Is there any use of light guns on tanks/armored vehicles?

[DWG]

And what I said is that simply attaching a 30-50mm turret to a hull, with 2-3 crew and nothing and none else in the remaining hull space - is a waste of space and is inefficient.

Depends whether the vehicle is weight-limited or space-limited. If it's weight-limited, sticking a turret on top is a really bad idea.

 

[Nik]

Could such auto-load 'remote' turret free enough hull-space for vertically launched, top-kill weapons ?

Would seem to side-step existential issue that otherwise takes MBT-sized vehicle to mount gun big enough to kill comparable MBT 'at range', while carrying enough armour to shrug off lesser foes....

 

[Big_Zukini]

Could such auto-load 'remote' turret free enough hull-space for vertically launched, top-kill weapons ?

Would seem to side-step existential issue that otherwise takes MBT-sized vehicle to mount gun big enough to kill comparable MBT 'at range', while carrying enough armour to shrug off lesser foes....

Many IFVs today mount an overhead turret with top attack ATGMs.

 

[Scott Kenny]

ReplyCould such auto-load 'remote' turret free enough hull-space for vertically launched, top-kill weapons ?

Would seem to side-step existential issue that otherwise takes MBT-sized vehicle to mount gun big enough to kill comparable MBT 'at range', while carrying enough armour to shrug off lesser foes....

Maybe?

A Hellfire is 5.5ft long. A Javelin is 4ft long. APKWS is over 6ft long. You'd need a tipover booster instead of a simple ejection charge, which adds a little length. So a vertical launched missile makes for a tall vehicle carrying it.

I really think you'd need to develop a dedicated missile for that. Maybe something like the Macross "flying beer cans," but those are not very aerodynamic.

 

[DeltaGreen]

This idea may sound stupid, but I wonder whether the following approach could be viable.

Imagine a assault gun weighing around 30 tons, armed with a main gun of less than 105 mm caliber, but still capable of efficiently engaging soft targets as well as APCs, armored vehicles, IFVs, and reconnaissance vehicles, while largely abandoning the ability to defeat main battle tanks.

In terms of protection, the first priority would be to equip as many sensors and air-defense weapons as possible, followed by armor that is as thick as feasible without becoming excessive.

Additionally, the vehicle should ideally be as inexpensive and easy to produce as possible.

 

[Big_Zukini]

This idea may sound stupid, but I wonder whether the following approach could be viable.

Imagine a assault gun weighing around 30 tons, armed with a main gun of less than 105 mm caliber, but still capable of efficiently engaging soft targets as well as APCs, armored vehicles, IFVs, and reconnaissance vehicles, while largely abandoning the ability to defeat main battle tanks.

In terms of protection, the first priority would be to equip as many sensors and air-defense weapons as possible, followed by armor that is as thick as feasible without becoming excessive.

Additionally, the vehicle should ideally be as inexpensive and easy to produce as possible.

Yes.

 

[Scott Kenny]

This idea may sound stupid, but I wonder whether the following approach could be viable.

Imagine a assault gun weighing around 30 tons, armed with a main gun of less than 105 mm caliber, but still capable of efficiently engaging soft targets as well as APCs, armored vehicles, IFVs, and reconnaissance vehicles, while largely abandoning the ability to defeat main battle tanks.

In terms of protection, the first priority would be to equip as many sensors and air-defense weapons as possible, followed by armor that is as thick as feasible without becoming excessive.

Additionally, the vehicle should ideally be as inexpensive and easy to produce as possible.

That's called a Sherman.