunt around I suspect its actually a Stormer 90 - which mounted a 90mm gun (although the first post's picture appears to be missing its muzzle brake.

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.army-guide.com%2Fimages%2Fstorm90_dfksjl1.jpg&hash=f693e2666514be9dbff1dc2ec62a36bc6b1c4e0a)
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Mossie on December 07, 2011, 05:38:17 AM
Turret differs as well, Steve's cutaway basically has a Scorpion turret with increased height.  Maybe an earlier design of the same concept?  :unsure:
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: dy031101 on December 07, 2011, 05:49:33 AM
Isn't the turret in the second pic the French TS-90?
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on December 07, 2011, 06:22:43 AM
Quote from: dy031101 on December 07, 2011, 05:49:33 AM
Isn't the turret in the second pic the French TS-90?

Yes.  The webpage I found the image on said it was one of the standard French turrets which were available at the time.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on December 07, 2011, 06:24:05 AM
Quote from: Mossie on December 07, 2011, 05:38:17 AM
Turret differs as well, Steve's cutaway basically has a Scorpion turret with increased height.  Maybe an earlier design of the same concept?  :unsure:

I beg to differ.  The turret appears to be much longer, the front and mantlet a different shape to that on a standard Scorpion turret.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: dy031101 on December 07, 2011, 08:26:08 AM
I believe the cutaway is presenting either a Stingray turret or a derivative of it.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on December 07, 2011, 03:55:04 PM
Looks rather different to the Stingray:

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg14.imageshack.us%2Fimg14%2F7232%2F82mj.jpg&hash=fb8c1f3c1e66b7d22d7e123178012184e81003fc)
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: apophenia on December 07, 2011, 07:37:03 PM
Quote from: Aircav on December 06, 2011, 11:47:20 PM
... Curtis-Wright RC1-350 ...

The use of a rotary engine is interesting -- even if the technical illustrator can't spell Curtiss-Wright  ;)

Does anyone know of other Wankel types proposed for armoured vehicles?
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on December 07, 2011, 08:02:29 PM
I'm pretty sure there have been several proposals.  I'm unaware of any though, that entered production...
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: ChernayaAkula on December 07, 2011, 09:10:53 PM
Quote from: rickshaw on December 07, 2011, 03:55:04 PM
Looks rather different to the Stingray:

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_MlcIJtVqC0I%2FSU6Wm14PR8I%2FAAAAAAAAClA%2FFsK8Fe9jdSY%2Fs400%2F26_17897_44e0001a5d1f2ab.jpg&hash=e54d13e8d39636dbb09c20b195ebe21b964c16b4)

I think you'll find/you do realize (:rolleyes:) that "Stingray" is actually a Japanese Type 10 MBT.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on December 08, 2011, 12:49:40 AM
No he don't any more.  ;D

Thanks for pointing out the mistake.  Obviously now corrected...
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Mossie on December 08, 2011, 05:07:32 AM
Projects found on Secret Projects under the Alvis Sagiter name.  All based on the Stormer Chassis.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3947.msg31041.html#msg31041 (http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3947.msg31041.html#msg31041)

ARES 75mm autmatic gun
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi72.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi176%2FMossie105%2FGeneral%2FAlvisSagiter01.jpg&hash=95033354508f3cea9224802e7256ce5f820764be)

Cockerill 90mm MkIII gun
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi72.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi176%2FMossie105%2FGeneral%2FAlvisSagiter02.jpg&hash=9a6fe1fd74aa8b0546478384a6a0a2e77eef1066)

76 mm L23A1 gun and twin TOW launcher
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi72.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi176%2FMossie105%2FGeneral%2FAlvisSagiter03.jpg&hash=156c9063ef6b59272aa12b41f287543c6b2f7934)

Quote from: rickshaw on December 07, 2011, 06:24:05 AM
I beg to differ.  The turret appears to be much longer, the front and mantlet a different shape to that on a standard Scorpion turret.

