User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 1:15:47 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: IIRC back in the day they used to put cages around vehicles to detonate RPGs before they hit our vehicles. Seems like something like that may also protect tanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 1:16:15 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A small vehicle can sever links of drones in a large enough area and lasers are going to be available soon. Existing lasers can burn the cameras. Lots of options, soon if not now. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: LOL because throwing out a signal that powerful isn't like putting a spotlight on yourself at night in Minnesota farm country in the middle of July and wondering why you have a billion Mosquitoes after you. The amount of power required for that is basically the entire output of a nuclear powerplant. So not feasible for a lot of reasons. A small vehicle can sever links of drones in a large enough area and lasers are going to be available soon. Existing lasers can burn the cameras. Lots of options, soon if not now. Depends. You have to detect a bird sized drone that emits a teensy amount of heat from a thousand yards to a mile away. While possible, that's gonna be mighty hard. Could you throw out enough power that would allow you to detect something that small? Sure with enough power supply, sure you could, but again, that's a mighty big spotlight you have on yourself, Mr Scott... Something as simple as the higher end Mavic drones NOW are essentially invisible to radar, and the ones I have been inundated with investigations on lately are smaller than that with disturbingly high capability. I just had a guy whipping one around near Will Rogers airport that got everyone all excited and it could fit in your hand yet had binocular vision and the guy had an oculus rift headset and was flying it from his house. He said it had a ceiling of around 6000 feet. He ended up being legal, he wasn't flying it in classes airspace, but you know how everyone is about fucking drones these days. One of the systems I work on in the military is, essentially, what you're describing, but it takes the launch of a rocket engine in a SAM with an IR head in it to be able to detect it and that's a white hot plume of exploding gas that the system locks onto and, essentially, burns out the seeker head of the incoming missile. What I am getting at is that it takes a lot to detect things that are small like that, and small elusive drones are a REAL pain in the ass to find. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 1:17:14 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Isn't that what those stupid looking boxes on the Abrahms are for? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: IIRC back in the day they used to put cages around vehicles to detonate RPGs before they hit our vehicles. Seems like something like that may also protect tanks. Probably. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 1:30:42 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Isn't that what those stupid looking boxes on the Abrahms are for? That’s ERA, for shaped charges. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 1:33:53 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Depends. You have to detect a bird sized drone that emits a teensy amount of heat from a thousand yards to a mile away. While possible, that's gonna be mighty hard. Could you throw out enough power that would allow you to detect something that small? Sure with enough power supply, sure you could, but again, that's a mighty big spotlight you have on yourself, Mr Scott... A drone that’s a direct threat to an armored vehicle has to be able to lift at a minimum 2 pounds. Probably more. They are working on locating things via sound also. And if it uses a laser to designate a target that beam leads right back to it. And all your shit is going to be either expensive or need to be automated, since controlling a done that’s targeted by EW requires a lot of money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 3:00:22 AM EDT
[#6]
Tanks work with infantry support. The Germans figured this out first. By themselves tanks are super vulnerable in a near peer environment.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 6:04:32 AM EDT
[#7]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 9:43:01 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Probably one day every armored vehicle will have a hardened version of these on them https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/56596/F9474225-98EE-42B1-A939-1037DC3A2033_jpe-2337130.JPG Drones are going to make fighting cheaper for poor countries and more expensive for rich countries. Much more expensive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 9:52:19 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Drones are going to make fighting cheaper for poor countries and more expensive for rich countries. Much more expensive. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Probably one day every armored vehicle will have a hardened version of these on them https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/56596/F9474225-98EE-42B1-A939-1037DC3A2033_jpe-2337130.JPG Drones are going to make fighting cheaper for poor countries and more expensive for rich countries. Much more expensive. Yup. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 11:37:29 AM EDT
[#10]
In the not too distant future, you will see ISR drones mounted on tanks. The tank will be able to launch it and see what is in front of it with full FLIR capability, well beyond the distance that the threat can engage the tank.
