posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 12:16 AM
From looking at the tank (the one we are supposed to be talking about) I can see SOME of the logic behind it but also several flaws:
1: hull design on the turret (front) allows incomming projectiles to be DEFELCTED easily vs what we see now.
2: TURRET: The diamon shape DEFLECTS attacks, so if you get that chance hit on the turret no big deal, also the weight will add stability and be less
likely to bounce around. Thus more accuracy.
3: Speed, lighter and faster
4: faster to produce from the metal standpoint.
5: smaller, harder to hit and see (heh)
1: the two people are so close 1 anti-tank round would wipe them out. The cockpits being connected would be the best target for any aircraft (Heli or
otherwise) and any smart anti-tank gunner or tank guy would fire on that one part and take 2 guys out with one shot. Two birds, one stone.
2: The tank is easy to distrupt, it relys HEAVILY on electronics, any EMP wave would fry the tank leaving them virtually blind and they loose all
"advantages" they had.
3: Cost, those electronics are going to HURT when it comes to cost, the steel loss is probably an attempt at alleviation of the price.
4: Loss of all gunners, unless someone in the cockpit drives and runs a .50cal at the same time on top of the tank they lost that advantage. Current
tanks have 2 guns on top to fight off people when they are low on ammo or cannot keep up the fire rate.
5: Less needed to blow it sky high, the tank is smaller true, but it lost the advantage of people being highly seperated, because of this critical
hits are easier. Take one shot and put it square through the tail pipe, or put it from above and straight down since there are no longer any gunners.
Also, you have the problem of there being LESS protection in the drivers area from what I saw, so it will be easier to blow up.
6: flaw in side design, as usualy the sucker is ment for HEAD ON attacks, hit it from behind or the sides and they are in serious trouble.
7: Turrent movement, unless they add more power to the turrent design it will be harder to move, thus slower turret movement. Remember they added A
LOT of weight to the barrel. So unless they drop the caliber they are going to have movement trouble.
Ok that is off the top of my head, more cons than pros, and the cons far outweigh the pros.
Plastic tank: HAHHAHAAHAH! Wishful scientists who want to sock a huge price tag on cheap junk again. Give me steel over plastic anyday! Steel is
easy to repair! Plastic you will have to take the whole tank appart at that rate! That or they have to hand out "gauze like pads" of plastic you
weld on... Unless they come up with some kind of "super plastic" that sucker will pop faster than the current APC's. The enemy would die of
laughter. 500 plastic toy tanks drop out of the sky and roll towards their armored battalions... oh yeah... big chance... Just think of what someone
in an anti-tank heli would think... Or the guy with the anti-tank rocket... The only thing that plastic tank would be good for is SPEED. try and make
a tank that hits 110mph or higher on the road. Due to plastic being lighter than steel that is.