New Type98/99 MBT thread

TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
It's all about the Workload. the first world war era tanks had crews of 10 to 12 with 2 main guns with 5-7 Machine guns. There were a few later that broke it down to 6 then 4 one or two very very light tanks with 2 men but packing a commander/gunner working only a single weapon without radio.
by world war 2 light tanks had not changed much but the tanks got bigger and radios became mission critical. the large gun demanded a loader and the radios of the time meant crews of 4 or 5 as Radios have simplified and crews got more tech savy they eliminated the dedicated Radiomen. mechanical loaders have simplified and mean that manual loading is more and more a concept that is Anachronistic held only as a budget issue in Legacy series vehicles like M1A series Merkava, Challenger 2 and Leopard 2. with only a rare fluke like the Altay keeping the Human loader

Western tanks kept the loader as the mechanical loaders were somewhat issue prone. but now Tanks like the Black Panther, Type 90, Type 10 and AMX Leclerc have proven a Reliable loader designs.Meaning we may now see More and more western tanks need to be evaluated to see if Conversion is possible, For some like the Merkava that seems like a design that lends it self to a unmanned turret In that if already has the space for a crew compartment in the hull vs others that might demand a total remodel like the Challenger 2 or Abrams. Since the Chinese Followed the Russian Tank model with Autoloader they have a slight advantage to moving to a remote turret but the issues are sorting power and sensors and a Chassis and more importantly for the gen IV tanks defenses and countermeasures.


Armada T14 set a bar but it was evolutionary more then anything. Type 10 marked the ideas of defense active suspension and light weight.
The PL01 concept takes it well and beyond because well T14 is made to take a beating. PL01 says yes we need to survive and take a beating but do we survive by just charging in and taking the blows? Or as PL01 does it do we change the dynamics and work first to avoid detection.
PL01 is embracing Stealth and moving it to the ground vehicle. Adopting Thermal and Radar stealth, active heat signature mitigation. Armada Shows the Unmanned concept but PL 01 is more ambitious beyond simply making it tougher but changing the very idea of how a tank survives. With Technologies like Hybrid diesel electric drive now proven and practical. simply modelling off of Armada seems to me at least short sighted.

.
 
L

Lezt

Junior Member
There is more to it too, the crew is not just for fighting. in the field, the crew does their own regular maintenance. The number of maintenance task does not decrease with the number of crew reduction therefore the work load per crew would be more.

Also bigger issues such as a track replacement would be a challenge with a 4 man crew, a 3 man crew is tough, and 2 man would be really hard.

That means shifting the maintenance to the supply train. - soft skinned, unprotected weak link that is easier to target than the tank. I would hate to wait around for a maintenance brigade in a hostile zone when my 4 man crew could have done the job under the overwatch of a friendly tank, rather than having my 2 man crew twiddling my thumb.
 
N

nemo

Junior Member
Lezt said:
T

Also bigger issues such as a track replacement would be a challenge with a 4 man crew, a 3 man crew is tough, and 2 man would be really hard.
Click to expand...

With development of exoskeleton, replacing track with two man may be feasible, and exoskeletons can draw power from tank simply having an long power cord to plug into the tank.
 
L

Lezt

Junior Member
nemo said:
With development of exoskeleton, replacing track with two man may be feasible, and exoskeletons can draw power from tank simply having an long power cord to plug into the tank.
Click to expand...
That maybe true for strength. Let's say you need a man to align a the track pin, one to hammer it in one to adjust the tensioner. A exo will not reduce the manpower needed.

You can design the tank to be serviable by 2 person or to add more automation and tools. Which in turn will become more to break down.

Likewise, other things like.. One crew to Heat up rations when the others are doing a gun calibration, ammo loading and another is doing some engine servicing will not be possible.. Things will have to be done sequentially.
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
nemo said:
With development of exoskeleton, replacing track with two man may be feasible, and exoskeletons can draw power from tank simply having an long power cord to plug into the tank.
Click to expand...
Also add to the fact that now you have added the Exoskeleton to the vehicle crew even the smallest exoskeleton is adding to the size of the wearer that means making the interior bigger.
Being honest I love the idea of Exosuits for Infantry, logistics and aircraft/vehicle maintenance and repair but not for the vehicle crews themselves. It just gets in the way.

As Lezt points out you can reduce the physical demand but not the associated work load. Humans still only have two hands and one brain. A 4 man crew can have a man keeping watch well 3 fix the tank. A 3 man crew can have 1 on watch well the others fix the tank, a 2 man crew can either keep watch or fix the tank not both.
 
D

delft

Brigadier
Is it possible to reduce the frequency of changing tracks and other heavy maintenance work so that such work seldom interferes with the other duties of the crew? That would be a significant improvement and make a reduction in crew size really useful.
 
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
TerraN_EmpirE said:
Also add to the fact that now you have added the Exoskeleton to the vehicle crew even the smallest exoskeleton is adding to the size of the wearer that means making the interior bigger.
Being honest I love the idea of Exosuits for Infantry, logistics and aircraft/vehicle maintenance and repair but not for the vehicle crews themselves. It just gets in the way.

As Lezt points out you can reduce the physical demand but not the associated work load. Humans still only have two hands and one brain. A 4 man crew can have a man keeping watch well 3 fix the tank. A 3 man crew can have 1 on watch well the others fix the tank, a 2 man crew can either keep watch or fix the tank not both.
Click to expand...

The tank crew doesn't need to wear an exo suit full time while operating the tank, what would be the point?

The only exception might be if western forces insist on keeping an manual loader, in which case, a powered exo suit might actually solve a lot of the problems traditionally associated with manual loading, such as crew fatigue and limitations on gun calibre and shell size etc.

Anyways, for a two men crew, they just need to allocate some space to store an exo suit or two, that could be specifically designed to fold into a nice little box while not in use.

As for needing addition crews for things like maintenance or to act as overwatch etc, well firstly, there are actually very few scenarios where a tanks breaks down and 3-4 men can fix it but 2 cannot.

And tbh, for most faults that brings a tank to a grinding hault, you will probably need a dedicated recovery vehicle with its specialist tools and spare parts to affect repairs anyways.

Even in those very rare instances, you would only have a point if tanks operated by themselves with no friendly support, but how often does that actually happen in real life?

Tanks almost always operate as a squadron and/or have infantry support.

A tank that finds itself all by its lonesome in hostile territory is in deep doodoo irrespective of the number of crew it has.

As such, insisting on the need for the extra man for those exceptionally rare, just in case, scenarios makes about much sense as insisting the tank crews all wear exo suits, even while inside their tanks doing their normal duties.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top