Future Main Battle Tank
-
hmm, better elevation will mean a taller and easier to hit abrams isn't it?? the have to make the turret taller. .. and yar, I read abt sniper detection systems on tanks, but you required more than one recieving area to accurately get the location of the sniper
the system actually 'hears' the first shot of the sniper, than calculates the level of sound from 3 or more different locations to pinpoint the location of the sniper if I'm not wrong. . . only problem is, the sniper has to shoot first before he can be detected. . .
hmm, the story about the abrams vs. 3 T-72 sound interesting, anyone know where I can read up more on that incident??? thx in advance. .. -
My friend, 5 years is not a long time in weapons developement. In anycase, the excerpt comes form a document dated 16 August 2000, which means the M1A3 upgrade plan was in place for 2 additional years.
In anycase, the logical step for the M1's life is upgrade. To an M1A3 standard that may not necessarily be the same as what we know. The US Army is definitely NOT gonna throw and store some 8000 M1 tanks. They will upgrade them. When compared to its predecessor, the M-60, the M1s have yet reached "mid life."
Without a doubt they are researching and designing replacements for the M1, but until at least 2030, there will be no such replacements coming into service unless circumstances forces otherwise. -
Dun see a problem witht he Abrams being tall, as long as it's not ridiculusly tall, it will not be a problem, after all modern fcs can put rounds into three foot tall targets (T-72s buried to the turret) at 3,000 meters as shown in the gulf war while on the move. Unless you can have a foot tall tank or something, you shouldn;t worry about excessive height too much.
-
wow really military nuts...
-
wait wait
where have i ever stated that "5 years is not a long time in weapons developement". Nope. I totally agree that 5 years is a short period, considering the RAH-66 program started 20 years ago and till now, hasn't been fielded. What I said was, the "envisioned future of the US Army" has changed. That's very different from what you think I said.
The thing is, during the period between 2000 and now, Dick Cheney came into the picture, and he brought with him BIG changes to the future of the US armed forces. He brought with him the concept of Legacy Forces, Interim Forces and the Objective Force. The M1 and M2s come under the Legacy force, the Stryker Brigades are the Interim Force, and the FCS would be the Objective Force.
And nowhere have I EVER stated that there will not be anymore upgrades of the Abram. What I said was, there is currently NO PROGRAM for an M1A3 upgrade in place, which you've insisted there is an ongoing one. Frankly, even your article doesn't prove your statement. All it shows is a study for an upgrade to a 140mm gun for the Abram. The US Armed forces conduct a hell lot of such studies. Many never make it to fruitation.
Now, the Bush Admin has come up with the extremely ambitious plan to bring forth the Block 1 capability of the FCS to 2008. Many programs have been sacrificed to fund the FCS program, most notably the Crusader program. Others include the SIIRCM/SIRFCM programs slated for the Apache helis, the ATACMS Blk II etc.
"The US Army is definitely NOT gonna throw and store some 8000 M1 tanks. " Of course not! I never said that. The M1s will serve for quite some time, very probably with at least 1 more substantial upgrade. But so far, there is no M1A3 upgrade plan in place yet. As for how long they'll serve will depend on how fast the FCS gets online. -
Okay, I believe what we have here is just a minor difference of the M1A3 concept.
The M1A3 I believe, is already an ongoing development, which will upgrade the current version of M1 Tanks to the A3 standard in perhaps 2015.
What I did not say is that they are upgrading to A3 standards NOW. I meant that the A3 is the next step which they are already looking into. -
Nice tanks for SAF!
-
nice, but way too heavy!Originally posted by Pressure-Forward:Nice tanks for SAF!
-
Why too heavy? Our grounds and roads so soft ah? They dun seem that much different from other countries leh, what the, we even have M60 engineering variants plying our roads on national day. Prehaps the "logic" of light tanks being better for Singapore is a little flawed, esp when some full weight MBTs can actually have superior mobility then them, and armour, and firepower too...
-
More SAF future tanks!
-
TANKS FOR SAF.......
-
the current clumsy tanks being out-dated and old must retired!
-
NEW BIONIX TANKS IN ACTION?
IT is true
Any one saw this mystery tanks in action B4??
-
Originally posted by Pressure-Forward:
Aiyo - that's an AMX-10PAC90!!!
[b]NEW BIONIX TANKS IN ACTION?
IT is true[/b]
I doubt we will see the new Bionix light tank until the official rollout or if Pioneer magazine decides to do an article about it. -
there are many models for the AMX-10
AMX-10RC
AMX-10P
AMX-10PAC90
what is the difference between them by the way? -
look strange to me by the way ,it has a long turret.
it look like a tank. -
We have two versions of that AMX-10 APC. One with 90mm gun and the other with 25mm gun. SAF actually bought small numbers of them for evaluation. Wonder why they are still here.
-
i found a pic of it,nice looking!an indoneasia one!
-
LAV-600
nice top,but use wheels sucks.what if stuck in swamp?
-
AMX-10 in the original form is just an IFV. They are usually armed with 25mm cannon. In SAF case, the AMX-10 IFV has a 1 man Drager turret with a French 25mm gunOriginally posted by Pressure-Forward:there are many models for the AMX-10
AMX-10RC
AMX-10P
AMX-10PAC90
what is the difference between them by the way?
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/9932/amx10p1.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/9932/amx10p2.jpg
SAF also has 22 AMX-10PAC90 which is armed with a 90mm high velocity cannon, eg. the picture you have included in your earlier post and the one above showing the Indonesian Marine are AMX-10PAC90.
For more information about AXM-10 and AMX-10PAC that SAF have, you can follow this URL:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/9932/amx10p.html
The AMX-10RC is a 6-wheels recon vechicle with a 105mm gun. The French use them at the battalion level.
For more info about AMX-10RC, you can follow this URL:
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/amx/index.html -
Nice info,Joe
-
The logic would be too have both light and heavy tanks for support. The Merkava 4, however, is on the upper end of that heavy scale. While large MBTs may have superior firepower and protection, the don't operate that well in closed terrain. Perhaps in certain built up areas and holding strategic highways. But certainly not in a palm or rubber plantations or narrow back alleys. It doesn't take much to immoblise a slow or a large tank, hitting a fast one under cover is a different story, even with the Milian or Spike, especially during exercises. My choice would be the French Leclerc, (rather than the Merk 4), which is just slightly lighter than most western tanks, operating with a 3 man crew.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Why too heavy? Our grounds and roads so soft ah? They dun seem that much different from other countries leh, what the, we even have M60 engineering variants plying our roads on national day. Prehaps the "logic" of light tanks being better for Singapore is a little flawed, esp when some full weight MBTs can actually have superior mobility then them, and armour, and firepower too... -
maybe we can order the french tanks to replace the current MBT.
it only 50 tons,compare to other like Merkava,M1,less 10 tons!
but still too heavy moving through jungle,plantation estate.
-
All depends on the foot pressure and track ground disturbance, give them wide tracks and rubber pads like the Abrams, you'll see they can go almost anywhere...
-
But my proposal is that they use a system that is like the FCS, 30-40 tons, advanced technology. Fight the war with information rather then sheer tonnage. Of course, this unit should have enough modular armour protection to slug it out with Pee Tee Nighty Toos and more then enuff firepower to kill... Dun forget the mobility...