Register here

Author Topic: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement  (Read 85537 times)

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1839
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #285 on: February 08, 2018, 10:37:58 pm »
The reduction in ammunition stowage and the cumbersome loading
were in part why the 140mm never progressed. That and it pretty much
required ETC (or other complicated ignition methods) to get reliable and uniform ignition.

ETC would have also facilitated fire-out-of-battery because the muzzle brake that
was envisioned would have had obscuration issues. 

This does bring up a need for MMW imagers (possibly passive) to help with
quick follow-up shots and to deal with IR/laser screening smoke; ViSAR recently
demonstrated close to 50W @ 231 - 235 GHz.

Online Foo Fighter

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 342
  • I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #286 on: February 09, 2018, 12:03:38 am »
The hull and turret architecture are not exactly expensive to develop in the greater scheme of things, consider the previous use of alternate turrets on developed hulls in the past for example.  This would allow proper consideration to new technology to be introduced.  It would be possible to for example, introduce a hybrid power unit/transmission and even an engine forward hull.

My understanding of the rheinmetal gun is that it has a smooth bore barrel not rifled.

"Until they were the first to introduce laser range finding and ballistic computers to tanks.

Today, they use lasers, meteorological sensors and ballistic computers to work out Fire Control Solutions".

I can remember the early laser range finders, very odd results for a long time which required the fitment of a 'second logic' button.  All very odd but part of the development fun.

Offline Kadija_Man

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1724
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #287 on: February 11, 2018, 07:36:09 pm »
The hull and turret architecture are not exactly expensive to develop in the greater scheme of things, consider the previous use of alternate turrets on developed hulls in the past for example.  This would allow proper consideration to new technology to be introduced.  It would be possible to for example, introduce a hybrid power unit/transmission and even an engine forward hull.

My understanding of the rheinmetal gun is that it has a smooth bore barrel not rifled.

"Until they were the first to introduce laser range finding and ballistic computers to tanks.

Today, they use lasers, meteorological sensors and ballistic computers to work out Fire Control Solutions".

I can remember the early laser range finders, very odd results for a long time which required the fitment of a 'second logic' button.  All very odd but part of the development fun.

I remember many years ago watching the BBC report on the introduction of the Laser range finder to the Chieftain.  They put it up against an older model with a .50in spotting gun.   The Laser range finder missed.  The .50in gun did not.   Reflections were a real problem apparently with the early Lasers.

Online Foo Fighter

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 342
  • I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #288 on: February 11, 2018, 09:52:00 pm »
Yes, interesting times.  We had a batch delivered which had the bottom prism reversed which meant a less than timely return for a fix.  Did very little to help the testing schedule.  Modern sensors are fascinating with many avenues used to achieve the same goal.  I wonder if Lidar is being considered yet.

Offline Kadija_Man

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1724
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #289 on: February 11, 2018, 10:20:44 pm »
Yes, interesting times.  We had a batch delivered which had the bottom prism reversed which meant a less than timely return for a fix.  Did very little to help the testing schedule.  Modern sensors are fascinating with many avenues used to achieve the same goal.  I wonder if Lidar is being considered yet.

The Americans have put mm wave radar into an M1 in a "hunter-killer" set up.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10155
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #290 on: February 12, 2018, 05:00:17 am »
Yes, interesting times.  We had a batch delivered which had the bottom prism reversed which meant a less than timely return for a fix.  Did very little to help the testing schedule.  Modern sensors are fascinating with many avenues used to achieve the same goal.  I wonder if Lidar is being considered yet.

The Americans have put mm wave radar into an M1 in a "hunter-killer" set up.

I'd think that'd pretty much say, "hey everybody, I'm right here".  Would anybody want to turn it on? 
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline SpudmanWP

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 769
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #291 on: February 12, 2018, 05:30:49 am »
Depends on how it's used, especially since OPFOR does not carry any ESM that I am aware of to even detect it.  If it's a decent LPI set then there should not be a problem.

5 Minutes of Google-Fu could only turn up MMW being part of an APS system like Trophy which means it's extremely short range at best.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2018, 06:02:48 am by SpudmanWP »
WE4-45-1-08     OMHIWDMB
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

Offline lastdingo

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 488
  • Blogger http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/
    • Defence and Freedom blog
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #292 on: February 12, 2018, 07:22:14 am »
mm wavelength radar is known for short ranges, but those short ranges still add up to several kilometres in the Longbow radar and some others.
mmW is not very accurate at rangefinding, but capable of creating imagery without SAR tricks.

The addition of mmW radar to tanks for APS and as complementary sensor to IIR will likely drive up the costs even further - MBTs risk becoming too expensive.

It doesn't help to calculate that a tank with it will be so and so much more effective ceteris paribus. In the end, the rise in the costs of current tanks (even a plain IFV like Puma is at 7 million drive away costs, 10+ if you add the periphery) may make them unaffordable in the necessary quantities.

A German army that goes down to 200 Leopard 3 for maybe six brigades would badly lack in MBT power compared to the cost equivalent of 2,000 T-90s, for example.

Online Foo Fighter

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 342
  • I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #293 on: February 12, 2018, 07:27:01 am »
I mentioned lidar as it is extremely accurate in an all aspect way.  Smoke and other ways a target can be obscured would not be a problem and a short 360 would enable ranges to landmarks in a defended position for those times it gets loud.

Offline SpudmanWP

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 769
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #294 on: February 12, 2018, 08:02:14 am »
Sorry that I was not clear enough.  While MMW is "short ranged" in it's own right (ie Longbow vs a fighter's X-Band radar), the MMW on Trophy is much shorter still (likely less than 1 mile) due to smaller antenna and lower power.
WE4-45-1-08     OMHIWDMB
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1839
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #295 on: February 12, 2018, 10:14:58 am »
Yes, interesting times.  We had a batch delivered which had the bottom prism reversed which meant a less than timely return for a fix.  Did very little to help the testing schedule.  Modern sensors are fascinating with many avenues used to achieve the same goal.  I wonder if Lidar is being considered yet.

The Americans have put mm wave radar into an M1 in a "hunter-killer" set up.

I'd think that'd pretty much say, "hey everybody, I'm right here".  Would anybody want to turn it on?

MTAS was ultimately basis for a fire control system for a command guided projectile (X-ROD). 
Also you would use it to defeat screening smoke or obscuration (including ownship-induced).

My view is that the best place for the MMW emitter would be offboard (UGV) hence the passive MMW
remark I made above.

Not sure I fully buy the claim that MMW is prohibitively expensive since it can and is riding a consumer market e.g.
5G, medical imaging, autonomous cars, aviation DVE.

Offline Colonial-Marine

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 501
  • Fighting the UAV mafia.
Re: M1 Abrams MBT Replacement
« Reply #296 on: February 13, 2018, 06:54:52 pm »
Wasn't some sort of MMW radar included in the fire control system of both the Russian T-14 and "T-95"/Objekt 195?
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy."