Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

United States Military Vehicle General: Guns, G*vins, and Gas Turbines


Tied
 Share

Recommended Posts

The XM360E1 isn't an ETC gun in its stock state, but the ETIPPS I & II tests retrofitted ETC capability into several guns, including the XM291 (ETIPPS II), the XM360 (ETIPPS I) and the M256 (ETIPPS I). For the XM360 to benefit from ETC tech, you have to mount a big, high energy density capacitor block to the turret (or find a big, spare compartment in the hull to stash it in) to fuel the firing circuit, like they did with the XM8 Lightning Bolt demonstrator.

 

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a476392.pdf

 

P.S. That document refers to the XM360 as XM36. Typo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from the really stupid looking, and detached from reality 'model' (i.e they think a vastly different MBT would look nearly identical), the expectations are fairly okay. 

The gun will definitely be replaced. Because why not? There is a need in added power that is not just incremental.

Modular armor became the norm so even if the internal structure isn't changed, the layout should at least change.

Autoloader and encapsulation of the crew mean the turret will likely be unmanned, which means it will indeed be smaller.

And they do need that autoloader if they want to proceed with the robotic wingman by having a 3rd crewman do the group control.

Smaller turret and new wiring technologies also mean weight can be reduced quite drastically as well.

 

Light cannon though? Idk. A jamming system could work, but for a hard kill they can definitely use a 0.5" cal HMG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Renegade334 said:

 

That autoloader plan also proposes converting the loader into something akin to an EWO or drone pilot (either small UAVs or UGVs like the robotic wingmen). Still, to perform those duties he'd need some space and making his station more cramped would go in the way of that.

 

Loaders need a lot of space, cutting them down to a similar footprint as the gunner would free up a lot of room. I'm not sure if this would tetris out as resulting in a reduced width turret, but it'd free up some volume

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Aside from the really stupid looking, and detached from reality 'model' (i.e they think a vastly different MBT would look nearly identical), the expectations are fairly okay. 

The gun will definitely be replaced. Because why not? There is a need in added power that is not just incremental.

Modular armor became the norm so even if the internal structure isn't changed, the layout should at least change.

Autoloader and encapsulation of the crew mean the turret will likely be unmanned, which means it will indeed be smaller.

And they do need that autoloader if they want to proceed with the robotic wingman by having a 3rd crewman do the group control.

Smaller turret and new wiring technologies also mean weight can be reduced quite drastically as well.

 

Light cannon though? Idk. A jamming system could work, but for a hard kill they can definitely use a 0.5" cal HMG.

 

The thing is you are describing a new vehicle, not an upgraded Abrams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Ramlaen said:

 

The thing is you are describing a new vehicle, not an upgraded Abrams.

An M1A3 might as well be an entirely different vehicle based on technologies developed as part of the NGCV's OMFV project (M1A3 is already part of NGCV).

Otherwise why not call it M1A2E, or M1A2D1?

 

I think it's fairly fair considering how the naming convention has changed since the cold war. An ECP phase today is bigger than a difference between the A1 and A2.

 

The naming today suggests a far smaller upgrade than reality, and the naming during the cold war suggested a far greater upgrade than reality.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Xlucine said:

Loaders need a lot of space, cutting them down to a similar footprint as the gunner would free up a lot of room. I'm not sure if this would tetris out as resulting in a reduced width turret, but it'd free up some volume

only a standard place for ammunition + put-in(not putin, ok) mechanism. Like Leclerc(but inside the turret) or MBT-70

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ramlaen said:
35 minutes ago, Karamazov said:

can you elaborate on these projects?

 

Optionally manned fighting vehicle, think of a manned Abrams with a remote control Abrams as a wingman.

 

The NGCV was the CFT. What was the "NGCV," they made the "NGCV-OMFV"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...