APC Bay

[boilerman]

I'm looking for opinions, not on the artist merit of the pic, if it has any but on the arrangement.  I know we have some military types that may have spent some time in APCs so their opinions would be especially appreciated. 
So is the infantry bay too crowded or could I fit the soldiers in tighter?  The model, of course, is not my work but it is close to average human male height (5 feet 9 inches, at least in the USA).

The layout as shown is for a 35 ton APC carrying 28 infantry and a 3 man crew.  The grey area is space for the engine and perhaps a turret.  I think I need to extend the length of the vehicle to increase the area for those items.  The open section between the crew (forward) and the infantry bay is for access between the 2 spaces.  I was thinking that I might put a medic plus his station there, .25 tons for the paramedic equipment and use  some of the remain mass from the infantry platoon for the medic: if not that then a space for the platoon leader for command and control etc.

So what are your opinions?

[Marxman]

i think it is a little too crowded. You want your soldiers to be able to board an unboard as quick as possible. I say use half the room between the sections for the seats you now have placed in the middle of the vihicle. put the equipment storage above their heads. kinda like in an airliner where you have storage room above your seats. Your soldiers will have most equipment at hand. all es is rather small and might fit in such discribed storage. Bigger items would be placed between the seatrows for grabbing while unboarding.
However,
Im realy pleased to see some people care about internal arangement.  [rockon]

[Falchion]

Needs more spacing. How do you expect a platoon of infantry in full battle-rattle to fit like that?

[Brainburn]

I would have the inner rows facing the outer rows.

So you would have the outer rows (facing inward) knee to knee with the inner rows (facing outward).
Total of 4 rows in 2 sets.
You can get a bunch of guys with that config in full battle-rattle. too easy.
Rucks/packs go on the knees or above them.
You can empty a vehicle in seconds..

If it were me.. I would drop two guys off of each row (8 total per row X 4 = 32 troops) allowing for extra elbow room.
I have also seen configs that have a ruck/cargo space between the rows (center line of the vehicle). Have to grab them prior to deploying though. maybe 5 minutes out or so..

Make sense?
Brainburn

[Demon55]

I would put them as a single inward facing row on each side. 

[boilerman]

Thanks for the comments guys.  Yes, I was thinking I made that first bay too cramped.  The arrangement was just part of a brainstorm session and an attempt to keep the size of the bay from growing too large.  I've been using the M1 Abrams as a size standard, which is approximately 3.5m wide with a hull length of about 8m.  The M1 is very large for an armored vehicle.  In comparison the USMC Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle is 3.7m by 9.3m, half the mass of the M1 and carries 17 soldiers plus a 3-man crew.  With those as a reality check it's obvious a standard BT infantry platoon carrier is going to be huge for an armored vehicle.

Brainburn I like the 4 row layout but with with .5m wide aisles it is as wide as it is long - 4m.  Below is a compromise with 3 rows but with the center row seats alternating its facing.  This arrangement reduces bay width to 3.25m and increases length to 5m for 29 infantry soldiers.

[boilerman]

I like the 2 row arrangement but it to creates some large vehicles.  A bay with 2 rows for 14 soldiers each is 7 meters long, although you can get width down to less than 3m.  That will make for quite a long vehicle.  I'm leaning toward the 3 row layout for a turret equipped APC and a 2 row layout for a turret-less design more like the canon heavy APC.

[Takiro]

Would 4 7 trooper compartments work?

[GBscientist]

From the exterior pictures of the Heavy APCs, it looked to me like the crew compartment was above the passenger compartment.  I hope that helps with your spacing problems.

[boilerman]

Would 4 7 trooper compartments work?

It's a possibility, I don't like the idea of separate compartments but it's worth a look.  I've actually come up with a single open bay with 4 rows. I will try to post it this weekend.

Interesting interpretation GBs. I always thought of the crew compartment of the heavy APC sitting above the engine.  If the infantry compartment extends below the crew compartment it would have to be a truly massive vehicle, that would put the vehicle at around 4 to 5  meters tall, of course it would have to be massive to haul 56 infantry too.