The tank will be able to call in indirect fire on missile teams and similar dug in positions while still beyond their ability to engage. It will then roll through and use direct fire to eliminate any remaining enemy forces. Tactics.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 11:40:15 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Depends. You have to detect a bird sized drone that emits a teensy amount of heat from a thousand yards to a mile away. While possible, that's gonna be mighty hard. Could you throw out enough power that would allow you to detect something that small? Sure with enough power supply, sure you could, but again, that's a mighty big spotlight you have on yourself, Mr Scott... Something as simple as the higher end Mavic drones NOW are essentially invisible to radar, and the ones I have been inundated with investigations on lately are smaller than that with disturbingly high capability. I just had a guy whipping one around near Will Rogers airport that got everyone all excited and it could fit in your hand yet had binocular vision and the guy had an oculus rift headset and was flying it from his house. He said it had a ceiling of around 6000 feet. He ended up being legal, he wasn't flying it in classes airspace, but you know how everyone is about fucking drones these days. One of the systems I work on in the military is, essentially, what you're describing, but it takes the launch of a rocket engine in a SAM with an IR head in it to be able to detect it and that's a white hot plume of exploding gas that the system locks onto and, essentially, burns out the seeker head of the incoming missile. What I am getting at is that it takes a lot to detect things that are small like that, and small elusive drones are a REAL pain in the ass to find. Drones emit RF. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 11:44:44 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Drones emit RF. Either they do, or they are autonomous and download when they get back, or they are very expensive and use directional RF and other tricks to overcome EW. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 11:48:00 AM EDT
[#13]
seems like tanks are only used for clearing urban, suburban areas. clearing houses, apartment buildings, industrial areas, Aleppo-style warfare. sniper hides, RPG, anti-tank missile shooter hideouts. They're too vulnerable to drones and modern ATGM, easily targeted. significantly limits their value.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 11:52:40 AM EDT
[#14]
Seems similar arguments have been made about other "advanced" systems. Missiles made aircraft guns obsolete. The Abrams was trash and unproven. The Patriot system wouldn't work.
Tactics and proper use seems to be the greater reasons anti-tank weapons appear dominant. I recall the Soviet monkey model armor faring poorly during the Kuwait war. Perhaps their designs are not as robust as promoted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 11:56:58 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: seems like tanks are only used for clearing urban, suburban areas. clearing houses, apartment buildings, industrial areas, Aleppo-style warfare. sniper hides, RPG, anti-tank missile shooter hideouts. They're too vulnerable to drones and modern ATGM, easily targeted. significantly limits their value. Your evidence for this is Russians and former Soviet nations, and Muslims who part modern tanks alone in hilltops for days. Hmmmm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 12:28:43 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Either they do, or they are autonomous and download when they get back, or they are very expensive and use directional RF and other tricks to overcome EW. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Drones emit RF. Either they do, or they are autonomous and download when they get back, or they are very expensive and use directional RF and other tricks to overcome EW. It would have to use inertial guidance. If they are guided by GPS it can be jammed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 12:41:28 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It would have to use inertial guidance. If they are guided by GPS it can be jammed. Correct. Or terrain mapping or jam resistant GPS or using a camera and the sun or stars or or or…lots of options but it’s gets expensive fast. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 4:37:42 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yup. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Probably one day every armored vehicle will have a hardened version of these on them https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/56596/F9474225-98EE-42B1-A939-1037DC3A2033_jpe-2337130.JPG Drones are going to make fighting cheaper for poor countries and more expensive for rich countries. Much more expensive. Yup. UAS technology has lowered the cost of aerial observation and fires, making it affordable for the “common man” |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 5:51:22 PM EDT
[#19]
Javelin Strike on 3 Man Taliban Mortar Team
