Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Army & Security Forces
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

Miramar_14_MV-22_1621a.JPG

Miramar_14_MV-22_1726a.JPG

Miramar_14_MV-22_0074a1.JPG

Miramar_14_FA-18C_0409a.JPG
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





Idea for future tank/apc

This is a discussion on Idea for future tank/apc within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; I'm an aspiring writer of military science fiction, so I often dream up new weapons systems used by future soldiers. ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old March 10th, 2011   #1
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1
Threads:
Lightbulb Idea for future tank/apc

I'm an aspiring writer of military science fiction, so I often dream up new weapons systems used by future soldiers. I'd greatly appreciate any and all comments about this particular weapon system.

The idea I had was to begin with a Stryker M1128 Mobile Gun System. The topside cannon would be completely removed. Inside the Stryker there would be two or three stations. Each station would have a helmet that gives the user a heads up display and allows for 360 degree vision and control of the sight lines for the robotic arms. Then, each station will have a pair of gloves that are linked to one set of the robotic arms.

The robotic arms themselves would each end in some type of heavy weapon system (mini guns, rockets, cannons, ground to air missiles, flamethrowers or heavy automatic shotguns). The arms would fold into armored compartments when not needed. I can also see variants of this Stryker being modified to use the robotic arms for search and rescue operations, among other things.

Because each set of arms is operating independently it would allow for multiple targets to be engaged simultaneously, thereby greatly increasing the combat effectiveness of the system.

This idea could also be scaled up and used on a greatly modified tank chassis.


Respond and tell me if this idea has any merit!
Seanbtwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2011   #2
Senior Member
Lieutenant Colonel
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,079
Threads:
1. What is the proposed purpose/mission of this vehicle? It sounds overly complex (i.e. expensive) and does not make much sense.

2. How many robotic arms? 2, 4 (in 2 pairs), or 6 (in 3 pairs)? What is the length and load bearing capabilities of each arm? Located at opposite ends of the vehicle or superimposed? Will they be attached to the sides, roof, or connected to a torso section (centaur style)?

3. From a weapon firing standpoint a telefactor style control system is inherently impossible to stabilize so it cannot fire accurately while on the move. Effective one handed aiming range probably the same as for a pistol, about 50m.
My2Cents is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2011   #3
Super Moderator
Lieutenant General
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,555
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seanbtwo View Post
I'm an aspiring writer of military science fiction, so I often dream up new weapons systems used by future soldiers. I'd greatly appreciate any and all comments about this particular weapon system.

The idea I had was to begin with a Stryker M1128 Mobile Gun System. The topside cannon would be completely removed. Inside the Stryker there would be two or three stations. Each station would have a helmet that gives the user a heads up display and allows for 360 degree vision and control of the sight lines for the robotic arms. Then, each station will have a pair of gloves that are linked to one set of the robotic arms.

The robotic arms themselves would each end in some type of heavy weapon system (mini guns, rockets, cannons, ground to air missiles, flamethrowers or heavy automatic shotguns). The arms would fold into armored compartments when not needed. I can also see variants of this Stryker being modified to use the robotic arms for search and rescue operations, among other things.

Because each set of arms is operating independently it would allow for multiple targets to be engaged simultaneously, thereby greatly increasing the combat effectiveness of the system.

This idea could also be scaled up and used on a greatly modified tank chassis.


Respond and tell me if this idea has any merit!
One of the problems with having articulated arms is they are far more complex and harder to effectively protect than a conventional turret. So the turret provides a simpler and more secure method of mounting weaponry than robotic arms with lots of complicated, moving parts that must be armoured against enemy action.

In addition you have to ask what sort of scenarios would you envision where a Stryker would make an effective director of three separate types of weapons, and where this could be used without putting the Stryker at extremely high risk?

Say you take a conventional turret with, for sake of example, a 25mm cannon on it. This is a general purpose weapon that can be used on a range of targets, and then you could add, say, a remote controlled weapon system atop the turret with a 7.62mm machine gun. These weapons complement one another and can engage a range of targets in a variety of scenarios without compromising the inherent relative stability, security and simplicity of a conventional turret design.

The system you're proposing is interesting, but very complex, in terms of not just the robotic arms themselves but the amount of computer systems necessary to make effective use of them and the difficulty of armouring such systems against enemy fire. For these reasons I'm unsure of whether it would achieve a benefit over a conventional turret with a general purpose primary weapon complimented by a secondary weapon like a machine gun.

Anyway, that's just my thoughts, maybe I'm off base on some things. There are other more qualified people in here who could give you a better opinion.
Bonza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2011   #4
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 13,144
Threads:
The robotic arms idea seems strange and out of place. In terms of an AFV with tons of differing weapons systems, and multiple weapon operators, I'd check out the BMPT, including the earlier prototypes of it.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2011   #5
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Waylander's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein
Posts: 4,679
Threads:
Just controlling two different weapons with both arms is more than just challenging.
Everyone who has tried to fire two pistols at once knows that one hits sh** while doing it.

All the other problems already got adressed.