[Demon55]

Another idea for you is a row of seats back to back.  The one where they are facing opposite and are next to each other seems like a good way for them to snag each others equipment.

[boilerman]

Yes, that is a serious flaw D55. 

I think I have the layout that works about as good as any I can put  together.  It carries 30 soldiers in 4 rows, the outer 2 have seating for 8 each and the inner rows have seating for 7 each.  Each soldier's seat is 0.5 m wide and with storage beneath.  The aisles are 0.8m wide so there is some leg room and I think enough for hasty egress for the platoon.  Note that I staggered the seating so that soldiers aren't as likely to be nose-to-nose when they stand up.

Although the seats are more like benches than buckets I see each soldier having his own seat with a 4 point restraint similar to what is seen today in a lot of the mine resistant vehicles being deployed by various militaries.  Overall the bay needs 3.5m by 4m to fit within an armored vehicle.  The APC I'm working on this for will be about 4m wide so there will be some space behind the outer rows of seating but I'm sure the bay will be cramped.  The majority of a soldier's nonessential gear will be hung outside the vehicle's hull in their rucksack. That is the common practice these days to save space inside. 

[GBscientist]

It's a possibility, I don't like the idea of separate compartments but it's worth a look.  I've actually come up with a single open bay with 4 rows. I will try to post it this weekend.

Interesting interpretation GBs. I always thought of the crew compartment of the heavy APC sitting above the engine.  If the infantry compartment extends below the crew compartment it would have to be a truly massive vehicle, that would put the vehicle at around 4 to 5  meters tall, of course it would have to be massive to haul 56 infantry too.

Given that vehicles can hide behind anything less than 6 meters tall, a vehicle 4 to 5 meters tall is not implausible in BattleTech.  Given the massive weapon loads of many assault vehicles, vast dimensions don't seem at all out of place.

[Jackmc]

I think if I had my druthers, I'd go with a four row arrangement with the center two rows back to back; however, each seat would have one side on a pivot so that when the vehicle was in motion, you had 7 four seat rows in order to orientate the troops with the primary axis of the forces.  That'll minimize fatigue and queasiness.

Also, I'd probably only have the driver down in the hull and consolidate the TC and gunner into one station in the turret for the better POV.

also, with a standardized backpack, it shuld be possible to design the seatback into a padded open frame to allow troopers to sitdown without having to remove their packs.

-Jackmc

     

[boilerman]

Given that vehicles can hide behind anything less than 6 meters tall, a vehicle 4 to 5 meters tall is not implausible in BattleTech.  Given the massive weapon loads of many assault vehicles, vast dimensions don't seem at all out of place.

Very true.

Jackmc I doubt most soldiers are going to want to ride around with their rucksacks on.  I like your swiveling seat idea but that, I think, would add to the volume required for the bay to insure a  reasonable amount off leg room for the soldiers.

[Jackmc]

Jackmc I doubt most soldiers are going to want to ride around with their rucksacks on.

If the seat is designed right, it supports the backpack so that there's no strain on the wearer, I've seen similar setups on airplanes which frquently hauled jumpers.  It's nice.

  I like your swiveling seat idea but that, I think, would add to the volume required for the bay to insure a  reasonable amount off leg room for the soldiers.

If the pivot is directly under one side of the seat, then there's plenty of room.  The swing of the seat would be equal to the width of the seat.  Your example used a 3.25 meter width.  If you give each seat 0.71 meters that leaves you with 41 cm to house the drive assembly for the center seats.  A seat size of 71 cm is 28 inches.  The average male shoulder width is around 20 inches so plenty wide, and assumeing about 28 inches of seat pitch puts the average male with just enough leg room unless to sit comfortably if they don't have to get up or down (which they wouldn't in that position).  Now if you you're willing to cough up 0.5 meters more of length, you can add almost another three inches of leg room which will allow you to accomodate even tall people and will seem positively spacious to a person of average inseam.

That's not to mention that you can also squeeze out a few more inches of leg room do to the dead space under the seat in front of you.

-Jackmc