Posted on 06/17/2018 12:51:05 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
A century ago, the two countries were sworn enemies.
Now they’re producing tanks together. Look what can change in a century.
Before that, England and France were sworn enemies.
Automatic Pop-up white flag is optional on the French version...
Combining superb German technology in the tank with fine French cuisine at the mess hall.
How many gears are on an Italian tank?
Six. One forward and five in reverse.
The important question is, how many islamic migrants can she hold?
European Heaven: The French are the chefs, the Italians are the waiters, the Germans run the trains and the British are the police.
European Hell: The British are the chefs, the French are the waiters, the Italians run the trains and the Germans are the police.
If it’s a lopsided battle and your side has complete control of the air, an air-conditioned tank might not be so bad.
If it’s a closely-matched battle and your side does not have undisputed air superiority, that tank, any tank, is a coffin. We and our adversaries have many effective ways to kill tanks and/or their crews. True, tanks are getting better protection from RPGs and so forth, but no close-in defense is going to stop DU or tungsten 20 mm rounds from shredding tanks and their tracks. AFAIK no short range defense has even been tried against top-attack seeker weapons such as Javelin or Maverick.
I think we need to let the Abrams be our last manned battle tank, and from now on concentrate on getting equivalent or better capability and firepower from swarms of remote-controlled smaller tanks with minimal armor for protection from small arms.
Swarm technology is rapidly advancing. Soon if not now you will able to remotely direct one lead tank platform in a battle and have a swarm of identical tanks follow your lead while using semi-autonomy to navigate terrain and gain advantageous angles on the objective. If your tank gets disabled you will instantly switch and make another one into the lead tank. The enemy will attack individual tanks but they will have to kill virtually all of them to defeat the swarm.
The happiest man in the world drinks German beer, eats Italian food, has a Japanese wife, and lives in America.
Will swarm technology dominate in the air and on the sea?
Abrams is aging. I wonder how this would compare? I should look into its stats...
I believe the Abrahms is still a top tier tank.
I believe the Abrahms is still a top tier tank.
Indeed, swarms with a human “leader” and semi-autonomous functionality seem to be the way to go. The reason for having a human at least near them, and for having semi-autonomy, is of course jamming (something our adversaries are getting very good at). You can’t just have it so that if a drone (whether aerial or ground based) loses its signal it’s taken out of the battlefield. Having a human nearby means that it can close ranks until signal gain is sufficient to restore communications. Having semi-autonomy means that if its signal is lost, it can attempt to continue its last assigned mission on its own to the best of its ability (e.g. including recognition, classification, and neutralization of targets discovered after communication was lost), up until communications are reestablished. If jamming can’t stop a mission from being completed, its utility is greatly reduced.
In the air, for example, I expect to see the F-35 slowly morph into an aerial command center for drone wingmen, the latter of which take a more front-and-center role in the operation, while the latter takes the rear and focuses primarily on operations management.
For the drones, take the human (and all of their associated weight) out of the equation. Eliminate the need for a high level of redundancy and general safety, and give the airframe maneuvering ability beyond what humans can withstand. Make them cheap, capable, and in large numbers.
You know, you can sort of envision the progressive distancing of “humans” and “value” from the battlefield. A carrier keeps its distance with aircraft. A manned aircraft keeps its distance with drone wingmen. A drone keeps its distance with standoff weaponry. A standoff weapon might in turn deploy numerous individually-homing warheads with increasingly sophisticated target identification and tracking capabilities, effectively MIRVing the final approach. Etc.
AMAP ADS is reportedly *specifically* capable against many top attack munitions like Javelin. Arena and Trophy can kill Maverick at many attack angles and reportedly so can Afghanit. They may also be able to take down Javelin depending on how far away the Javelin was launched (see below pictures.)
FYI, this is Javelin's top down attack profile - Maverick's is similar. It's not actually fully perpendicular 'top down.'
For reference, here's Javelin's direct attack profile.
Our current Abrams is air conditioned as well - not because of crew comfort but for NBC reasons and to cool the huge array of computers and electronics in it.
Additionally, there are versions of Arena and other APS that *can* knock down 20mm cannon fire. Yes, even tungsten AP rounds.
Right up until the point the operating system crashes, someone pops a cold or hot EMP, or manages to jam the control frequencies. Swarm based AI is still a considerable way off and EMP shielding is still big and heavy.
Is it designed for conditions in the PIIGS?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.