Overcomplicated, diffuclt to armor, expensive and without a clear role.
Waylander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2011   #6
Junior Member
Private First Class
SteelTiger 177's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: I live in Sierra Vista Arizona since November 2001
Posts: 85
Threads:
I think we should look at upgunning the 1128 Mgs with a 120mm main gun.
SteelTiger 177 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2011   #7
Senior Member
Lieutenant Colonel
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,079
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTiger 177 View Post
I think we should look at upgunning the 1128 Mgs with a 120mm main gun.
They have enough trouble with the recoil from the 105mm, the weight of the vehicle, and that it only carries 18 rounds on board. It would probably be a better idea to see if a 90mm or 75mm Ares cannon could do the job.
My2Cents is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2011   #8
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
NICO's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: AZ, USA
Posts: 207
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seanbtwo View Post
I'm an aspiring writer of military science fiction, so I often dream up new weapons systems used by future soldiers. I'd greatly appreciate any and all comments about this particular weapon system.

The idea I had was to begin with a Stryker M1128 Mobile Gun System. The topside cannon would be completely removed. Inside the Stryker there would be two or three stations. Each station would have a helmet that gives the user a heads up display and allows for 360 degree vision and control of the sight lines for the robotic arms. Then, each station will have a pair of gloves that are linked to one set of the robotic arms.

The robotic arms themselves would each end in some type of heavy weapon system (mini guns, rockets, cannons, ground to air missiles, flamethrowers or heavy automatic shotguns). The arms would fold into armored compartments when not needed. I can also see variants of this Stryker being modified to use the robotic arms for search and rescue operations, among other things.

Because each set of arms is operating independently it would allow for multiple targets to be engaged simultaneously, thereby greatly increasing the combat effectiveness of the system.

This idea could also be scaled up and used on a greatly modified tank chassis.


Respond and tell me if this idea has any merit!

I would look into developing/using new types of ammo compared to new sci-fi platform. Just a thought.
NICO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2011   #9
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3
Threads:
Wheeled Vehicles

I used to work with Strykers- Just remember to consider the weight of your modifications. The maximum practical weight for a wheeled vehicle is about 19 tons. Anything higher and you have to switched to a tracked chassis, else you will get stuck in the mud. The Strykers are generally already at that weight and exceed it with the add on armor. This appears to be okay in the desert, but I wouldn't bring an uparmored Stryker into a woodland environment
hasty_d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2011   #10
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Waylander's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein
Posts: 4,679
Threads:
19 tons is not the maximum usefull weight for wheeled vehicles.

A VBCI comes in at more than 25 tons, a Boxer at 33 tons and IIRC a Piranha III with turret is also heavier than 19 tons. Sure they cannot compete with a tracked modern AFV in heavy terrain but they are not less mobile than lighter Strykers and LAVs on their older Piranha chassis.

Not that the idea with these arms doesn't remain weird...
Waylander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2011   #11
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3
Threads:
Thank you Waylander, I stand corrected. After further research- the 19 ton maximum requirement for the Stryker was to meet Air Force transportability capabilities. The 30 ton mark is considered to be about the practical limit for wheeled vehicles.
hasty_d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28th, 2011   #12
New Member
Private
Corsair96's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 36
Threads:
I remember the M551 being Airdroppable, but are their any other tanks that still have this capability? Is it a viable use for actual combat? or is it a completely worthless use. I think it wold be pretty useful for RDF's and for sites without a big airstrip
Corsair96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28th, 2011   #13
New Member
Private
Corsair96's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 36
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seanbtwo View Post
[FONT="Book Antiqua"]



[FONT="Tahoma"][FONT="Times New Roman"]The robotic arms themselves would each end in some type of heavy weapon system (mini guns, rockets, cannons, ground to air missiles, flamethrowers or heavy automatic shotguns). The arms would fold into armored compartments when not needed. I can also see variants of this Stryker being modified to use the robotic arms for search and rescue operations, among other things.
It would look cool as hell
but you probably wouldnt have as much degree of control over their weapons and if one broke then your sitting in water? Also, consider how many motors it would take to give you a good degree over control for 6 separate moving "arms"
Corsair96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28th, 2011   #14
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 13,144
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corsair96 View Post
I remember the M551 being Airdroppable, but are their any other tanks that still have this capability? Is it a viable use for actual combat? or is it a completely worthless use. I think it wold be pretty useful for RDF's and for sites without a big airstrip
The Sprut-SD is. The Russians call it a self-propelled anti-tank gun, but basically it's an air-droppable light tank with a 125mm main gun.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2011   #15
Junior Member
Private First Class
SteelTiger 177's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: I live in Sierra Vista Arizona since November 2001
Posts: 85
Threads:
What should also look at is artillery and light tanks.Currently the U.S. is fielding two new systems the M777 towed howitzer and the HIMARS rocket system and so far nothing new in the way of self-propelled guns.In the last decade two Spg-systems were looked at the Crusader and the N-LOS cannon both of which were cancelled.A new Sp-Howitzer is needed simply because the the currrent system the M109A6can't keeep pace with the Abrams MBT.When the Paladin entered service in the 1960s the M48/60 tanks were the current mbts in the US arsenal .When the M1 entered service we something unique in tank combat a tank that can move fast(and furiously) and hit its targetss straight and true from great distances.A new Spg is vital as well as light tanks and breaching and bridging systems
SteelTiger 177 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:09 PM.