 Javelin Strike on 3 Man Taliban Mortar Team |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 5:54:20 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Drones emit RF. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Depends. You have to detect a bird sized drone that emits a teensy amount of heat from a thousand yards to a mile away. While possible, that's gonna be mighty hard. Could you throw out enough power that would allow you to detect something that small? Sure with enough power supply, sure you could, but again, that's a mighty big spotlight you have on yourself, Mr Scott... Something as simple as the higher end Mavic drones NOW are essentially invisible to radar, and the ones I have been inundated with investigations on lately are smaller than that with disturbingly high capability. I just had a guy whipping one around near Will Rogers airport that got everyone all excited and it could fit in your hand yet had binocular vision and the guy had an oculus rift headset and was flying it from his house. He said it had a ceiling of around 6000 feet. He ended up being legal, he wasn't flying it in classes airspace, but you know how everyone is about fucking drones these days. One of the systems I work on in the military is, essentially, what you're describing, but it takes the launch of a rocket engine in a SAM with an IR head in it to be able to detect it and that's a white hot plume of exploding gas that the system locks onto and, essentially, burns out the seeker head of the incoming missile. What I am getting at is that it takes a lot to detect things that are small like that, and small elusive drones are a REAL pain in the ass to find. Drones emit RF. Th... that's not really an answer. That's random spaghetti on the wall. So does literally every other piece of literally everything on every modern battlefield and at magnitudes far exceeding feedback loop inputs. Exactly how sensitive/selective is that equipment that it can pick up a drone at a mile that is transmitting in milliwatts, because I want in on the ground floor of that technology. Especially when each and every soldier around you is absolutely bathed in transmitters along that same frequency or resonances thereof, at substantially higher power, and you are still going to pick that one up? I don't think this works like you think this works. The antennas on the top of the tank would muck up any attempt at locating that drone, much less countering it, and you would still need to VISUALLY find it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 5:59:49 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, Russia just sucks at war and doesn't support their armor with infantry. This. Tanks should never go in unsupported by infantry. Infantry should be handling the ATGMs. Some tanks will still be destroyed by ATGMs anyway. That's warfare. The way the Ukrainians are kicking the shit out of Russian armor is indicative of poor tactics, not that tanks are suddenly obsolete. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 6:06:27 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Shouldn’t all American tanks be rocking an awesome “TROPHY” ANTI-ATGM system? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 7:49:41 PM EDT
[#23]
 Failed To Load Title |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 8:31:30 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. Tanks should never go in unsupported by infantry. Infantry should be handling the ATGMs. Some tanks will still be destroyed by ATGMs anyway. That's warfare. The way the Ukrainians are kicking the shit out of Russian armor is indicative of poor tactics, not that tanks are suddenly obsolete. Sure if you put your infantry 3+ miles in front of the tanks, which pretty much negates any usefulness tanks have. Loitering drones launched from dozens of miles away can blow the shit out of tanks. Tanks are obsolete. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 8:51:53 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sure if you put your infantry 3+ miles in front of the tanks, which pretty much negates any usefulness tanks have. Loitering drones launched from dozens of miles away can blow the shit out of tanks. Tanks are obsolete. You should probably tell militaries this and share a selection of YouTube videos with them so they can correct their misconceptions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 10:57:53 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You should probably tell militaries this and share a selection of YouTube videos with them so they can correct their misconceptions. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Sure if you put your infantry 3+ miles in front of the tanks, which pretty much negates any usefulness tanks have. Loitering drones launched from dozens of miles away can blow the shit out of tanks. Tanks are obsolete. You should probably tell militaries this and share a selection of YouTube videos with them so they can correct their misconceptions. Well in some ways he isn't really wrong. *RIGHT NOW* taking tanks up against American/British ATGM's, tanks out in the open especially puts them firmly in the land of obsolescence. Honestly, we are watching people who are for a large part entirely untrained civilians on foot exacting a butcher's bill upon armor that would make A10 guys rock hard. If you're taking on 2nd and 3rd world shit tier militaries, a tank is awesome. Up against what the Russians are up against? Not so much. Couple this with shit tier Russian logistics and tactics and you have a perfect recipe for armored disaster. What we are seeing on the ground right now is the equivalent of average infantry being given an anti tank sniper rifle that never misses. (In the case of the Javelin) Now if you're using tanks like the Israelis use the Merkava, as in within the confines of an urban slugfest up against a bunch of Muslim shitheels hey, tanks are awesome. As technology improves I can see tanks becoming battlefield relevant to dominant in the future, but right now? Infantry and air power are king |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 11:05:27 AM EDT
[#27]
