[XEHRpa]

The true test is a battlefield where air superiority is not assured.

While that may be true in a strict test of "tank" capability, the tank is evolving into a network of interconnected and intercommunicating vehicles known as a "combat system," which should be truly integrated on the battlefield. So while it may, at some point, have to survive "on its own as a single platform," that is not the design vision, nor the system's intended strength. It is intended to be most lethal and survivable as an element of a larger network of interoperating platforms, which include airborne and land-based platforms of all types.

If you watch Star Trek, think "Borg."

[Southack]

"It is intended to be most lethal and survivable as an element of a larger network of interoperating platforms, which include airborne and land-based platforms of all types. If you watch Star Trek, think "Borg."

One change, think "Borg" overall networking capability combined with full Captain Piccard/Kirk local command and control individualism.

Thus, what we are fielding today is a conceptual hybrid of *both* the Borg and Federation systems.

And frankly, it would just about take a futuristic starship to give our current military a run for its money. The rest of this planet lags *way* behind us.

[Republic of Texas]

I agree, and I hope we never see a "true test". We should always strive to make it an unfair fight. But this war will tell us little we didn't know about the M-1, except for the improvements in targeting and communication. If we can figure out how to reduce the friendly fire incidents, that will be a victory in itself.