Military Question: Do We Have A Next Generation Main Battle Tank?

[Mark Felton]

Here are a couple of links, I hope these are what you were looking for.

The Crewing and Configuration of the Future Main Battle Tank

This also seems to be a pretty good article on the subject; Future Combat Systems (FCS)

I wrote a technical paper, jointly with TACOM, on the SRV that was published in the late 1980's. But I've never seen it published on the web anywhere.

This is a list of references from the above FCS site;

Sources and Resources

• Issues Facing the Army’s Future Combat Systems Program, U.S. General Accounting Office, August 13, 2003
• The Crewing and Configuration of the Future Main Battle Tank Robin Fletcher, "ARMOR" pages 6-8, 42, and 43 -- May-June 1995
• The M1A2 Abrams: The Last Main Battle Tank? by Stanley C. Crist ARMOR July-August 1997
• The Future Combat System (FCS) - A Technology Evolution Review and Feasibility Assessment by Asher H. Sharoni and Lawrence D. Bacon ARMOR — July-August 1997
• The Future Combat System (FCS): PART TWO: ARMAMENT by Asher H. Sharoni and Lawrence D. Bacon ARMOR — September-October 1997
• The Future Combat System (FCS): PART THREE: POWERING THE NEW SYSTEM by Asher H. Sharoni and Lawrence D. Bacon ARMOR January-February 1998
• A Crisis of Confidence in Armor? by Mike Sparks ARMOR — March-April 1998
• Final Solicitation (posted January 31, 2000).
• DARPA AND ARMY SELECT CONTRACTORS FOR FUTURE COMBAT SYSTEMS PROGRAMS May 9, 2000 -- DARPA and the U.S. Army today selected four contractor teams for the first phase of the Future Combat Systems (FCS) program.
• DARPA/Army Collaborative Future Combat Systems Demonstration Program
• FCS Public Briefings presented on Industry Day (Presented in Ypsilanti MI on January 11, 2000)
  • Dr. Allen Adler
  • Dr. Michael Andrews
  • Dr. F.L.Fernandez
  • Dr. Ingo May
  • COL Thomas F. Page
  • LTG Randall L. Rigby
  • LTC Marion H. Van Fosson
  • DARPA Contracts Management Division
• Technology Breakthroughs Keep Transformation on Track, Leaders Say Future combat systems demonstration possible by end of 2005 or early 2006, TRADOC New Service, 11 July 2000 -- The Army will have the technological breakthroughs needed to create an objective force very nearly within the target 2008-2012 time frame, according to the Army's chief scientist.

[Mark Felton]

Were there any problems with Auto-loading [ie jamming, speed]?

Sure, initially, but these were expected to be overcome with reasonable engineering practices.

Remember that the Navy has been using autoloaders in their guns for many years. The main companies bidding on the Army autoloaders had past naval experience. My company was bidding on it and had built prototypes for the Army. They, Emerson, had previously built the Emerlec 30 naval gun.

Speed was much greater with the autoloaders.

The main problems (as I recall) were packaging the autoloaders in a tight space and being able to logistically support it in the event of jamming, problems etc. with the crew on hand, and in the middle of nowhere.

You may wish to learn about the Army developments in Mast Mounted Sights. There are some good ideas there that are being put to use on other platforms, and may make their way to the tanks.

Imagine a low-profile tank (no higher than 5'6"?) with IR/TV cameras and a millimeterwave radar that are on a 15' mast and a gun that can fire 1 round per second while on the move in a dust storm at night (and 40-50% lighter than the M1). [The MMW radar allows it to spot targets in poor visibility conditions]

[VaBthang4]

Thanks for the info.

Seriously, I had considered mast mounted targeting and recon when I was a teenager. I user to draw Battle Tanks and try and consider problems and solutions...
I saw a photo of an M1A1 heading towards a low hill/slope and thought what would happen if another tank was sitting just beyond that hill [knowing nothing of air support or scouts]....voila...the mast mounted sights. Haha...

Anyway, the scenario you painted is an awesome one. It'll probably be the Russians and Chinese that get to it first considering our comfort level with our MBTS right now.

[VaBthang4]

Thank you for the links you provided.

[SauronOfMordor]

I saw a photo of an M1A1 heading towards a low hill/slope and thought what would happen if another tank was sitting just beyond that hill [knowing nothing of air support or scouts]....voila...the mast mounted sights. Haha...

Now, visualize one M1A1 being opposed by a thousand $2,000 remote-controlled unarmored crawler vehicles, with a little video camera and a secure comm link, mounting a $500 RPG-27 launcher (see below)

[VaBthang4]

"Now, visualize one M1A1 being opposed by a thousand $2,000 remote-controlled unarmored crawler vehicles, with a little video camera and a secure comm link, mounting a $500 RPG-27 launcher"

Take out the remote stations.
Game-Set-Match.

Or better yet...

Simply EMP'em.
Game-Set-Match.

[SauronOfMordor]

The remote controller station would be further back, as heavily armored as an M1, camoflaged, and protected by a ring of crawlers. Not as easy as taking out something that's come to your neighborhood where you're waiting for it.

re: EMP: military equiptment is shielded, and has been for decades. Otherwise an EMP would take out all our fighters (the latest ones are all computer-controlled fly-by-wire)

[VaBthang4]

Brother, respectfully...you are dream weaving.

Have you ever heard of tank plinking? Do you see the simple transition from tank plinking to controller station plinking?

Any military that does not control the air [as we do] can have the fanciest little gadgets ever conceived and it'll amount to zip strategically.

That's not hubris it is reality.

I understand the concept you're putting forward but the fact is that no nation has the technological capabilities of fielding such a force much less protecting it....except maybe us.

Sorry.

[SauronOfMordor]

Have you ever heard of tank plinking? Do you see the simple transition from tank plinking to controller station plinking?

It will depend on the terrain. Yep, anything out in the open, like on a desert plain, is going to have a very low survival time. Out in forest, jungle, and urban terrain, it may be a different story. Remember, NATO had complete control of the air over Serbia under the Clinton air war, with less than stellar results in actually hitting serb tanks (as opposed to plastic/cardboard decoys).

In urban terrain, we may find ourselves being targeted by small remote-controlled firing platforms, controlled over a thin fiber-optic thread from a basement a few hundred yards away -- which will be empty once we finish tracing back the thread (meanwhile, the route of our thread-followers will be covered by more remote-controlled weapons)