I'm very impressed by the technical expertise on this forum, and so I'd like your feedback on my theories about what a crew-less, robot tank would be like. I wrote about it here, on my blog:
I might edit the blog entry based on any feedback I get from you guys.
Let us open a topic dedicated to the Optionally maned fighting vehicle.
What we know now is that we don’t know so much.
What is sure, the US Army :
- wants 9 men strong dismounted section ;
- doesn’t want to continue to share an IFV between two sections when mounted ;
- is awared that it’s complicated to fight with an IFV carrying a 9 men section.
Platforms showed available at AUSA 2018 were :
Griffin III from General Dynamic
CV90 from BAE
Lynx from Rheinmetall
Maybe a proposal from SAIC ?
My point here is the following : I have the strange feeling that there’s a misunderstanding.
During last years, US Army spend lots of money to study new manufacturing process, new designs... and today, when we are looking at news, all we see is old concept.
The Lynx is optimized to be a cost effective platform with proven components. But what is its upgrading capability to stay in services until 2070 ?
CV90 is very good but it got limitations too. It need a deep reworked of its hull.
The Griffin was introduced as the response to the Army call but in fact there’s no other tracked other platform in the GD catalog.
I may be wrong but I can’t see any real disruption.
What about monolithic forged hull ?
What about decoupled running gear ?
Are torsion bars still a solution for suspensions ?
I think, this is the very beginning of the story but it’s very strange.
Since Xlucine suggested it in the general AFV thread, here is a new version of the old Tank ID thread that used to exist at the WoT forums, back before the great exodus to SH.
The rules are simple. Post a picture of some sort of AFV and everyone has to try to name what it is. Try to avoid posting a new picture until the previous picture is identified. Generally, the person who was first to correctly ID the picture in question gets to post the next picture, unless they want to pass. If a picture is not ID'd in a day or two, the person that posted it should say what it is and bask in their own sense of superiority. They should then post a new picture for the sake of keeping the thread moving. Please, no fictional tanks, paper napkin drawings that never made it to prototype or pictures where the vehicle in question is obscured or particularly hard to see. Also, if posting a picture of an unusual variant of a relatively common vehicle, be sure to note that you are looking for the specific variant name, not just the general family of vehicles it belongs to (for example, if I post a picture of a Panzer IV with the hydrostat drive, I would say in the post something like "What makes this Panzer IV unusual?" since everyone can ID a Panzer IV)
It is perfectly ok to shame those that make spectacularly wrong guesses. That's just how we roll around here.