This article is within the scope of the Ground Units WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve BattleTechWiki's coverage of non-BattleMech ground units. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

This article has been flagged for review by the Project: Ground Units team. If you have reviewed this article, please remove the tr parameter from this template.

Updated the Variants section with newer information. I'm not satisfied with the last sentence. First time using the references/bookmarks function. Comments? — The preceding unsigned comment was provided by Jherbert2 (talkcontribs) 23:34, 27 March 2010.

Does the Trellshire version have a designation (maybe from a record sheet? As for the last line, maybe something like, "Considering the SturmFeur's less-than-average speed..." But, it reads fine to me. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 11:52, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Its a perfectly nice sentence, no objections here from my part... although you could argue, that there are virtually no assault-class tanks that have great speed, even the Destroyer, being THE most typical close-range brawler ever been, tops out at 54. Also, its not like the tank has no ranged weaponry at all, like a Typhoon or something, so that's probably all fine...:D RagTag 11:56, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
As an old battletech fan who thinks that Fire Support consist of 2 Doombud LRM-20 racks it hurts me to see them do much at all to the Sturmfeur. The whole "heavy gauss" thing makes me sick. *sigh* You should also look at the Long Tom Artillery (Combat Vehicle) page. I could use some help for that as well. --Jherbert2 22:27, 28 March 2010 (UTC)


I rewrote all the text except for the HGR variant because it had been taken, almost verbatim, from TRO:3026r and TRO:3039. --Scaletail 16:32, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

JH, take a look at Scaletail's edits. I talked you thru my method (on your talk page) and I know you had the intention of updating, but plagiarism concerns remain a top issue for Admins; I'm not surprised by his course on this one. Please continue to contribute. I think someone with your level of interest would be most beneficial. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 20:21, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
I love his edits. They give me inspiration on how to contribute future articles, like re-writing the Long Tom Artillery (Combat Vehicle) page I put up earlier. I could use some help for that as well.I've noticed a dearth of vehicle updates. Considering BattleMechs are the king of the battlefield I'm not overly surprised. I appreciate his help! --Jherbert2 22:24, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome. Jh, I saw on your discussion with Rev, so I assumed you were getting around to it. Thank you both for your praise. The combat vehicle project is much newer than the 'Mech project, which is why it is less complete. I did a lot of them, but I've gotten rather burned out. --Scaletail 22:40, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Good person to make your pitch to for the project, Scaletail!--Revanche (talk|contribs) 22:42, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Kalki Cruise Missile Launcher[edit]

Hi guys, i know this early, but might well get this out of the way. I think the Kakli should split from SturmFeur due to fact is radically a differient vehicle. It origin is from Kakli, but i don't think it should be considered a variant. Seperate Article when it comes out of the Moratorium? -- Wrangler 23:59, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

On this I agree. It warranted its own name, and not because it was a one-off (like individual 'Mechs).--Revanche (talk|contribs) 00:40, 13 July 2011 (UTC)