How would you design a light tank?




 
--
 
December 12th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 

Topic: How would you design a light tank?


Okay there's a lot of talk about light tanks. Now here's the specifications:
- Must fit inside a C-130
- Must be able to knock out a tank

So how would you design your light tank? Where would your emphasis be?

Basically the design I'd go for would be the Stryker. It just seems the best deal for the role. Do any of you guys have a different idea?
December 12th, 2004  
godofthunder9010
 
 
Well, I believe there is a complete thread on exactly that already. The "Light Tanks" thread has a lot of discussion on it. Give it a look.

What I'd like to know: What is the best velocity that a lightly armored tracked vehicle can achieve?
December 12th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
This is a thread on how you would design one.
--
December 12th, 2004  
godofthunder9010
 
 
There's lots of ideas and information about that discussed in that thread. I agree that a separate thread would be a good thing -- but have a look at what was already discussed. That's all I'm saying.

How I would design a light tank: Well, the Stryker is probably a good starting point to say how I'd do things differently. I'd make it shorter (front to back) first of all. I'd keep the 105mm main gun, but I'd want to add some options onto that turret -- I'd adapt a vehicular version of the Javelin to add on top of the turret and try and figure out a way to also add a Stinger. It needs lots of options IMHO.

The Scimetar is an interesting design.
December 12th, 2004  
rocco
 
up armor a humvee, and give it missles.
December 12th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
The thing with missiles is that it's not as versitile as the gun and usually has a much shorter range.
With the 105mm you have a chance to out shoot some of your enemies who may be using antequated military hardware.
Also I believe tank cluster munitions can be used on infantry concentrations.
That's why I'd stick with a gun.
December 12th, 2004  
Dutchy
 
Design a light tank? Light tanks are mainly used for recon purposes, so speed is it's main defense. So probaly a gas turbine for propulsion, suspension capable of coping with sustained high speeds.

Armament: 1 or multiple 20 or 30mm gatlingcanon with a high rate of fire (doubeling up as AA gun), usual machine guns and a TOW/Stinger launcher.

Armor:
Combination of steel and composite armor
December 13th, 2004  
rocco
 
see thats where the problem lies... the specification forthe light tank is that it can be carried in a C-130... qwhich means that the tank cant be heavy... thus no steel, no composite armor... just aluminium, at most with ERA on top. this means that the vehicles will get pwned by RPG's unless offcourse as stated before they have ERA... still thats not eneugh.
all of USA APC's are light armor, and vulnerable. the bradley is basically a M-113 hull with a sleek looking gun on top. they should have made them of harder metal like say the Ratel... or even used the thousands of M-60's america has and covert them to APC's
December 13th, 2004  
egoz
 
Well just to throw some numbers out there. The normal payload of the new C-130J is 34,000lbs, while the max is 42,000lbs. Keep in mind by using the maximum amount of payload you shorten the range of the aircraft. It also changes the distance it needs to take off and land. The Stryker weighs in at about 40,000 lbs on average. So weight is going to be an obvious concern.
I wish I could remember the name of the vehicle. But they were showing a tank on the History Channel a while back that was using a new type of plastic armor that was supposed to significantly reduce the weight. They were contrasting it to the weigh of the M1A1. That was the last I heard of it. Anyone know what I'm talking about?
December 13th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
Could it be the M-8 Buford?