Why there's no tanks that runs on nuclear or alternative energy?, page 2

reply to post by NuclearPaul

---

I am not sure if you might remember, but back in the 90's there was a local South Australian inventor who built a new type of radial motor called "Jetfire". It was meant to use very little fuel and despite its small displacement generated large amounts of power. The patent was purchased from the inventor by the US Army to be used in Tanks. There was only one news story on it at the time, and I have heard nothing since though I have kept an eye out to see if it was ever implemented. Clearly it was shelved.

reply to post by masonicon

---

my thoughts:

1. tanks are designed to be destroyed (you can't make a 100 mil $ tank because if it blows up you just lost it all)
2. tanks are made for the front line and can be taken out by any other weapon. RPG, missile, mine, magnetic grenade, other guns even low caliber. They are made to be lost. That's why a modern army may have 30.000 tanks and just 300 planes.
3. You can find diesel all around the world, but you can't find a H fueling station in 99% of the world.
4. space inside + a diesel engine is easy to fix, even a modern petrol engine is complicated.
5. tanks aren't supposed to be fast or go more than 400 miles on a tank because they need infantry to protect them. So a new energy source would be useless.

reply to post by masonicon

---

It’s clearly a massive conspiracy to destroy the environment, duh.

Think for a second...what must all military vehicles be?

1. Fast
2. Dependable
3. Repairable
4. Salvageable
5. Sustainable

Most alternative energy doesn't allow quick movement, nor are they particularly dependable. They require specialized fuel, specialized tools for repair, and specialized technicians. None of these make for good military vehicles. In a way some military vehicles DO use alternative fuels. The M1A1 for example can use pretty much any fuel you can find, from kerosene to diesel....just won't run too long on it, it uses jet fuel because its readily available and already in the supply lines.

Uranium batteries aren't terrible ideas, but the issue is when a tank gets hit, whatever is in it disperses to the area around. The depleted uranium in the armor already creates nasty dust (like all heavy metals) that will mess up your repertory system. Any type of nuclear reactor or nuclear battery creates huge liabilities, and a part that cannot be destroyed by incendiaries if abandoning the vehicle. Also, you again need specialized repairmen for these jobs-- with high clearances, very costly, and unnecessary considering gas does it cheaper.

reply to post by masonicon

---

Because they run on steam, which brings about it's own unique problems.

Originally posted by GEORGETHEGREEK
Good tanks run on turbines.

Yes that piece of equipment that propels aeroplanes and other large or demanding machinery.

Is that not enough?

Turbines are usually rated in the thousands of horsepower.

They consume petrol and other petrol based fuels. (Unfortunately)

No matter how environmental a conscience i have that's it and that's how it will be for some time.

You ask for environmental war machinery?

If humanity was as evolved war wouldn' t be an issue in the first place.

PEACE
George

edit on 3/1/2011 by GEORGETHEGREEK because: wrong person reply

Actually I personally believe that the turbine was mainly used for the "wow factor" the turbine burns WAY more fuel for comparable power from a diesel engine. The turbine sucks down 12 gallons per hour, standing still and gets one gallon per mile, or worse. In fact the army was planning on replacing the 1960s design turbine with diesel engines of similar power with far better fuel consumption but was cancelled due to the high costs involved.

Here's a good article on fuel consumption in the military.
www.usatoday.com...

As far as alternative energy in an armored combat vehicle the new Non-Line-of-Sight Cannon (NLOS-C) self propelled gun is in fact hybrid, I'm surprised no one else brought this up.
green.autoblog.com...

I think there is also a European hybrid propulsion armored vehicle but I cannot remember the country of origin or the model.

Low-Tech Solutions To High-Tech Tyranny (Save links before they are gone)
  Posted 3 days ago with 7 member flags

Israeli Company Has FAA Permission to Fly Drones in U.S. Airspace
  Posted 12 days ago with 6 member flags

Colt Commander, finally failed
  Posted 7 days ago with 5 member flags

Laser Firearms
  Posted 18 days ago with 4 member flags

First possible near-collision of unmanned drone and commercial aircraft in US airspace.
  Posted 11 days ago with 4 member flags

US Army Launches Phase II of competition to replace M4
  Posted 19 days ago with 3 member flags

The 450 million rounds of hollow point ammunition for DHS....my thoughts..nefarious....or not????
  Posted 13 days ago with 3 member flags

Show us your bow
  Posted 1 days ago with 3 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: