Main Battle Wank

[LoooSeR]

My bet is a leopard 2 with a autloader

Or maybe it will fall through. I doubt it though besides nationalism both nations want thr same box tank

It is called Leclerc. 

[Collimatrix]

Or maybe it will fall through. I doubt it though besides nationalism both nations want thr same box tank

 

 

You Russians and your nationalism.  You don't know how good you lucky bastards have it.  You can still make tanks.

 

The UK, despite inventing the damn things can't design or make them anymore.  Yes; it's sad, especially since in eighty-something years of tank development they never made one that was particularly good.  Yes; the UK, despite having a larger GDP than Russia, cannot make tanks or fighter aircraft on its own anymore.

 

The time is fast coming when NATO will have to standardize on a Europanzer, because they won't be able to sustain cute little boutique national MBTs that are materially identical to Leo 2s (I'm looking at you Ariete!).  If they do have a boutique national design, it'll probably be designed in South Korea or something.

 

Hell, in a few years the new KANT product, whatever improved abrams emerges and the Altay may be the only tanks in production in NATO.  The only alternative may end up being Poland or something.

[LoooSeR]

I think times changing and some European may actually push actual project to make something new. Maybe it will not be something groundbreaking (well, when last time France, UK, Italy and Germany made something grounbreaking in tanks? In WW1 UK and France did but this is all i remember), but it could be new. I just hope to see how Leclercs perfoms in Yemen to know what is actual level of European/French tank design school. 

[Mike E]

IIRC, they were claiming the design would be finished around, or after 2025. One can still try to guess the features though, and I think we will see;

- Modular AMAP armor.

- AMAP APS.

- Bustle-loader, probably from the French.

- 1800 hp diesel.

- Pneumatic suspension.

Etc etc...

[LoooSeR]

That will be not very impressive for 2030...

I suspect something just a bit creative. Maybe French designers will manage to push unmanned design based on one of Leclerc proposals.

[Mike E]

That will be not very impressive for 2030...

I suspect something just a bit creative. Maybe French designers will manage to push unmanned design based on one of Leclerc proposals.

Well, we are talking about Europe here.  They'll stick to what they are good at, and add a few things. 

[LoooSeR]

Oh damn, i wanted to say unmanned turret proposals for Leclerc :-( Anyway, between France was more creative than Germans in tank field, i just hope for something actually new and not Leotard 2 version number 10 or 11.

[Priory_of_Sion]

Leoclerc

[LostCosmonaut]

My body is ready for the Leopard 2A19, coming in 2067.

[Bill]

What that really shows is that the Canadian army needed an assault gun and had to resort to deploying what they had readily available in order to fill a the need, which was basically an infantry support role. Something a vehicle like the M8 would have filled perfectly.  In low intensity conflicts when the threat from enemy armor is close to 0, vehicles like the M1128 or the defunct M8 program are easier to deploy and support yet pack the punch needed to deal with any potential threats.  The M1128 has some pretty serious design flaws but the concept is pretty sound. 

 

I do not foresee the large tank and tank battles being the typical future conflict. 

The Assault gun, Sryker 105mm or M-8 is fine - until it hits a mine.  Lessons of AFG and of Vietnam - if the enemy can get explosives, he will focus on mine warfare.  It is low risk, for the insurgent, and offers the promise of catastrophic kills.

I am not aware of any example in history of AFV crews taking armour off their vehicles (less turret removal on things like Rolls Royce armoured cars to allow viable armament to be carried).  These is no shortage of examples of people up-armouring their vehicles - officially or unofficially.

When commenting about AFV design, remember the people inside it.  They decide how effective it is.

Prior to the 1967 war, the most popular tank in the Israeli Armoured Corps was the AMX-13.  Reliable and fast, it was a fun machine.  The least popular tank was Centurion - slow and demanding a lot of heavy duty maintenance with plenty of hard to reach bits.  By the end of the war, the most popular tank was Centurion.  Much more bounced off it than penetrated.  When penetrated, the electric turret traverse and elevation mechanism did not burn, like the hydraulic system on the M-48s. The AMX-13 proved prone to catastrophic turret explosions to the point that there were combat refusals by AMX-13 crews.

If you want a crew to take a vehicle into action, you must ensure that the crew are confident that the vehicle gives them the best possible chance of survival.

 

Grumpy comment complete.

B   

[Toxn]

Doesn't this also kind of show that crews are shit at judging their own equipment objectively?