Jump to content
Hedgehog

The Future of the Tank

Recommended Posts

Why not attach wings to the tanks a la sparky? :biggrin:

SwHqLtK_TpY

The good part starts at 1:30

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're still maintaining a fair distance to Sparky, and I surely hope that we'll keep it. That man has ... serious issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PMSL

Is ths intented to be a serious concept or was he doing it as a piss-take?

Maybe Ssnake could give a quick synopsis about this: Sparky?

For us newer types?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike Sparks has been banned from pretty much every serious military discussion board that I know of, repeatedly (he has a habit of registering under multiple names and congratulating himself to his brilliant ideas). Most of his suggestions are bordering on the insane (even though he sometimes actually has a point, which unfortunately gets drowned in the rest of his drivel). He's incapable of taking criticism, he's incapable of rational behavior or even basic politeness, and he shows symptoms of certain manic personality disorders, to put it mildly (and I'm not going to start discussing certain other preferences that were unveiled; still trying to erase the disturbing pictures in my memory).

You all know that I try to restrain myself from passing judgment on internet people. But Sparky manages to push all the buttons in the most abrasive manner, including his one-man crusade to get the M113 renamed as "Gav!n" (not typing the name here to avoid Google ranking this even higher).

Mike Sparks - Pissing off Military Discussion Boards Near You Since 1998.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HERE is a more detailed accounting of sparky's infamy.

Hmm, Server Error.

Is that a good thing?

Ah, so Mr Sparks is one of those, is he?

Say no more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm reading Max Hastings' book Bomber Command. It is interesting to see how much wishful thinking, double-speak and outright lies were used by those we consider good guys, or even heros. "Bomber" Harris and a number of others, including key leaders in the US 8th AF, seem to have been actually delusional at times. It would be interesting to see a study comparing that kind of military-madness with the likes of crackpots like Sparky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm reading Max Hastings' book Bomber Command. It is interesting to see how much wishful thinking, double-speak and outright lies were used by those we consider good guys, or even heros. "Bomber" Harris and a number of others, including key leaders in the US 8th AF, seem to have been actually delusional at times. It would be interesting to see a study comparing that kind of military-madness with the likes of crackpots like Sparky.

... like General LeMay.

a-MTBPKfI90

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A tank with complete protection against 30mm APFSDS should be more than enough to do whatever is needed to be done within most battlefields these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A tank with complete protection against 30mm APFSDS should be more than enough to do whatever is needed to be done within most battlefields these days.

Well I think you'll find the penetration stats for most "modern" RPGs with their chemical rounds, is much more than the kinetic abilities of 30mm APFSDS.

In addition if the threat is now going to be more "insurgent" types as opposed to field armies, you are far more likely to encounter the hand held anti tank weapon type threat than a vehicle mounting 30mm(+).

Let alone the whole suite of IED, VBIED, ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A tank with complete protection against 30mm APFSDS should be more than enough to do whatever is needed to be done within most battlefields these days.

Yes, but "adequate for most" battlefields doesn't cut it as soon as you are in opposition to an enemy with access to advanced armored vehicles, or even just 100mm anti tank guns, the probably most widely proliferated caliber. Or 57mm anti aircraft guns.

Add to that the threat of modern RPGs and missiles, eventually even with top attack capability, or projectile forming anti tank mines.

Sacrificing vehicle mass for strategic mobility may be justified ... as long as it doesn't impede your operational survivability and sustained deployment. And there's the real bitch of a fundamental problem that you just don't know what the future will bring - except that it'll be different from one's expectations (for better or worse).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not forgetting also that complete protection against 30mm APFSDS is beyond the capability of most (even possibly all?) MBT of MLC70 even.

The hull sides and rear, and the turret rear and cupolas etc are all vulnerable to perforation by small (25mm-40mm) APFSDS rounds, and sight hoods etc are barely splinter proof, and yield partial mission kills.

Most 'protected against 30mm AP' vehicles are only protected against 30mm API or possibly 30mm APDS or APCR with APFSDS being a far harder proposition to completely defeat, all over the vehicle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...