Any thoughts on what the next generation of Main Battle Tanks is likely to look like. What do people think the design priorities are likely to be in the future?
Lower cost. Higher Survivability. Enhanced 'stealth' (low heat sig, radar sig, EM etc). Obviously, 'lower cost' will go out the window - unless they make the tanks smaller, or decide not to bother with some of the other features. To draw a parallel - the F-22 Raptor. Cost: $2 billion for 10 ($200,000,000 each) Yes, it has stealth, speed (as much as is needed, according to the studies), advanced weaponry, advanced avionics, etc etc etc. However, only a few countries can afford it (like the USA, and possibly the UK will buy a few) and, in reality, why is it needed? The Eurofighter can do almost as good a job (one computer simulated mission gave the Eurofighter a 95% survival chance and the F-22 a 97% survival chance), for far less money (£40 billion for 620 - around £65,000,000 each - or [very roughly!] $103,000,000 each). Frankly, for the huge costs & development times involved, it does not offer such a huge advantage over its contemporaries. Yes, I know, any advantage is good in combat, but who will this plane be fighting? Britain? Unlikely - unless Bush gets muddled between the UK and the UAE. Any other European nation with front-line military jets? See Britain. The ex-USSR nations? Yes, upgraded MiG29s & Su27s will be tricky to deal with, and this is probably the main threat, should a war ever start. However, look at how many upgraded MiG29s & Su27s the Czech republic has, then look at how many F15, -16 & -18s the USA has. China? Certainly they have made great strides in technology recently... The main enemy for the US Armed Forces will be terrorists & third-world nations suspected of harbouring terrorists, or possessing WMDs, or of looking at Bush's pint in a funny way. That job could be handled by a bunch of P-47s. So, in conclusion - While I understand the need to have a better weapon than anybody else (or at least, anybody else that you won't sell yours to!), but is there a need to spend oodles & oodles on 'highly advanced' weapons that offer only slight advantages over current models? I reckon the next crop of tanks will have the overall look of the Challenger (low, lots of slope) and be packed with yet more electronics. Nothing more radical than a continuance of current trends, really.
Ah but what about mobility between different thearters? Even the Americans, who have by far the best airlift capacity, can't move Abramhams MBTs in useful numbers by air. Might there be a future for smaller lighter tanks? Any thoughts?
This topic has been discussed. http://www.fun-online.sk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=512 http://www.fun-online.sk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1102 http://www.fun-online.sk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=515
Besides the smaller and lighter tanks with air-lift capabilitites. There will still be place for the heavies I think. Probably turret-less to present a smaller target, operated by a smaller crew that is better-protected deep within the hull (in lieu of the turret), mount a larger gun (150mm)....
Or still have a turret, but the turret is only occupied by the auto-loader, and is therefore very small (this has been done on at least one test vehicle).
