"The US Army Has Big Plans for a Light, Fast and Deadly " Topic
4 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please be courteous toward your fellow TMP members.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Profile Article
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
|
Tango01 | 16 Oct 2018 9:43 p.m. PST |
…Super Tank. Here's What We Know So Far. "Could there be a lightweight armored attack vehicle able to speed across bridges, deploy quickly from the air, detect enemies at very long ranges, control nearby robots and fire the most advanced weapons in the world – all while maintaining the unprecedented protection and survivability of an Abrams tank? Such questions form the principle basis of rigorous Army analysis and exploration of just what, exactly, a future tank should look like? The question is fast taking-on increased urgency as potential adversaries continue to present very serious, technologically advanced weapons and attack platforms. "I believe that a complete replacement of the Abrams would not make sense, unless we had a breakthrough…with much lighter armor which allows us to re-architect the vehicle," Col. Jim Schirmer, Program Manager for the Next Generation Combat Vehicle, told reporters at the Association of the United States Army Annual Symposium…." Main page link
Amicalement Armand
|
Thresher01 | 16 Oct 2018 9:53 p.m. PST |
So, they're bringing back the Sheridan? |
Lion in the Stars | 17 Oct 2018 4:08 a.m. PST |
Trying to bring back the Future Combat system, which would have replaced both Sheridan and Abrams with 18ton vehicles. Yup, the MBT-equivalent was supposed to be C130 transportable! FCS protection depended on Quick Kill APS, which was not developing as fast as it needed to, and quite frankly I'm still not sure it's up to the task of swatting long-rod penetrators. The idea I had borrowed a few pages from the USN. Instead of a single APS, use multiple different ones for different roles. Or at least multiple different countermeasures, each optimized for a different threat.
|
Tango01 | 17 Oct 2018 11:46 a.m. PST |
|
|