51 replies to this topic

[Kalimaster]

Never seen the T28 before. 4 tracks. Neat.

[StompingOnTanks]

I wish we still built big supertanks like that. Sadly tanks aren't considered as important as they were during WWII.

[StompingOnTanks]

Marack Drock, on 09 February 2015 - 12:47 PM, said:

That's because they became outdated. Way better stuff out there. Plus not exactly hard to blown one up. They are kind of big and Jets and planes now have the weapons to take those things out (like the A-10 Warthog which is also labelled Tank Killer). The things are just huge, slow, missile targets now.

I would actually like to have a discussion with you about this, as I disagree about tanks being obsolete. With stealth tech, anti-missile systems, modern armor and the latest weapons coming out (railguns and lasers), I think that tanks are going to become more deadly then ever.

Invisibility to tracking and lock on systems, armor that can defeat anti-tank guns and even handheld infantry rocket launchers (my ex-military friends have told me plenty of stories about how they do), missile defense systems that destroy Hellfires and Javelins before they even hit the tank, and main guns that are longer ranged and more powerful than ever means that the tank is here to stay, I think.

It will probably become smaller, cheaper, and autonomous, like everything else in the military is, but I really don't think tanks are going anywhere.

[StompingOnTanks]

Marack Drock, on 09 February 2015 - 06:49 PM, said:

(Shortened so as to take up less space)

You make a good point about tanks being immobilized, but I think you may misunderstand how tough tanks actually are.

An acquaintance of mine who was in the military told me a story about how an M1A1 Abrams tank had its engine deck blown out by an RPG. A lucky shot had hit the exhaust vents in the back of the tank and shrapnel ruined the engine, even through the tank itself survived. (For the record, getting hit in the back isn't something that happens often in real combat because tanks have air, infantry, and other tanks protecting their sides and back). So, not wanting to waste a perfectly good tank hull, they towed it back to their base to use as target practice for their anti-tank weapons and .50 cal machine guns.

They shot at the tank for months and months with .50 cals, LAW and SMAW rockets (the American equivalent of an RPG but much more powerful), and not one shot made it through the front or sides of the tank. Yeah, RPGs and .50 caliber machine guns will burn through a tank hull eventually from pure metal fatigue, but not nearly fast enough to save you from being blown to pieces by the cannon.

Also, machine guns with grenade launcher attachments? You mean like the M4A1 and its M203 launcher?



The tank crew would literally be laughing it off.

Edited by StompingOnTanks, 09 February 2015 - 07:20 PM.

[Hex Pallett]

Marack Drock, on 09 February 2015 - 08:37 PM, said:

Um, yeah, those are WWII era weapons. A modern tank crew wouldn't even laugh it off. They wouldn't even feel it.

[Kalimaster]

Anti-Tank weapons are a factor, but here is one factor that people still forget about. The Fear factor. When tanks arrived on the field of war during WW I, troops took off and ran! The same thing could happen today if a tank was big enough and looked scary enough, front line troops would simply run away. The tank was built originally to deal with machine gun nests, a static threat. Now tanks fight tanks. The British challenger can reach speeds of over 40 mph, and for an armored Goliath, that's pretty damn good. Still I have to admit, I like the look of the T28.

I was in the military briefly, never really saw any action because of my post. Did more push-ups than anything else or marched an the parade grounds for the brass. Others, including someone I considered a friend at the time, went over. When he came back, he wasn't the same. His whole personality had changed, and his health had deteriorated. Despite my being little more than a shelf-boy I loved the aspect of armor.

[Hex Pallett]

Marack Drock, on 10 February 2015 - 06:28 AM, said:

Woops lol. Need to go find the new ones. Curse Google Images.

The reason Google is showing you WWII AT-rifles is because in modern warfare they basically don't exist. I've heard of a few 20mm anti-material rifles out there but the rest of the world basically go only as far as .50 cal, and I'm pretty sure none of those would penetrate modern tank armor. Anti-material rifles are heavy, will NOT penetrate tanks, requires extensive training, and most importantly, expensive. I bet you could buy a whole crate of RPGs for the price of a Barrett's scope alone.

[TheSilken]

The Merkava laughs at your anti-tank rifles and RPGs, the thing is a f*cking beast. Even the M1A2 Abrams ain't got nothing on it if it's in its native land of Israel.


This monster, however, has a good chance of it

Edited by TheSilken, 10 February 2015 - 07:57 AM.

[StompingOnTanks]

TheSilken, on 10 February 2015 - 07:51 AM, said:

The Merkava laughs at your anti-tank rifles and RPGs, the thing is a f*cking beast. Even the M1A2 Abrams ain't got nothing on it if it's in its native land of Israel.


This monster, however, has a good chance of it

Until a Zaku shows up.

[TheSilken]

Actually the "Semovente" team did use the M61A5 Heavy Tank (seen above as the bottom pick) to great effect during that war and could stand up to a Zaku and Zaku Tank 1v1. Now the Zaku II required several of these monsters but again it shouldn't be too much trouble

Moar M61A5 goodness

Edited by TheSilken, 10 February 2015 - 08:16 AM.