I don't see it.  Very difficult to tell the length of the turret & the mantlet looks very similar to me.  Anyway, I did say 'basically', not exactly100%likey.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: DarrenP on February 02, 2012, 03:38:11 PM
always thought a scorpion turret could have been added to either Fox hull or FV432
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on February 02, 2012, 04:34:58 PM
Quote from: DarrenP on February 02, 2012, 03:38:11 PM
always thought a scorpion turret could have been added to either Fox hull or FV432

Fox was already dangerously top heavy with the turret designed for it.  The Scorpion turret was heavier still.   They did put a few Scimitar turrets on FV432 (which IIRC served with the Berlin Brigade).   Putting a Scorpion turret would be relatively simple and you'd have something equivalent to the Australian FSV/MRV.   A very useful vehicle, much missed in the RAAC as I understand it.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on March 18, 2013, 07:44:09 AM
Jordanian Scorpion upgraded with a Russian 2A72 30mm cannon and 4 x unspecified ATGWs:

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi35.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd165%2Fhws5mp%2FJordanianScorpion.jpg&hash=69ed906223068b9c0f0095edd2b85ef27220d3d9)

Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on March 18, 2013, 05:29:32 PM
Interesting and perhaps logical conversion.  Obviously not much to the mount if it needs that substantial external barrel support.  Runs counter to the British viewpoint on reconnaissance vehicles though ("needs a gun that can engage targets with HE").
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Thorvic on March 18, 2013, 11:11:00 PM
Quote from: rickshaw on March 18, 2013, 05:29:32 PM
Interesting and perhaps logical conversion.  Obviously not much to the mount if it needs that substantial external barrel support.  Runs counter to the British viewpoint on reconnaissance vehicles though ("needs a gun that can engage targets with HE").

Except British Scorpions dropped out of service during the 90s and recon is done with Scimitar and Scimitar2 armed with the 30mm rarden cannon
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on March 19, 2013, 05:17:50 AM
As I understand it, the withdrawal of the Scorpions and their conversion into Sabres was down to two factors, neither of them tactical:

1. Originally, both 76mm and RARDEN ammo were "specialist" ammos that only needed to be supplied to the recce units via their own logistics. However, the introduction of the Warrior made RARDEN ammo universal, so by removing the 76mm, the recce units' ammo logistics could piggyback off the infantry units they were supporting.

2. The 76mm gun didn't have a fume extractor, it was apparently impossible or uneconomic to fit one, and new health and safety rules would lay the MoD open to claims of long-term injury due to cordite inhalation if they kept it in service.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: crudebuteffective on March 19, 2013, 11:34:59 AM
Having served with guys who were in the 91 gulf war i have always believed that the 76mm was withdrawn because if the breach was opened too quickly after firing it sucked sand down the short barrel which caused the breech to jam
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on March 19, 2013, 05:34:16 PM
The actual reason was political.  The Conventional Forces in Europe arms reduction treaty considered anything with a gun bigger than 75mm towards the total for tanks which each signatory was allowed.  So, the choice was either a Scorpion with a 76mm gun or a Challenger with a 120mm gun.  Guess which won?

The lack of a fume extractor could have been easily handled with the NBC system running at an overpressure, it would have blown any fumes out the muzzle as soon as the breech was opened.

The 30mm Rarden ammunition argument is a bit spurious.  It was a standard round within the army and would have been treated as such by the logistics system, no matter how much the weapon was used or not.

I wonder if anybody here has heard of "Rarden Thumb"?   If you see someone missing their right thumb and is ex-Army that is usually the reason.  The weapon used to be cleared by checking with with the thumb.  If the weapon closed it's breech without warning, the clearer usually ended up with a smashed thumb which had to be amputated.   :banghead:
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on March 19, 2013, 06:50:17 PM
Quote from: rickshaw on March 19, 2013, 05:34:16 PM
The actual reason was political.  The Conventional Forces in Europe arms reduction treaty considered anything with a gun bigger than 75mm towards the total for tanks which each signatory was allowed.  So, the choice was either a Scorpion with a 76mm gun or a Challenger with a 120mm gun.  Guess which won?

That seems a likely factor too.

Quote
The lack of a fume extractor could have been easily handled with the NBC system running at an overpressure, it would have blown any fumes out the muzzle as soon as the breech was opened.

I always thought that as well, but the fumes argument was put forward at the time.

Quote
The 30mm Rarden ammunition argument is a bit spurious.  It was a standard round within the army and would have been treated as such by the logistics system, no matter how much the weapon was used or not.

