Future Main Battle Tank
-
Otherwise known as the M1A3
Its an M1A2 chassis, with.... a gun. A big gun... well..
-
can't see your pic..
-
Hmm, that was a one-of tank they made to explore some FCS concepts. It's real name was the FTTB Future Tank Test Bed.
The current latest working FCS prototype looks more conventional, though there's nobody in the turret and there're only two men crewing the thing. You can see how it looks like on Discovery channel Extreme Machine eposide on tanks. The turret is quite a bit bigger then on the concept art you can see at the links. And it appears more mobile then the Abrams on the program (probably, since it's only 45 tons)
some useful links
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/fcs-t.htm
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/4fcs97.pdf -
Hmm, that was a one-of tank they made to explore some FCS concepts. It's real name was the FTTB Future Tank Test Bed.
The current latest working FCS prototype looks more conventional, though there's nobody in the turret and there're only two men crewing the thing. You can see how it looks like on Discovery channel Extreme Machine eposide on tanks. The turret is quite a bit bigger then on the concept art you can see at the links. And it appears more mobile then the Abrams on the program (probably, since it's only 45 tons)
some useful links
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/fcs-t.htm
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/4fcs97.pdf -
Okay, that site had no hotlinking so u will have to surf in to see for urself. Its still under the M1-abrams family, but looks... U'll know it when u see it.
http://www.pmulcahy.com/acvh-tanks.html -
eh?
i tot they came up with the M1A3 quite some time ago.... -
No such thing, it's the FTTB you're looking at.
-
Actually, the M1A3 is gonna be the NEXT version of M1 tanks scheduled to roll off in 2010 or 2020. However, I doubt that the M1A3 is the Giraffe tho. I think its gonna look similar to the M1A2 now, except with perhaps, and active defense suite, as well as other additional capabilities.
-
There is NO SUCH THING AS AN M1A3, nor are there ANY PLANS for such a tank. The website posted is for a game of some sort, NOT REAL LIFE. The latest config of the M1 is the M1A2 SEP. The US Army is not looking for an M1A3, but is now concentrating on the FCS.
BTW, the 40 ton tank thingie you guys saw on Discovery and the same tank shown on the link posted above is OUTDATED. New requirements call for a 20+ ton design, as they want it to be air-deployable. Block 1 of FCS seems to be based on the cancelled Future Scout and Calvary System (FSCS) TRACER recon vehicle which was a joint project between US and UK. 2 prototypes were recently unveiled, 1 wheeled version, and another a tracked version. So far, it seems that the FCS would consist of BOTH wheeled and TRACKED versions, as both have their advantages. -
Forgot to add, these two prototypes were unveiled during AUSA, by United Defense. Go to this link to see the prototypes:
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/americas/news/jaa/jaa021030_1_n.shtml -
Wow, just 20 tons? I wonder how much armour protection they can pack in even with advanced technology, it's virtually a light tank now.
Of course, the Americans have a bad habit of giving way to uninformed opinion and kill the best programs even when they are moments from completion and fund overpayed, bloated and seriously flawed ones. -
They are trying to use active defense (like Arena) to counter threats like anti-armour missiles and even HEAT shells. Even exotic technology like electrified armour is being explored to counter HEAT shells. But its acknowledged that even with new technology, the platform will very probably not survive a hit from a SABOT shell. What the American's FCS system will be relying on is what gives them their current overwhelming power : information.
And heavily loaded with information the FCS system will be. Equipped Shadow UAVs, Organic Air Vehicles, Micro Air vehicles, the FCS unit will even be plugged to national surveillance assets to give it as much situational awareness as possible. The FCS way of fighting is to engage at standoff distances as much as possible. CLose in combat is avoided, at least until a position of advantage is gained. The idea is for the US units to "choose the time and place of engagement", using information to force the enemy to fight a war on the American's terms. -
The does not exist yet. But there ARE plans for it. The M1A3 will come as an upgrade over the current M1A2 standard. This may or may not come with new machines.
-
AFAIK, there are non. Would you care to provide some links as to where you got your info from?
-
I still like to get something that can stop a sabot. In the meantime, what fills in the gap between the superadvanced tanks and the modern M1A2s? There should be some interm...
-
I am kinda entu about the Land Warrior 21 system though, also because we have our version in the works! Information warfare, outwit, outfight, outmove the enemy. Works great against larger, but less modern and mobilized forces... hey wait a minute...
-
I had read from a source( i believe national library ) saying that the merkava from israel have the capacity to receive a direct hit without suffering much damages. ( but im not sure wats round is used on that tank, but i believe the israelis learned a great deal in the battle of sinai ..)
The armour on that machine is so heavy that it is one of the slowest tank on earth today.
Is it true? Im not that into tanks , can anyone enlighten mi. ThX~! -
_____________________________________________________Originally posted by foxtrout8:I had read from a source( i believe national library ) saying that the merkava from israel have the capacity to receive a direct hit without suffering much damages. ( but im not sure wats round is used on that tank, but i believe the israelis learned a great deal in the battle of sinai ..)
The armour on that machine is so heavy that it is one of the slowest tank on earth today.
Is it true , im not that into tanks , can anyone enlighten mi. ThX~!
While the Israeli Merkava MBT may be able to take a direct hit from another tank; in 2002, it was reported that a Merkava was wasted by a Palestinian booby trap mine laid in its path.
The turret of the Merkava MBT was blown 5 meters out of its main body, and when it came back to earth, the turret crushed to death the injured crew that was immobilised and shell shocked.