[ORCRiST]

Gentlemen, MBTs are not going anywhere and nations around the world are constantly looking toward the future of armored combat.

One such vision is this, the PL-01 Concept:



Although I wouldn't put any stock in 'ArmedForcesUpdate' a well-known Russian troll who laughingly thinks Russian hardware can hold a candle to anything in the West - the PL-01 is a joint concept design from Polish and English companies. (And yes its 'real' you can find other videos of it driving around, although at this stage in its development its probably just a rolling 'shell' meant for demonstrations and conventions.)

Edited by ORCRiST, 10 February 2015 - 11:16 AM.

[Hex Pallett]

/thread

Edited by Helmstif, 10 February 2015 - 11:40 AM.

[S3dition]

Tanks aren't obsolete, they're situational. It takes a lot of money and time to ship them around the world and they need infantry and air support. The current generation of tanks has been around for 30+ years now with only an upgrade to the gun and FCS/Ballistic Computer. The T90 is currently the newest tank, and Russia already plans to replace it within the next ~15 years.

Given the advancements in railgun, solid state laser, and graphene technology (look them up, especially graphene. Cool stuff), the tank is due for a hardcore revival.

Obviously air power is going to win against any modern tanks. But air power wins against anything but other air power. Even ground based AA batteries have become a bit of a joke for modern air forces. Stealth and ECM has rendered it virtually obsolete.

However, there are a lot of things aircraft can't do. Open doors being among them:

[TheSilken]

That stealth tank is probably too expensive to actually use as a Main Battle Tank for ground forces and despite its stealth is still very easily spotted and thus destroyed. I don't see much use for it outside of very specialized missions that take place at night.

[ORCRiST]

TheSilken, on 10 February 2015 - 01:46 PM, said:

That stealth tank is probably too expensive to actually use as a Main Battle Tank for ground forces and despite its stealth is still very easily spotted and thus destroyed. I don't see much use for it outside of very specialized missions that take place at night.

Since the dawn of time, you first must detect an enemy before you can destroy them.

You obviously don't have a military background, so let me explain. How is stealth anything 'very easily spotted'? That's what's called a misnomer. Seeing as, you know, its designed not to be detected? Is the black color throwing you off, because you know you can paint it in whatever camo you want - or leave it black and install a Barracuda MCS. It's smaller and lighter than current generation MBT's, so is very likely cheaper once in production. Do you know what an 'Active Protection' system is? It means fire all the missiles/projectiles you want at it, it shoots them down before hitting the vehicle. That's assuming of course, that the firing platform can even lock a weapon system on to it in the first place. Active Protection is here to stay, its cheap and its small. You can even mount it on something like a Hummer. The days of a man-portable system even threatening an armored vehicle will soon be over. The Israeli Trophy system (one of many being tested) has been combat proven on the Merkava (and other vehicles) for a couple of years now.

Operating at night means nothing to a modern army anymore. It hasn't for the last 40 years (unless you're a bunch of poor terrorists running around in a jungle or desert without modern equipment). In modern warfare Night=Day, Day=Night.

Edited by ORCRiST, 10 February 2015 - 02:34 PM.

[ORCRiST]

Wow.

Obvious troll is obvious.

[Kalimaster]

LOL. Loved the clip with the tank being used as an over-sized door knocker. The models of the double barreled monsters are nice also.

[GonaDie]

Tanks are useless.Time for Mechs

[TheSilken]

Stealth is expensive man. Look at how many Stealth aircraft we have, less than 100 in total. The costs to mount a tank with stealth armor would be even greater assuming that the armor doesn't have just a stealth coating. Also it is easy to see, it's a tank. They aren't exactly hard to notice. Big, loud, shakes the ground, this tends to be noticeable. By the way I know more about the Israeli tech than you do assuming that you don't live in Israel. Their system is amazing, however, I doubt that the Poles and Brits would have anything remotely close to its effectiveness. Bottom line this stealth tank will never be a Main Battle Tank because its too complicated to be mass produced. And if it were to be mass produced then the quality of its stealth would have to be diminished in order to meet quotas. Even if somehow it is able to be mass produced while keeping its stealth, not that I trust Polish and British "stealth", you do realize that anti-stealth systems are starting to appear right? I give this tank maybe 20 years max assuming everything about it goes according to what you say.

Btw not trolling just saying that I don't see any cost effective reason for making this.

Another thought just occurred to me, this thing is supposed to be stealthy right? Then why is it that there is a video of this thing, especially as a concept? All of the good stealth units are designed and produced in secret. Look at the F-117, B-2, and the F-22, all made without any knowledge being shown to the public. Then there is the F-35, shown to the public, which turns out to suck compared to the F-22 the fighter it was meant to replace. See the trend? All of the good stuff is kept secret, all of the let downs are made public.

Edited by TheSilken, 11 February 2015 - 06:54 AM.

[TheSilken]

Yet another thought. In a defensive role lying in ambush, where movement is not an issue, a group of these could be used effectively to surprise an opposing force since seismic sensors would not be effective until after it had already fired. Although the cost effectiveness of this might not be good though.