Urban Battle Tank

Whispering Death

Whispering Death

Active member
I want to hear your ideas for what a tank that is meant only to operate in urban conditions should be like. What roles should it fill that modern MBTs and APCs are not filling, or not filling adequately? What kind of weight, armor, and armament should it have? This is a right-brained discussion.
 
Well, firstly, it would need to be maneuverable, because current locations in the middle east have very tight spaces in which to put a tank.

-The tank body itself would have to be reasonably thin width wise so as to be able to fit into some of the tighter spaces of cities that dont suffer Urban Sprawl.

-It needs good armor all around, (top, bottom, left/right, front/back) to repel IEDs, RPGs, and other fire.

-The vehicle should be properly equipped to put down resistance, whether Infantry, or Armor. Easiest way (as I see it), is to take a hint from some prior vehicles, and give the tank a TOW launcher, and a anti-personnel, high-caliber weapon, such as a .50 caliber machine gun, and perhaps a MK-19 grenade launcher for long range, area suppression (such as mobs, or to deal with attackers hiding in structures deemed too important to knock down entirely or when TACAIR is not an option).

-And one of the most important functions of an APC, it should be able to quickly, and safely (safely being a relative word, since, hey, it's war) to the front lines, provide suppressing cover fire with it's weaponry, and then continue to cover their advance as needed, or to get clear so that other vehicles can deploy their teams. I'd guess that each vehicle should ideally transport between 6-10 men + weapons, armor and other battle gear semi-comfortably.
 
Whoops, no, let me make this a quick clarification here. The urban battle tank WILL NOT carry infantry. It isn't an APC, it's job is to, perhaps, take the job of the MBT in MOUT away from the MBT. In fact, I'm still not exactly sure what the mission profile of this theoretical Urban Battle Tank is, but it isn't an APC since the current generations of APCs like the Bradleys are doing a fine job.

What I do know is that lightly armored HUMVEEs and MBTs are the square pegs being forced into the round hole of MOUT combat. In short, there are needs that current arms where not designed to meet, so what can we do to envision a new class of tank that will meet those needs?
 
Well if anything its probably got to be heavier armoured than present tanks as top and rear need strengthening as well as having armour protecting from mines underneath.
Weapons fit, i cant see a need for a 120mm gun, helicopters and warplanes can be used to destroy buildings. So having a weapons fit with, .50 machine gun, Mk 19 grenage launcher, Tow/MILAN launcher, to give good anti-infantry firepower.
Size wise, it needs to be smaller, maybe having it the size of small tank, such as the british stormer/scimitar. Though due to excess armour it would likely have to be bigger.
The main role for it probably would be infantry support in urban areas, it doesnt need to have a large anti-vehicle arnament as not many heavy vehicles can fit into urban areas, and there is always attack helicopters/planes to take them out. Possibly having the weapons fit, remotely controlled from inside the vehicle so that the person operating does not need to be exposed, especially in high rise areas.
 
I bet this will be pretty good


tnk_bmpt%20002.jpg
 
Whispering Death said:
Whoops, no, let me make this a quick clarification here. The urban battle tank WILL NOT carry infantry. It isn't an APC, it's job is to, perhaps, take the job of the MBT in MOUT away from the MBT. In fact, I'm still not exactly sure what the mission profile of this theoretical Urban Battle Tank is, but it isn't an APC since the current generations of APCs like the Bradleys are doing a fine job.

What I do know is that lightly armored HUMVEEs and MBTs are the square pegs being forced into the round hole of MOUT combat. In short, there are needs that current arms where not designed to meet, so what can we do to envision a new class of tank that will meet those needs?
Click to expand...

Oddly enough I think modifying the Bradley a bit and you would have the ideal UBT.
 
I dont see why tanks etc dont still use the rpg nets, like on the old Britsh ''Tin Can'' used in Ireland
 
A low profile would be useful, but i'm not sure if the same logic would apply to urban combat since you're dealing with rebels and not other tanks. But the tanks should be fast and have more soft attack capabilities since the biggest threat would be a vehicle. And if there are other tanks, the main gun should be able to do the job against the opposition. Even with armor it would be smaller than current tanks are now.
 
Well, I would say that it would be somthing like a Merkava tank, only with the turret replaced. The new turret would have a 20 gatling gun, an AGL, and a lot of smoke dischargers.

But to me, the MBT is just that: a multy purpose ultra protected vehicle, that can be used for urban and open terrain operations.
 
I would say 40mm-75mm chaingun, 7.62mm coax, 60mm Smoke, 100mm of chobam armor, M2 AA gun, M240-D AA gun.

Like this.
tankUBT.jpg
 
Ideally...

- crew of 2. 1 gunner/commander and 1 driver
- Same height as a hummer, same width, longer than hummer
- Turret would have a 20mm Gatling mounted and remotely operated - both crew would be in the main body of the vehicle
- vehicle will be wheeled
- enough armor all around to withstand IED and RPG (even if it means having nets)
- Smoke dischargers
- AGL and 2 7.62 MG's, 1 facing opposite direction of 20mm gatling and one on a mount, , allowing the commander/gunner to fire it independently of the turret guns.
- 20mm Gatling will fire 4 round sets of munitions. 1 tracer, 1 DU, 1 HE and one Ball. This will allow it to knock out almost any armoured vehicle or building they may run into.
 
I don't think having a crew of 2 is a good idea. M1 crews have found that having both the loader and commander heads up and looking around allows for twice the situational awareness
 
bushpig1998 said:
Ideally...

- crew of 2. 1 gunner/commander and 1 driver
- Same height as a hummer, same width, longer than hummer
- Turret would have a 20mm Gatling mounted and remotely operated - both crew would be in the main body of the vehicle
- vehicle will be wheeled
- enough armor all around to withstand IED and RPG (even if it means having nets)
- Smoke dischargers
- AGL and 2 7.62 MG's, 1 facing opposite direction of 20mm gatling and one on a mount, , allowing the commander/gunner to fire it independently of the turret guns.
- 20mm Gatling will fire 4 round sets of munitions. 1 tracer, 1 DU, 1 HE and one Ball. This will allow it to knock out almost any armoured vehicle or building they may run into.
Click to expand...

A 20mm Vulcan Canon remotely control? Hmm, not a good idea. The M61 cannon throws out 3,000 RPM and they don't make ball rounds for the gun its DU or HE. The gun would rip apart anything it is used against and the 20m is prone the overheating and jamming, and there is always the possibility of the remote hydraulics and turret jammming when hit with an RPG or IED. A crew of 2 is also a bad idea.
 
My idea of a specialized Urban Armored Assault Vehicle:
1.) Small target, low profile with a tight turning radius. Need to be able to squeeze through tight quarters where needed or easily pull off a tight precision turn if necessary.
2.) The best armor possible. That means it would be tracked. Tracks are less vunerable to ... oh, the odd RPG for instance. Best if the tracks have the best protection available too.
3.) A broad range of weapons options. A main gun is a plus in some , a 30 mm machine gun is better in other cases.
 
Well, for awareness, thre would be better, but I mentioned 2, since this would effectively mean that the vehicle is something like a ground based attack vehicle (more or less like the apache is in the air). Also the more crew, the larger the vehicle will have to be. While you don't want a pickup running around Faluja, you really want something smaller than a bradley. The tracks is a sore point. Yes, it is more reliable, but cuts down severely on speed. a 6 wheeled vehicle would seem better for urban combat (and more quiet too).
The 20mm gun will have to be mounted in a small hydraulic operated turret. The reason I vote for this weapon is its ability to take out anything hiding behind a building and also take out armored vehicles if needed. A secondary weapon suchs a GPMG or .50 cal can take care of situations where a 20mm isn't needed.
 
Its all about multiple weapons configurations!! Sure, a main 110 mm gun might be great for one circumstance, but the 25mm like the Bradley is better for a lot of things. Have the option to add or remove a TOW or modified version of the Javelin for vehicles. Whatever is most useable for a smaller vehicle and best suited for the needs of the given situation.

Point taken on wheels vs tracks. I suppose it depends on whether speed is an over-riding factor. Probably is but I suppose it depends on what you're doing with said vehicle.
 
Oh I agree on multiple configurations. A Modular design with a quick disconnect for weapons systems would be ideal. Kinda like switching uppers on an AR15?
The general concesus, I think, is that whatever vehicle it is, it should be smaller, more heavily armoured than and abrahms that moves faster and carrie AA as well as AT and AP weapons. Hmmmm sounds like a miracle to me. Fact is, there is no ideal weapon that would suit every need of every action.
IMO (and I know I'm biased and I keep going on about it) the Ratel or Caspirr will still do best in urban combat. They are mine/IED resistant, can take a beating and the are relatively fast. With the turreted Ratel90, you have a 90mm gun that can take out armor and buildings alike. Or take a regular ratel and mount 2 50's on it. I know the Caspirr has an small turret at the rear as well, in addition to the MG turret up front.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top