The issue wasn't the RARDEN round, it was the 76mm round. Originally both RARDEN and 76mm were equally "minority" but the Warrior forced the Army to buy and supply vastly greater quantities of the former. Reducing the number of different types of ammo is always an improvement from a logistics point of view, and the relatively small number of 76mm users left made it the obvious candidate for phase-out. They didn't even need to supply more RARDEN ammo to compensate since the Sabre turrets came from scrapped Foxes, so the total number of RARDEN guns remained the same as before the change.

Yeah, I've heard of RARDEN thumb - it's not a popular weapon for all sorts of reasons....
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: PR19_Kit on March 19, 2013, 09:44:22 PM
Quote from: rickshaw on March 19, 2013, 05:34:16 PM
I wonder if anybody here has heard of "Rarden Thumb"?   If you see someone missing their right thumb and is ex-Army that is usually the reason.  The weapon used to be cleared by checking with with the thumb.  If the weapon closed it's breech without warning, the clearer usually ended up with a smashed thumb which had to be amputated.   :banghead:

I didn't know it had a name as such, but I knew a guy who'd lost his thumb like that.

During the early days of Gulf War I they were running into problems with sand ingenstion into the Rardens and the guys at Fort Halstead used one of my rigs to simulate the firing cycle, but they had no way of auto-loading the clips in the test lab so they had a bunch of squaddies doing it, taking shifts! One of them was missing his thumb and he warned me to keep clear of the breech part of the weapon, but I said I had more faith in my hydraulics than he had in the gun!  ;D
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on March 20, 2013, 05:14:05 AM
Quote from: Weaver on March 19, 2013, 06:50:17 PM
Quote
The lack of a fume extractor could have been easily handled with the NBC system running at an overpressure, it would have blown any fumes out the muzzle as soon as the breech was opened.

I always thought that as well, but the fumes argument was put forward at the time.

I've heard that reasoning as well but it doesn't really gell with me.  Another extractor fan or the NBC system should have been able to handle it, if the Army had really wanted the vehicle.  It sounds more like a convenient excuse than anything else.

Quote
The issue wasn't the RARDEN round, it was the 76mm round. Originally both RARDEN and 76mm were equally "minority" but the Warrior forced the Army to buy and supply vastly greater quantities of the former. Reducing the number of different types of ammo is always an improvement from a logistics point of view, and the relatively small number of 76mm users left made it the obvious candidate for phase-out. They didn't even need to supply more RARDEN ammo to compensate since the Sabre turrets came from scrapped Foxes, so the total number of RARDEN guns remained the same as before the change.

Up until 12 years ago, that was the standard thinking in military circles.  Today, there seems to be an over-abundance of specialised ammunition in every army, as odd, strange and different calibres have been adopted willy-nilly during "The War on Terror(ism)"(tm) .   76mm is AIUI still being manufactured for export customers.

I found the Spartans fitted with Scimitar turrets quite an interesting conversion.  I expect they'll be much more popular than the standard Scimitar/Scorpion hulls if for nothing else the extra room in them.  Do they retain the rear door and can they carry a trooper or two in the back still?

Quote
Yeah, I've heard of RARDEN thumb - it's not a popular weapon for all sorts of reasons....

It's interesting that the British would be the only nation to design such a dangerous weapon clearing procedure.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on March 20, 2013, 05:58:39 AM
Quote from: rickshaw on March 20, 2013, 05:14:05 AM
I found the Spartans fitted with Scimitar turrets quite an interesting conversion.  I expect they'll be much more popular than the standard Scimitar/Scorpion hulls if for nothing else the extra room in them.  Do they retain the rear door and can they carry a trooper or two in the back still?

They do retain the rear door, but I'm not sure how much room there is in there. The main motivation for the change seems to be mine-protection, with "hanging" seats etc.. and having the space for a protected fuel tank (the original one was plastic!).

Quote
QuoteYeah, I've heard of RARDEN thumb - it's not a popular weapon for all sorts of reasons....

It's interesting that the British would be the only nation to design such a dangerous weapon clearing procedure.

Oh I don't know: the Russians are quite good at "dangerous to user" too....
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Rheged on March 20, 2013, 08:58:40 AM
Quote from: rickshaw on March 19, 2013, 05:34:16 PM
The actual reason was political.  The Conventional Forces in Europe arms reduction treaty considered anything with a gun bigger than 75mm towards the total for tanks which each signatory was allowed.  So, the choice was either a Scorpion with a 76mm gun or a Challenger with a 120mm gun.  Guess which won?