build a weapon, build a defense against that weapon.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 11:12:26 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: When competent CAS turns the missile operators into pink mist, then tanks are GTG. Add in some aimed artillery / mortars and those missile operators will be long gone. Add in reactive armor that works... But all the Armchair generals will say "Oh, we are all EXPERTS now, since we watched UKR defeat Russia from our Lazybois and know what to do!!!" LMFAO, go drink another beer and mow your lawn. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 11:24:46 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: IIRC back in the day they used to put cages around vehicles to detonate RPGs before they hit our vehicles. Seems like something like that may also protect tanks. They still do it today. Cope cages. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 11:33:51 AM EDT
[#30]
Tanks right now are in a similar lifecycle phase as battleships were at the start of WWII. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 11:41:02 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sure if you put your infantry 3+ miles in front of the tanks, which pretty much negates any usefulness tanks have. Loitering drones launched from dozens of miles away can blow the shit out of tanks. Tanks are obsolete. k |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 11:43:25 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well in some ways he isn't really wrong. *RIGHT NOW* taking tanks up against American/British ATGM's, tanks out in the open especially puts them firmly in the land of obsolescence. Honestly, we are watching people who are for a large part entirely untrained civilians on foot exacting a butcher's bill upon armor that would make A10 guys rock hard. If you're taking on 2nd and 3rd world shit tier militaries, a tank is awesome. Up against what the Russians are up against? Not so much. Couple this with shit tier Russian logistics and tactics and you have a perfect recipe for armored disaster. What we are seeing on the ground right now is the equivalent of average infantry being given an anti tank sniper rifle that never misses. (In the case of the Javelin) Now if you're using tanks like the Israelis use the Merkava, as in within the confines of an urban slugfest up against a bunch of Muslim shitheels hey, tanks are awesome. As technology improves I can see tanks becoming battlefield relevant to dominant in the future, but right now? Infantry and air power are king If the US was pushing Ukraines shit in right now there would be Abrams losses but we would not be talking about the tank being obsolete. Ukraine is begging for tanks though, because they need them to attack. It’s still critical. You can fight a delaying action with ATVs and Javelins but the combined arms breach that makes the US so stunningly effective requires armor even today. Even if you’ll lose some. Look at the early war in Ukraine. Their formations got heavier and heavier to match the realities of that war. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 11:46:16 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Tanks right now are in a similar lifecycle phase as battleships were at the start of WWII. Bullshit. Naval and land warfare don’t overlap that much. Battleships aren’t required to hold the sea. You can do that with other ships and to a lesser extent even aircraft. But on land you have to physically occupy ground to hold it, and to take it you pretty much need tanks. Airpower won’t do it. Airpower does very little without ground troops to either force the enemy to mass or to exploit its unwillingness to mass. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 11:51:01 AM EDT
[#34]
Drone tanks that are able to take multiple hits with active countermeasures will be important battlefield tools in the future.
Any platform that is able to have a big gun will always be useful with combined arms. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 11:54:51 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bullshit. Naval and land warfare don’t overlap that much. Battleships aren’t required to hold the sea. You can do that with other ships and to a lesser extent even aircraft. But on land you have to physically occupy ground to hold it, and to take it you pretty much need tanks. Airpower won’t do it. Airpower does very little without ground troops to either force the enemy to mass or to exploit its unwillingness to mass. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Tanks right now are in a similar lifecycle phase as battleships were at the start of WWII. Bullshit. Naval and land warfare don’t overlap that much. Battleships aren’t required to hold the sea. You can do that with other ships and to a lesser extent even aircraft. But on land you have to physically occupy ground to hold it, and to take it you pretty much need tanks. Airpower won’t do it. Airpower does very little without ground troops to either force the enemy to mass or to exploit its unwillingness to mass. Life cycle phase, not application. In this context, you wouldn’t want to stand toe to toe with either a battle ship or a tank. Both are still relevant in their intended application, but their intended application isn’t much of a reality anymore. Fleets of battleships weren't going to slug it out anymore; aircraft became the primary weapon of navies. Same with tanks. Both have/had cheaper technologies that can kill them, and those technologies are improving at a rate faster than their own improvement rate. The sun was setting on the age of the battleship at the beginning of WWII, and it’s setting on the tank now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 12:07:40 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Life cycle phase, not application. In this context, you wouldn’t want to stand toe to toe with either a battle ship or a tank. Both are still relevant in their intended application, but their intended application isn’t much of a reality anymore. Fleets of battleships weren't going to slug it out anymore; aircraft became the primary weapon of navies. Same with tanks. Both have/had cheaper technologies that can kill them, and those technologies are improving at a rate faster than their own improvement rate. The sun was setting on the age of the battleship at the beginning of WWII, and it’s setting on the tank now. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Tanks right now are in a similar lifecycle phase as battleships were at the start of WWII. Bullshit. Naval and land warfare don’t overlap that much. Battleships aren’t required to hold the sea. You can do that with other ships and to a lesser extent even aircraft. But on land you have to physically occupy ground to hold it, and to take it you pretty much need tanks. Airpower won’t do it. Airpower does very little without ground troops to either force the enemy to mass or to exploit its unwillingness to mass. Life cycle phase, not application. In this context, you wouldn’t want to stand toe to toe with either a battle ship or a tank. Both are still relevant in their intended application, but their intended application isn’t much of a reality anymore. Fleets of battleships weren't going to slug it out anymore; aircraft became the primary weapon of navies. Same with tanks. Both have/had cheaper technologies that can kill them, and those technologies are improving at a rate faster than their own improvement rate. The sun was setting on the age of the battleship at the beginning of WWII, and it’s setting on the tank now. The life cycle you speak of isn’t comparable for this reason: a battleship must present itself close to the enemy to do its work, like a tank. But you can control ocean space from a distance. You cannot control the ground from the air. That’s been promised for literally a century but absent nuclear weapons it’s never proven true. You must physically occupy ground to control it. To do that you must overcome resistance. There is a fantasy that in future war both sides will fight with drones and then one side will withdraw and the other side will advance their light infantry to hold the other drone operators station. That’s not realistic. You still need a tool that can shrug off all but the closest of artillery, and masses of RPGs, and small arms, and break enemy lines. If you don’t have such a tool you can always surrender your territory, harass the enemy as they advance, and then sue for piece from your rump state. Which will be the position Ukraine would be in without tanks. Furthermore the tank is now receiving systems to shoot down missiles and drones and in the future those systems will only improve. The ability to shoot down missiles and planes did not make the battleship relevant again, because it’s fundamentally different. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 1:15:15 PM EDT
[#37]
Two things.
1. Has it been said even a basic level of tank tactical movement would do wonders to save Russian Tanks in this conflict? A convoy column is probably the most vulnerable formation they could take. 2. This is yet another Armor thread where I can push my concept of a lighter faster assault tank. Basically an armored vehicle that's less MBT and more fast strike weapon platform. Something that has the speed and off road capability of buggy with enough armor to tank an IED/Landmine and light missile strike. But with the direct fire capability close to that of an MBT. With a small 2-3 man crew. Basically something like this but less sci-fi.  Or the batmobile with a functional turret.  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 1:19:49 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sure if you put your infantry 3+ miles in front of the tanks, which pretty much negates any usefulness tanks have. Loitering drones launched from dozens of miles away can blow the shit out of tanks. Tanks are obsolete. I bet those loitering drones are great at taking and holding ground. Jk |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 1:22:36 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Two things. 1. Has it been said even a basic level of tank tactical movement would do wonders to save Russian Tanks in this conflict? A convoy column is probably the most vulnerable formation they could take. 2. This is yet another Armor thread where I can push my concept of a lighter faster assault tank. Basically an armored vehicle that's less MBT and more fast strike weapon platform. Something that has the speed and off road capability of buggy with enough armor to tank an IED/Landmine and light missile strike. But with the direct fire capability close to that of an MBT. With a small 2-3 man crew. Basically something like this but less sci-fi. https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/H6d90092a3ff24285b513e4c9eee41ef1i/Bandai-Original-Anime-Figure-HG-1-48-86-REGINLEIF-KURENA-ANJU-USE-Action-Figure-Toys-for.jpg_Q90.jpg_.webp Or the batmobile with a functional turret. https://i.ytimg.com/vi/5W-MohbsXPA/maxresdefault.jpg Rooikat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 1:31:46 PM EDT
[#40]
Javelin was first, but I think a few fire-and-forget man-portable ATGMs are out there now. And the dread Turks have shown that useful UAVs aren't restricted to the West/Israel/etc. NLAW also has a few copy cats out there.