The driver was killed by the blast that came from below. -
Actually it's the Depleted Uranium enhanced Chobhamm package of the later M1 Abrams variants that make it the most heavily armoured tank, for RHA thickness on the face of the planet today. The Merkava relies on spaced armour, where almost every internal component is armoured, fuel lines, ammo, so and so. So that damage is limited even when a round penetrates the actual glacis armor. The Merkava is heavily armoured, but not the most heavily armoured tank in the world.
As for being wasted by the booby trap, the attack came from below, where the tank was thiny armoured. That kind of attack would have wasted any tank. Once again, no tank is invulnerable. -
Oh yah, a lot of modern tanks, the good ones can easily wistand direct hits (to the front) with little damage. M1A1s easily turned off the fire of Iraqi T-72s in the rare event the Iraqis managed to shoot. HEAT rounds were worthless and the sabots at best stuck in the armor like arrows or glanced off. One bogged down Abrams recieved the attention of three Iraqi T-72s in a brief engagement in which it was hit directly three times by HEAT and APFSDS rounds, sustaining little damage. The Abrams proceeded to destroy all three T-72s. When the Americans decided they could not remove the tank, other M1s started firing on it to destroy it, the first two rounds failed to penetrate, with only the third striking from a favourable angle and causing the ammo to brew up. Even then the damage control systems of the tank kicked in and snuffed out the fire while the blow out panels vented the blast upwards. When the tank was finally removed, it was found to be still functioning and driven back for repair!
Of course, you could try reading Armoured Cav.
However, once again, no tank is invulnerable. There were M1A1s badly fragged by friendly fire, in most of the cases taking shots up their less armoured rear. (Imagining being backstab by A-10 GAU-8 cannon) However the damage control systems were so good that only one M1 crewmember lost his life in the entire gulf war, and that was when the ammo on a target he knocked out exploded when he drove past, unbuttoned and exposed. -
so ... who is going to exploit this weakness... a remote controlled mine that runs under the tank? anyone ? DSTA???
-
Germans tried it in WW2, tons of problems with the system.
In the future I have no trouble forseeing robot drone tanks though, being controled by a mother tank that sits rear in safety. -
Yeap read abt this as well....Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Oh yah, a lot of modern tanks, the good ones can easily wistand direct hits (to the front) with little damage. M1A1s easily turned off the fire of Iraqi T-72s in the rare event the Iraqis managed to shoot. HEAT rounds were worthless and the sabots at best stuck in the armor like arrows or glanced off. One bogged down Abrams recieved the attention of three Iraqi T-72s in a brief engagement in which it was hit directly three times by HEAT and APFSDS rounds, sustaining little damage. The Abrams proceeded to destroy all three T-72s. When the Americans decided they could not remove the tank, other M1s started firing on it to destroy it, the first two rounds failed to penetrate, with only the third striking from a favourable angle and causing the ammo to brew up. Even then the damage control systems of the tank kicked in and snuffed out the fire while the blow out panels vented the blast upwards. When the tank was finally removed, it was found to be still functioning and driven back for repair! -
Well the M1A3 is planned upgrade, if you don't believe, its up to you.
http://www.periscope1.com/demo/weapons/gcv/tanks/w0003593.html
In it, it very briefly mentions the M1A3 with a planned 140mm gun upgrade.
The M1A3 is already being considered as a "far-term" Heavy force option. That being around 2015 and 2025.
"The current versions of the Abrams and Bradley are replaced with notional next-generation variants, the M1A3 and M2A4, which incorporate significant improvements in both firepower and protection. The M1A3 has a 140mm main gun, as compared to the 120mm gun on the M1A2, and a combination of sophisticated heavy armor and an advanced active protection system (APS) that together protect it against most antitank weapons, including those with top-attack munitions, and even some kinetic energy weapons." This is an excerpt from rand.org, a company which makes "freelance" analysis.
Another weapon system that is gonna be fielded in that term, would be the ARES. Advanced Robotics Engagement System. Unmanned missile pod basically. -
I'm real sorry, but that article was last updated in 15 March 1998 !! That, my friend, is a LONG LONG TIME AGO, when you consider the amount of changes that has occured so far, in terms of the envisioned future of the US Army.
I did some checking on the Abrams, and the latest considered upgrade to the Abram is a notional "Urban Abrams" config. It consists of additional armour around the tank to give it full dimensional protection, especially in the rear and bottom. It also involves equipping the Abrams with HE rounds and beehive rounds so as to give it good anti-personnel capability, The current rounds used are too specialised against tanks, and they wont punch holes through walls big enuff for friendly forces to go through in a forced entry. Other sensors are also being considered for the Abrams, like a sniper detection system, which will be based on sound measurement techniques to cue the tank's armament in the direction of the sniper. I'm not very sure, but i remember something about enhancing the elevation angle of the main gun, as current elevation of the gun is unsuitable for use in urban warfare. Take this part with a bit of salt.
However, like all procurement programs, do not believe that it will definitely be implemented, until it has really BEEN implemented. Too many programs like this in the US have never come to fruitation, and sometimes even after the go-ahead to implement them, they may get cancelled all of a sudden.
One really has to get up-to-the-minute news to stay abreast with how the Americans are modernizing their forces. That's bloody hard to do, sometimes some programs you thought are still ongoing get cancelled all of a sudden, and then they get revived again in the future. Kinda makes one irritated when trying to follow certain developing programs. 