SinoSoldier
Colonel
The Type 99A2 and T-90MS have completed their development, so it would just be the T-14 and the Chinese MBT for now.
New Type98/99 MBT thread
- Thread starter Dongfeng
- Start date
The Type 99A2 and T-90MS have completed their development, so it would just be the T-14 and the Chinese MBT for now.
Polish PL-01 "stealth" tank. That could be the future U.S. Army M3 tank, except a lot more need to be done to transform the PL-01 from an experimental object to an actual battle tank. I'm pretty sure the Chinese are designing a future MBT similar to the Armata, except the future Chinese 60 calibre 125mm gun (especially armed with DU or Tungsten APFSDS) is likely to be more powerful.
Last edited:
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
The US looked into a 2 man crew for the FCS Manned vehicle family.
There is yet to be confirmation on the Armada of just 2 men there seems to me to be a hatch that could be for the gunner.
Because of the commander and gunner optics I would lay cash on a three man crew.
PL01 is one of my favorite tank concepts, but there is to date no current US Army program of record for a new tank. If there was they could do worse. Also note it aims for a three man crew and could be converted into a IFV.
The Type 10 of the JGSDF is also a 3 man crew as is the K2 in Korea.
There is yet to be confirmation on the Armada of just 2 men there seems to me to be a hatch that could be for the gunner.
Because of the commander and gunner optics I would lay cash on a three man crew.
PL01 is one of my favorite tank concepts, but there is to date no current US Army program of record for a new tank. If there was they could do worse. Also note it aims for a three man crew and could be converted into a IFV.
The Type 10 of the JGSDF is also a 3 man crew as is the K2 in Korea.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Here is my thinking on a 2 man crew, it seems impractical.
A three man crew is it seems to me the most efficient way to operate a tank. The driver focus on maneuver of the vehicle, the commander operates the defensive arms and spots the targets. The gunner operates the main armament and coax.
A two man crew would have to tack a huge work load onto the commander. Who would be spotting, targeting defending and commanding.
If there was such a tank. The coax and gunners sight from the turret would pretty much be unnecessary and redundant.
A three man crew is it seems to me the most efficient way to operate a tank. The driver focus on maneuver of the vehicle, the commander operates the defensive arms and spots the targets. The gunner operates the main armament and coax.
A two man crew would have to tack a huge work load onto the commander. Who would be spotting, targeting defending and commanding.
If there was such a tank. The coax and gunners sight from the turret would pretty much be unnecessary and redundant.
Equation
Lieutenant General
With so much improvement in automation technology. Two man tank crew IMO is possible. The driver will be the maneuvering and the loader became the gunner that will be targeting firing. The commander will be online wireless from another location via satellite to direct and command.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
One person crew. All Terrain, AI driven, neuro interface, highly maneuverable, 40 tons. Modular design.. easy weapons swap based on specific mission profile.
Problem solved.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
The problem I have with that is the commander is either going to suffer lag from communications or may be jammed. What good is the spooter if his information is seconds behind? Or if he gets cut off. And then there is bandwidth a maneuvering combat team hundreds of tanks all streaming video and data at once? The data requirements would be massive and vulnerable.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
I hope you realized I was trolling LOL .... in reality a mech (even if exist like in the movies) would make for a terrible vehicle of war... or at least the types of war we're fighting. It looks very cool in movies but that's about it.
It's tall, easily targeted, cumbersome and probably not very effective and can be easily mission killed just by disabling one of the legs. A tank sits very low, is a highly stable platform and has very high survivability.
A Mech would also be a terrible asset in combined arms warfare or mechanized infantry. the only advantage it has is because it's bipedal can probably tranverse adverse terrains or trenches but that is easily nullified because it can trip, fall etc.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
I was discussing equation's defense of the 2 man crew, I only saw your post after I had posted. I saw what you were doing Kwai.
SinoSoldier
Colonel
The MBT is thought to be equipped with an electrothermal chemical gun, not the 60-calibre monster that was the subject of much attention a few months ago.