So that would account for the sudden demise of the Saladin armoured car?
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: pyro-manic on March 20, 2013, 10:50:08 AM
Quote from: Weaver on March 20, 2013, 05:58:39 AM
QuoteYeah, I've heard of RARDEN thumb - it's not a popular weapon for all sorts of reasons....

QuoteIt's interesting that the British would be the only nation to design such a dangerous weapon clearing procedure.

Oh I don't know: the Russians are quite good at "dangerous to user" too....

You'd think a simple stick would be better than using your thumb? Obviously call it something else, but it would just be a length of wood or metal you'd poke into the breech? Or is that too sensible? :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on March 20, 2013, 06:43:21 PM
Quote from: Rheged on March 20, 2013, 08:58:40 AM
Quote from: rickshaw on March 19, 2013, 05:34:16 PM
The actual reason was political.  The Conventional Forces in Europe arms reduction treaty considered anything with a gun bigger than 75mm towards the total for tanks which each signatory was allowed.  So, the choice was either a Scorpion with a 76mm gun or a Challenger with a 120mm gun.  Guess which won?

So that would account for the sudden demise of the Saladin armoured car?

The Saladin was gone from British service long before CFE.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on March 20, 2013, 06:51:46 PM
Quote from: Weaver on March 20, 2013, 06:43:21 PM
Quote from: Rheged on March 20, 2013, 08:58:40 AM
Quote from: rickshaw on March 19, 2013, 05:34:16 PM
The actual reason was political.  The Conventional Forces in Europe arms reduction treaty considered anything with a gun bigger than 75mm towards the total for tanks which each signatory was allowed.  So, the choice was either a Scorpion with a 76mm gun or a Challenger with a 120mm gun.  Guess which won?

So that would account for the sudden demise of the Saladin armoured car?

The Saladin was gone from British service long before CFE.

It was still held in War Emergency Reserve Stocks though, which is why there were a sudden glut of Saladins on the private market, along with many other "out of service" vehicles at the time.   They were still counted towards the totals for the Treaty.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: rickshaw on March 20, 2013, 06:55:53 PM
Quote from: pyro-manic on March 20, 2013, 10:50:08 AM
Quote from: Weaver on March 20, 2013, 05:58:39 AM
QuoteYeah, I've heard of RARDEN thumb - it's not a popular weapon for all sorts of reasons....

QuoteIt's interesting that the British would be the only nation to design such a dangerous weapon clearing procedure.

Oh I don't know: the Russians are quite good at "dangerous to user" too....

You'd think a simple stick would be better than using your thumb? Obviously call it something else, but it would just be a length of wood or metal you'd poke into the breech? Or is that too sensible? :rolleyes:

Too sensible.   A stick with a right-angle on the end.  Problem though, would be it would always be not where it's needed, when it's needed.  Lost, broken, stolen ("but it makes a wonderful stand for the Billy over the campfire!"  "Needed some kindling", etc.  :banghead: ).  Thumbs don't do that.  Soldiers, being soldiers, they'll always use the most convenient even if dangerous tool to do the job.   I'd have suggested a breech indicator - up, when something's in the breech, down when there isn't anything there.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: PR19_Kit on March 21, 2013, 02:10:49 AM
It was more an issue that the breech would close of it's own accord as there wasn't a manual lock to hold it back.

When we built the rig for Fort Halstead we had an auxiliary jack that positioned a damn great bar in front of some part of the weapon that stopped it closing even it tried. Working out the interlock chain to ensure the bar was retracted BEFORE we 'fired' it was an interesting exercise!  ;D
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: MAD on April 08, 2013, 01:59:45 AM
Quote from: rickshaw on December 07, 2011, 04:51:58 AM
Having had a bit of a hunt around I suspect its actually a Stormer 90 - which mounted a 90mm gun (although the first post's picture appears to be missing its muzzle brake.

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.army-guide.com%2Fimages%2Fstorm90_dfksjl1.jpg&hash=f693e2666514be9dbff1dc2ec62a36bc6b1c4e0a)

I would have said it was based on the AMX-10P APC chassis 

M.A.D
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on July 13, 2021, 11:57:46 AM
Another use for a Scorpion turret, this time on an 8x8 APC project from KADDB in Jordan.
I'm afraid I can't find out any more about this vehicle, so I presume it never got any further than pretty artwork.
The turret looks to be armed with a Russian 2A42 30mm cannon like the one they actually built (see earlier in this thread).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51310427035_15da254cc7_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: ysi_maniac on September 13, 2021, 01:57:04 PM
^^^^^
similarities??????

