Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Space & Defense Technology
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





U.S' next Generation tank?

This is a discussion on U.S' next Generation tank? within the Space & Defense Technology forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; has anyone heard of,or seen any pic's or video's of a concept? m1a3 maybe?...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old February 14th, 2009   #1
Banned Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6
Threads:
U.S' next Generation tank?

has anyone heard of,or seen any pic's or video's of a concept? m1a3 maybe?
hotrod44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 23rd, 2009   #2
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 49
Threads:
The FCS?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mounted_Combat_System

-----JT-----
Vajt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 23rd, 2009   #3
Just Hatched
Private
Freeman's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vajt View Post
That appears to be self-propelled artillery, not a tank.
Freeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 23rd, 2009   #4
Defense Professional / Analyst
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The land of Oz
Posts: 822
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post
That appears to be self-propelled artillery, not a tank.
Yes and no. From that site:

The MCS will provide both direct and Beyond-Line-of-Sight (BLOS) offensive firepower capability, allowing for in-depth destruction of point targets up to 8 km (5 mi) away.

So its not designed as a direct replacement for the Abrams, more an airportable indirect and direct fire vehicle - part replacement perhaps of the M-8 Stingray (? wasn't that the 80's proposal to replace the Sheridan?)
Marc 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2009   #5
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 13,143
Threads:
It's a family of vehicles. Not a single vehicle. It includes SP arty, MBT, and other variants.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2009   #6
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 49
Threads:
Correct, some are designed as the new SP 155mm artillery and others as lightweight tanks (with 120mm turrets) as well as troop carriers and other versions.

The latest issue of Armada magazine: www.armada.ch actually has a supplement where 10-30 ton vehicles are reviewed. There is one section about the FCS program, and it mentions that the 120mm version will replace the M1....eventually.

-----JT-----
Vajt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2009   #7
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Abraham Gubler's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,237
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc 1 View Post
So its not designed as a direct replacement for the Abrams, more an airportable indirect and direct fire vehicle - part replacement perhaps of the M-8 Stingray (? wasn't that the 80's proposal to replace the Sheridan?)
Nope the XM1202 MCS will replace M1 tanks in those heavy brigade combined arms battalions that convert to FCS. Despite its much lower gross vehicle weight the XM1202 will actually have 'thicker' or more capable passive armour and active defence not to mention much higher SA and target acquisition capability. Current block 1 add on armour for the XM1202 is as capable as the Abrams armour but the in service vehicles (~2015) are programmed to have block 3 armour.

US Army modeling shows that the FCS brigade will suffer 1/3 to 1/4 less casualties than a heavy brigade despite having twice as many infantry dismounts.
Abraham Gubler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2009   #8
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abraham Gubler View Post
Nope the XM1202 MCS will replace M1 tanks in those heavy brigade combined arms battalions that convert to FCS. Despite its much lower gross vehicle weight the XM1202 will actually have 'thicker' or more capable passive armour and active defence not to mention much higher SA and target acquisition capability. Current block 1 add on armour for the XM1202 is as capable as the Abrams armour but the in service vehicles (~2015) are programmed to have block 3 armour.

US Army modeling shows that the FCS brigade will suffer 1/3 to 1/4 less casualties than a heavy brigade despite having twice as many infantry dismounts.
And will this tank be 100% American unlike the Abrams that uses a German main gun and British armour?
paca22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2009   #9
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
eckherl's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,268
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by paca22 View Post
And will this tank be 100% American unlike the Abrams that uses a German main gun and British armour?
Yes it will in both categories, ie: firepower and protection.
________________
"Here, across death`s other river
The Tartar horsemen shake their spears"
eckherl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2009   #10
New Member
Private
wtsimpson7's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 25
Threads:
An October 2005 report by the Pentagon recommended "further delaying the Army's Future Combat Systems program." This probably means that the XM1202 Future Combat Systems Mounted Combat System (M.C.S) will not see service for some time though. So the M1 Abrams might be around for awhile.
wtsimpson7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2009   #11
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
eckherl's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,268
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc 1 View Post
Yes and no. From that site:

The MCS will provide both direct and Beyond-Line-of-Sight (BLOS) offensive firepower capability, allowing for in-depth destruction of point targets up to 8 km (5 mi) away.

So its not designed as a direct replacement for the Abrams, more an airportable indirect and direct fire vehicle - part replacement perhaps of the M-8 Stingray (? wasn't that the 80's proposal to replace the Sheridan?)
The MCS program is designed to eventually replace M1 series tanks but I have my doubts on this happening anytime soon, the big roll out for the program is 2015 but the M1A2 SEP has been going thru a upgrade process to keep it around until at least the year 2025. It will be a pity if the entire program gets scrapped due to the amount of research and big dollars spent on the program but this just may likely happen especially if the U.S Army announces further delays due to glitches in the system or budget increases.

Yes, the Stingray was offered to the 82nd Airborne but by the time it rolled out the technology and armor protection was already obsolete, Textron did find a buyer though, that country is Thailand who still operates it. We also tested another vehicle that was more capable over the stingray, this vehicle was called the AGS but by the time it rolled out it to was found to be obsolete in armor protection and firepower.
________________
"Here, across death`s other river
The Tartar horsemen shake their spears"
eckherl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2009   #12
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4
Threads:
I remember stumbling upon a video on Youtube where they had a tank competition between countries in NATO in which the US crew came in first and the Germans in 2nd, but I can't remember what the rest of the order was. Do they have skill competition between NATO countries often? Does anyone have any links with results?
paca22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2009   #13
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Pulau Pinang
Posts: 232
Threads:
It's an interesting concept, though I doubt the current targets for the FCS will be met, given the current Economical circumstances. They've got trillions of dollars that need to be dealt with. (the US that is)
Tavarisch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2009   #14
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
eckherl's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,268
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by paca22 View Post
I remember stumbling upon a video on Youtube where they had a tank competition between countries in NATO in which the US crew came in first and the Germans in 2nd, but I can't remember what the rest of the order was. Do they have skill competition between NATO countries often? Does anyone have any links with results?
You are referring to the CAT tank gunnery shoot off between NATO countries, this has pretty much gone away.
________________
"Here, across death`s other river
The Tartar horsemen shake their spears"
eckherl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2009   #15
Defense Professional / Analyst
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 284
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abraham Gubler View Post
Despite its much lower gross vehicle weight the XM1202 will actually have 'thicker' or more capable passive armour and active defence not to mention much higher SA and target acquisition capability. Current block 1 add on armour for the XM1202 is as capable as the Abrams armour but the in service vehicles (~2015) are programmed to have block 3 armour.
I thought they gave up on approaching Abrams-level passive protection for FCS and are relying nearly completely on active defenses and improved SA for high-end threats, with passive armor only stopping medium caliber autocannon and RPGs.
B.Smitty is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:14 PM.