No doubt the Russians are just fucking up more than usual, but the Turks lost about a dozen Leopard 2s in Syria. Older models, but not THAT old. Modern MBTs are gonna have harder time out there from here on out, unless there is some revolution in APS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 1:33:31 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Javelin was first, but I think a few fire-and-forget man-portable ATGMs are out there now. And the dread Turks have shown that useful UAVs aren't restricted to the West/Israel/etc. NLAW also has a few copy cats out there. No doubt the Russians are just fucking up more than usual, but the Turks lost about a dozen Leopard 2s in Syria. Older models, but not THAT old. Modern MBTs are gonna have harder time out there from here on out, unless there is some revolution in APS. Turks purged their officer corps and then drove tanks into a city without infantry like it was grozny or something. Don’t read too much into that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 1:43:18 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Rooikat. Smaller than that. Basically right below Rooikat, Styker, Bradley, and the like. But slightly bigger than this.  With the survivability based on the design philosophy of the husky. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 1:45:14 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In this context, you wouldn’t want to stand toe to toe with either a battle ship or a tank. A BB wouldn't last 10 minutes against anything from a frigate on up because of missiles. Hell, you can kill one with a missile launched from a truck. It doesn't work like that on land, though. Not yet anyway. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 1:46:13 PM EDT
[#44]
You’re going to have mobility issues if it’s less than 8x8, and you’re definitely not putting a full size gun in something less than 6x6.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:09:21 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You’re going to have mobility issues if it’s less than 8x8, and you’re definitely not putting a full size gun in something less than 6x6. Definitely not full size gun. Something medium with rocket/ missile systems to supplement However, if a fully modular system is possible it would be three major components. Crew section, Turrent/weapons section, Drive train section (Which will be more like a frame for the other two). Then a 4, 6, and 8 wheel drive train frames would be possible allowing for larger armaments depending on specific unit requirements. 4 wheel frames for non armed, convoy security. 6 wheel for scout, light infantry, and light strike deployment. 8 wheel for heavier fire support and hard target destruction. Also a possibility for a light track frame if it could be implemented in a sensible manner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:17:09 PM EDT
[#46]
Those things don’t go together. You’d need a family of vehicles but they wouldn’t be modular in that sense.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:24:15 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Tanks are an important part of combined arms. When used properly. Russia is historically known for not using them properly. As a layman, this is the term that I've always heard being used. Infantry, air support, tanks, ect., all working together and providing defense for each other. A tank is still part of that scenario, and the threat to a tank goes way down when you have infantry and air support covering them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:30:22 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Define special forces tactics. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I don't know that you can breach enemy defenses with tanks knowing there are Javelins, NLAWS, Matadors, etc. I personally think tanks are going the way of the battleship as tactics continue to favor special forces tactics. Define special forces tactics. Throwing a knife or axe while doing a front flip off a mini-trampoline. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 3:00:11 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Those things don’t go together. You’d need a family of vehicles but they wouldn’t be modular in that sense. No not completely modular. The crew compartment would be the only part interchangeable between all frames. With the fames being more for the armaments themselves with a handful of armament options. However, that is more of a pipe dream. The core concept is more similar to that of the Daimler Armored Car. But designed from the ground up with modern technology. Mostly armaments that would allow a smaller vehicle to deliver a credible threat to a tank, building, or aircraft. So a large part of keeping it in the fight is it's smaller size and high mobility.  Tank Chats #37 Daimler Armoured Car | The Tank Museum Or to put it another way. modern ordinance may not make the tank obsolete. But the idea of a slow heavy MBT seems less useful against it. Where a faster lighter platform more dependent on advanced electronic systems and speed for its survival may be a better fit in the future for getting tank firepower to the battlefield. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 5:55:41 PM EDT
[#50]
Might be a bit early to write an obituary for MBTs. Let's see how the battle goes by Russia against the heart of the Ukraine army that is facing Donbass. It's said Russia is bringing more forces in theatre. Expect to see a Russian force of 250,000 spearheaded by the 1st Guards Tank Army, 2nd Motor Rifle division and the 4th Tank guards division.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File