What if an 8 wheels Scorpion?

(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/Alvis_Scorpion_8w.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) (https://app.photobucket.com/u/ysi_maniac/a/e58f1c54-aee2-42c9-bc15-f72ec22af374/p/12ded9b7-2236-4a92-9a5d-a707f81f4d4b)
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on September 13, 2021, 04:48:50 PM
LOL - A Scorpion's only about the length of an LWB Landrover, so you could probably get away with a 4x4. The 8x8 would have wheels so small it'd be like the world's most heavily armed Supercat... ;D
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Logan Hartke on September 13, 2021, 08:31:40 PM
I had that same thought, Weaver, so I chose a smaller chassis, the YP-408, from closer to the time period of the CVR(T) family and scaled the turret to match, including a turret ring extension that considers the angled upper hull.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51470558756_2a38928917_b.jpg)

This would be a Dutch variant in place of the M113 C&V (also known as the Lynx or M113 ½). It would increase commonality with the Belgian and British armies and provide greater speed, strategic mobility, and firepower, albeit at the cost of greater size.

Also, I chose the Scimitar turret which I think is better fit and much better looking, but the Scorpion is still an option, too.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51471346969_f0aec8e100_b.jpg)

I'm calling it the YP-408 Pantserwiel Verkenning, abbreviated as YP-408 PWVK. I don't know about anybody else, but I like the looks of it more than the Bundeswehr's Spähpanzer Luchs of the same era.

Cheers,

Logan
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on May 27, 2022, 09:16:40 AM
Quote from: rickshaw on March 19, 2013, 05:34:16 PM
The actual reason was political.  The Conventional Forces in Europe arms reduction treaty considered anything with a gun bigger than 75mm towards the total for tanks which each signatory was allowed.  So, the choice was either a Scorpion with a 76mm gun or a Challenger with a 120mm gun.  Guess which won?

Just been reading the CFE Treaty here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/273132/2294.pdf

Doing so clarifies this point a little and makes it make more sense.

1. The Scorpion's 76mm gun did NOT make it count towards the number of 'battle tanks' under the treaty, because the definition of a 'battle tank' included an unladen weight of over 16.5 metric tons, and the Scorpion was comfortably less than half of that.

2. What the Scorpion's 76mm gun did get it was a classification as a 'heavy armament combat vehicle', i.e. anything over 6 metric tons with a gun over 75mm that didn't qualify as an 'armoured personnel carrier' or an 'armoured infantry fighting vehicle'. The Scorpion is specifically listed as a 'heavy armament combat vehicle' in a table defining the status of pre-existing systems.

3. Interestingly, the Scimitar isn't mentioned at all, even in a table of pre-existing equipment that is NOT covered by the treaty.

4. The treaty set separate limits on 'battle tanks' and 'armoured fighting vehicles' the latter category including 'armoured personnel carriers', 'armoured infantry fighting vehicles' and  'heavy armament combat vehicles'. This meant that NATO as a whole could have as many Scimitars & Sabres as they wanted, but every Scorpion came out of the treaty-limited pool of vehicles that included the FV432, the M113, the Warrior, the Bradley, the Marder etc... It's unlikely therefore that the Scorpion was retired in order to save British Army Challengers: it was retired in order to avoid restricting the numbers of Warriors, Bradleys, Marders et al across NATO as a whole.


Footnote: you might very well wonder where the BMP-3's 100mm gun got it, since, at 18.5 tonnes, the vehicle meets all the criteria for a 'battle tank'. The answer is that it was classified as an 'armoured infantry fighting vehicle', along with all the other BMPs, Bradleys, Warriors and Marders, in the table defining the status of existing systems. Presumably this was the outcome of some horse-trading in the negotiations. It does, however, open the door to the 'what-if' possibility of a Warrior fitted with a Scorpion turret and retaining capacity for dismounts (say 4) being permitted under the treaty.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Gondor on May 28, 2022, 08:10:28 AM
Quote from: Weaver on September 13, 2021, 04:48:50 PM
LOL - A Scorpion's only about the length of an LWB Landrover, so you could probably get away with a 4x4. The 8x8 would have wheels so small it'd be like the world's most heavily armed Supercat... ;D

