"New Polish "stealth" tank -- can I get one in 28mm??" Topic

OK, NOT an April Fool's joke, this is a new Polish MBT design that takes tanks to the next level by incorporating stealth designs and new infrared camo systems for low observability -- plus a 120mm main gun.

"So why is this tank such a big deal? Grab onto your hats folks; this tank comes with a radar and thermal camouflage system, which means that the three person crew will be safe while they attack and re-position themselves away from enemy fire. The infrared camouflage system is made up of hexagonal plates and is capable of taking heat readings from tank's surrounding area and then alters the PL-01 heat signature to match that of its environment and hence, the tank simply disappears for those attackers, which are relying on infrared to locate the target; such as drones and missiles. This also allows for variable heat signatures to be adapted, hence rendering the tank as an average car even."

link

Very Science-Fiction-y. Replace the treads with skirts and it's look good for Hammer's Slammers (as a light tank).

Great looking tank!

Should ask OO to make it up in his 1/600 line of Sci-Fi. Be nice in 15 mm also.

Dan

Working on the tracks and suspension looks as though it could be a pain …

I watched the video of this thank in motion. It had a quiet engine but I would have liked to see it doing more than just strolling to a loading trailer. The 120 mm smoothbore is common fare right now but the other features while perhaps not revolutionary are significant. Still, I think the future of AFVs is not in better designed manned vehicles. Instead I see a future of smaller manned types like the Polish one above combined with unmanned remote or robotic AFVs that will be fast and effective because you do not have to up armor to protect the crew. Of course some of the advancements that are going on with polymers and ceramic derivatives might render that issue moot.

The tank has been in use for almost 100 years now. Officers in the British War Office first began to consider the creation of Armored Vehicles in 1914. Or if you consider Simms' War Car, functioning AFVs have been in use since 1909. Therefore we are past the 100 year mark.

link

MY question is given that single infantry ATGM systems are in common use is the tank still viable? Please note I am a devoted tread head but wonder if the cost of continued advanced tank production and creation still worth the tactical benefit?

…looks very familiar that….

Maybe there are stairs that fold into the side skirts

It could be the forced perspective, but the tank looks to me to have a pretty high profile, something most modern tanks strive to avoid. But, as said, it could be the crewman standing farther back than he appears.

Some of the designers played too much Battlezone as kids!

"Hey, Ludwig, where do I put this Invisible Paint?"
"Between the plaid and the checkered paints, of course, Stash!"

Whitematicore, I warmly welcome our new Skynet overlords!

"How the hell do you climb aboard it????? The glacis is really not that low and doesn't have anything to grab onto."

You don't have to – the turret is unmanned and there are doors on the back of the vehicle.

The reason it is so high is because the chassis is a Swedish CV90 (an IFV). It probably use the same back entrance like the standard vehicle.

Looks like a further development of the CV90120 concept with with some ideas from BAE/Hägglunds cancled SEP project as well as some new concept. I notice that other sources lable it as a light tank or a Direct Fire Support Vehicle rather than than as an MBT which IMO is a much more correct lable.

The shape of things to come … maybe …

MY question is given that single infantry ATGM systems are in common use is the tank still viable? Please note I am a devoted tread head but wonder if the cost of continued advanced tank production and creation still worth the tactical benefit?

That question has been asked since the 1960s, but the true weapon of a tank isn't the 120mm or whatever main gun. It's the ENGINE. Infantry-carried ATGMs can only advance as fast as the infantry, and I've not met a single footslogger than can exceed 4mph in full kit for an entire day.

Tanks can re-deploy almost anywhere, at up to 100kph in some cases, instantly massing force where the opponents are NOT.

Sure, they have a huge logistical trail, and need to make sure they don't outrun their fuel trucks, but that tactical or operational level mobility is what makes tanks so powerful.

The problem comes at strategic level mobility. Most tanks are only deployable from ships or rail, not by air. Even if they are air-deployable, it takes a big strategic airlifter like the C5 or C17, not a smaller tactical airlifter like the C130 or A400.

Personally, I think the US Army screwed up when it cancelled the Future Combat System, which were intended to be transportable via C130. Each one weighed slightly less than 20 tons at full combat weight, and could be driven into combat right out of the back of the plane.

They were trading heavy armor for electronic countermeasures, active defenses, and mobility.

Very interesting. Future war.

GBS
15mm.co.uk