Sounds as if your talking about the FV721 Fox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_armoured_reconnaissance_vehicle

Gondor
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Steel Penguin on May 28, 2022, 08:22:01 AM
id rather have the tracks, and not the desire to roll over, Fox as rather top heavy from what ive heard
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: NARSES2 on May 29, 2022, 02:34:43 AM
Quote from: Steel Penguin on May 28, 2022, 08:22:01 AM
id rather have the tracks, and not the desire to roll over, Fox as rather top heavy from what ive heard

I remember Fox more as being issued to the TA than regulars. But that may be that one of our local TA units was Fox equipped for a couple of years before it closed/amalgamated.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: PR19_Kit on May 29, 2022, 04:09:19 AM
Various suppliers were doing a LOT of development work on the Fox chassis parts in the mid-80s, I never did find out if they fixed it, but from the above comments I guess they didn't. :(
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Gondor on May 29, 2022, 04:12:39 AM
I remember the Old Airfix Magazine, A5 size one, haveing a scratch build article on building the Fox. 1970 something

Gondor
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on October 24, 2022, 06:53:51 AM
Stormer options graphic from 1982, posted on Twitter by Think Defence here:
https://twitter.com/thinkdefence/status/1584463125708828672?s=20&t=nsqdtlz2WYN_8ogxCy9pNA

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ff0kxTvX0AA1Nxy?format=jpg&name=medium)

The 'Air Defence' variant with what looks like a recoilless rifle has drawn some comment. I suspect it's a generic placeholder for a single-tube MANPADS like RBS-70 or Javelin.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Nick on October 24, 2022, 10:52:44 AM
The Assault Gun looks like a Fox turret with a larger cannon. Practically a Scorpion.

The Low Profile 75mm looks even meaner, I guess it's an artillery gun.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Mossie on October 24, 2022, 12:51:32 PM
Some of these went under the name Sagitar.  I posted in reply #15 but they've been photobucketed:
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/alvis-sagiter.3947/#post-31041

ARES 75mm gun
sagiter01.JPG

90mm Cockerill Mk.III gun
sagiter02.JPG

76mm L23A1 gun (Scorpion) with twin TOW launcher
sagiter03.JPG
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Rick Lowe on October 24, 2022, 03:31:54 PM
Quote from: Gondor on May 29, 2022, 04:12:39 AMI remember the Old Airfix Magazine, A5 size one, haveing a scratch build article on building the Fox. 1970 something

Gondor

Yeah - part of a series on building British Army vehicles at the time. Others were Stalwart, FV432, Humber Pig.
I still have that particular issue, and still intend to use it as a source of plans/ideas to build one, one day... I hasten to add I won't be building it out of 20 thou per the article, but hopefully adapting something else to make life easier.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Mossie on October 24, 2022, 11:37:02 PM
Quote from: Nick on October 24, 2022, 10:52:44 AMThe Assault Gun looks like a Fox turret with a larger cannon. Practically a Scorpion.

The Low Profile 75mm looks even meaner, I guess it's an artillery gun.

More on the 75mm gun on Secret Projects:
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/ares-xm274-75mm-automatic-cannon.37720/

ERvnyQYWkAI2kqT.jpg
ERvn2nXXUAYpdI7.jpg   

The low profile Sagitar should be quite easily bashable from two Scorpions, I've got two Airfix kits, but they're lost in the chaos that's my garage.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Nick on October 25, 2022, 06:57:40 AM
One of the first kits I recall building was the Airfix Scorpion. Fiddly even for a 10yo and the rubber tracks just would not stick together.

I saw one of those kits at the last Brampton show and they wanted £18 for it  :o

I still have an Action Man Scorpion but that's a bit big at 1/6 scale. Have to admit it'd look good done up with working tracks and an all new turret but it's not on my to-do list.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: NARSES2 on October 26, 2022, 06:16:55 AM
Quote from: Nick on October 25, 2022, 06:57:40 AMOne of the first kits I recall building was the Airfix Scorpion. Fiddly even for a 10yo and the rubber tracks just would not stick together.


I used to get my mum to sew them together when I was a nipper.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: ysi_maniac on November 01, 2022, 07:30:59 PM
I love ARES 75mm gun :wub:  :wub:  :wub:
Thanks for posting! :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Mossie on November 02, 2022, 03:29:18 AM
 :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Mossie on September 24, 2023, 03:21:17 AM
Some proposed Stormer variants:
274387149361191477.jpg

Stormer 30 prototype.  Ajax, eat your heart out.
stormer30_1.jpg

deu1xds-3a1faec5-8161-4837-b83b-c70b9237cb8d.jpg

Stormer_30_orugas_Vehículo_blindado.jpg
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Gondor on September 24, 2023, 03:48:04 AM
Quote from: Mossie on September 24, 2023, 03:21:17 AM274387149361191477.jpg


Have a look at the Scorpion 2 and then the image top right...... very similar

Gondor

Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Mossie on September 24, 2023, 04:13:58 AM
Yes, Scorpion 2 was built on an updated Spartan superstructure.  The Stormer is effectively a stretched Spartan.  I've got an AFV Club Scimitar on the go and it might be supplemented with a Gecko Models Scimitar 2.

Going off topic slightly, whiff wise it might worth considering what turrets to drop on APCs.  Most of them have at one time or other.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on September 24, 2023, 12:46:58 PM
Small batches of those Stormer APCs actually got built for Malaysia and Indonesia.

The 25 Malaysian ones had Helio FVT-series one-man turrets, 13 with two 7.62mm MGs and 12 with a 20mm cannon and a 7.62mm MG.
Some of the 40 Indonesian ones had pintle-mounted 0.50 cal M2HBs: I don't know if there were any other variants.


(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F_En-sxfOkXP8%2FSeClpp7jDRI%2FAAAAAAAAAhk%2F0NqSzkz8T3c%2Fs400%2FStormer%2BAPC.jpg&hash=c6bfc623972a20cef90df5bbd725a804461e6714)

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/b3/33/8b/b3338bb5960e5489d1453bf617853cbb.jpg)
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: NARSES2 on September 25, 2023, 06:17:22 AM
Stormer 30 looks good in that 4 colour camouflage scheme.
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on January 08, 2025, 07:22:50 PM
Scorpion hull fitted with a French SAMM S530 twin 20mm AAA turret. This was only a prototype, but the turret did see limited production: Venezuela bought a dozen mounted on Panhard AML 4x4 armoured car chassis in 1973.

EDIT: that rectangular thing at the back of the turret is a shared hatch over the commander and gunner's positions by the way, not a radar aerial.

(https://forum-en-cdn.warthunder.com/original/3X/2/8/2854a3c2dbb2eceb5c77afe1f67d9fad6306685e.png)
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: NARSES2 on January 09, 2025, 01:21:26 AM
Interesting  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: zenrat on January 09, 2025, 02:53:32 AM
Quote from: Weaver on January 08, 2025, 07:22:50 PMScorpion hull fitted with a French SAMM S530 twin 20mm AAA turret. This was only a prototype, but the turret did see limited production: Venezuela bought a dozen mounted on Panhard AML 4x4 armoured car chassis in 1973...

Perfect for crowd control...
Title: Re: Scorpion Family
Post by: Weaver on January 09, 2025, 10:34:39 AM
Quote from: zenrat on January 09, 2025, 02:53:32 AM
Quote from: Weaver on January 08, 2025, 07:22:50 PMScorpion hull fitted with a French SAMM S530 twin 20mm AAA turret. This was only a prototype, but the turret did see limited production: Venezuela bought a dozen mounted on Panhard AML 4x4 armoured car chassis in 1973...

Perfect for crowd control...

Yeah, well not much good for anti-aircraft: no search radar, daylight optical fire-control and the guns are GIAT M621s firing US pattern 20x102mm, so it'd have all the range issues of the Vulcan-armed M163 with half the fire rate and ammo supply. There's a pattern of third-world countries buying borderline-effective SPAAGs from the French: Gabon has a handful of 6x6 ERCs with a similar twin 20mm turret.

If you want a properly effective twin 20mm SPAAG from the French, you buy the VDA, which is based on the M3 4x4 APC chassis, and which has a radar and more powerful HS820 guns. Egypt bought a batch of these to put on M113s, and then subsequently re-armed them with Soviet Zu-23 23mm guns and 6 x SA-7 SAMs.