It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Secret Tanks?

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 04:27 PM
We've all heard of secret airforce projects but has there been any researched (proven or unproven) secret projects like tanks, maybe hovering with the technology from the downed spacecraft?

posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 04:36 PM
Why not talk of armoured mobile suits as a weapons platform.

we have mostly all seen the robocop like mobility suits that give enhanced speed and strength to the wearer.

Add armour, a shoulder mounted long - medium ranged weapons system, as well as arm/hand mounted short ranged weapons, with extra clips, rounds, re-charges etc in the legs or torso.

then mix in the alleged UFO anti grav generators mounted on the mid back to give increased mobility, and perhaps a magnetic kinetic sort of shielding.. suddenly you have a Gundam, or a start to the Robotech universe.

posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 05:03 PM
Right now I think the main aspect of tank technology development is Stealth, Camouflage, and communications systems.

Communications allows tank crews to become far more aware and effective in the battlefield.

The rumors that have been going around for the last 10 years are that new forms of stealth/camo have been devised that essentially "cloak" the tank.

Basically they use sophisticated mirror systems to reflect light the perfect way to make the tank appear invisible, even though it is a optical illusion.

These are just rumors though, as no one has ever SEEN a cloaked tank. Ahahaha

posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 03:07 AM
sectret tanks weird stuff man, sounds deadly to me. i dont' like violence all that much , there really isn't a need for it.

posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 09:33 AM

Originally posted by teosty
sectret tanks weird stuff man, sounds deadly to me. i dont' like violence all that much , there really isn't a need for it.

their isn't need for high-tech stealth bombers yet they are reported in our skies

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 09:32 AM
Don't know for sure but, don't you think that if the government had this kind of tech usable on tanks we would be kicking but in Iraq right now

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 10:05 AM
I remember reading something a ways back about electrical Forcefields being applied to tanks....So any missisle or RPG would be vaporized instantly by a massive surge in electricity.

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 10:31 AM
Reply to post by Blue Fox

Whatever secret advanced technology the military does have is not in iraq. The last thing they want to do is reveal it to the world. I doubt they have any flying suits or stealth/flying/hovering tanks.

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 10:43 AM
Super-advanced tanks are not required for the "war" in Iraq. The Abrams proved more than enough against Iraqi armor in the first stages of the war. A tank is essentially useless in counterinsurgency operations- they're designed to go toe to toe against other heavy equipment.

That's the US military's biggest problem- nobody wants to play with us in heavy-metal, rock-em, sock-em WWII style warfare. If anybody tried, we'd crush them in a matter of days. We have the gear and tactics, and excel at that kind of warfare. Our enemies know this, and prefer to fight asymmetric, guerrilla style, which minimizes our advantages. Smart on their part.

If the US does have next-generation tanks in development, they certainly won't be revealed until they're needed against a more heavily equipped opponent. For now, the Army's state of the art fighting vehicle is the Stryker. Which is not technically a tank. The Marines are developing the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, which is also not technically a "tank".

[edit on 16-6-2010 by moonwilson]

posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 09:18 AM
The conventional armored vehicles being employed by the Army/Marines will not be anything too spectacular. What I mean by this is no hover tanks or rail gun mountain mechs.

We all know that when a nation plays it's ace on the table, everyone else who sees it will put out something similar a short time later. No sense in motivating our enemies to copy our tecnhology until after we have used them first.

posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 09:58 PM
Tanks, for the time being, are more or less an 'evolutionary dead-end.'

There will be systematic upgrades to improve overall function - additions of EM weapons as they become practical as well as point-defense systems, etc.

The biggest thing going on in the Army right now is data-linking and networking.

One of the projects involves what is known as 'augmented reality' - think about how Ghost Recon games highlight enemies behind walls, indicate the location of squad-mates, objective points, building schematics and city maps, etc. Now imagine all of that actually superimposed over your own vision using a visor on your helmet with built in secure radio.

Ongoing studies with existing solutions have shown a lot of promise. Soldiers get lost less often, communicate more effectively, and generally accomplish their objectives with far fewer casualties (on all sides).

One of the biggest things is that soldiers will, naturally, tend to spread out a little more using these types of technologies. It has been an age-old battle against instinct in war to keep soldiers from bunching up. Spreading out is a huge tactical advantage, whether it is in scouting or taking a fortified position.

Further advances will be in powered armor suits.

Tanks will always be around in some form - but, like the battleship, are only going to change in the details. There may eventually be "hover-tanks" - but any technology used to hover would likely be just as effective at flight, so any solution there would more closely resemble a helicopter or VTOL aircraft.

The only major change I would expect would be lighter attack platforms centered around anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles or rockets centered around high-explosive fragmentary warheads (good for clearing infantry and structures).

We already have some acoustical and EM-centered nonlethal crowd-control designs mounted atop Humvees. Optimized versions of those might find their way onto heavier armor.

But, really - the 'secret projects' involve radar capability, sonar capability, propulsion technology and defeating radar/infra-red detection.... tanks are raw, solid products of industry built around a really big gun. The whole reason it was designed was to, essentially, say "%#$@ YOU!" and run down the enemy's throat.

It's not really much of a cloak&dagger solution to problems.

That said - having something like a NOD Stealth Tank would open up some tactical and strategic advantages.

However, the reality is that tanks need a lot of support (which is not stealthy - regardless), and while there may be research into methods of 'shielding' going on somewhere, they likely require their own power plant to function. This would make any practical "secret tank with an energy-shield" tied to an extension cord - obvious problems exist there.

The research I would expect to have the most profound impact on military solutions would be self-contained power modules centered around fusion (or some other means of generating massive amounts of power in a small area). That would drastically change the scope of ground combat (which is very reliant on supply lines).

And while I believe someone has had some success with practical fusion technology in those "restricted access programs" (Black Projects) - it is likely limited in scope and undergoing refinement for practical implementation in even the largest mobile platforms (naval solutions).

That's simply my input on the present and future of armor and infantry tactics.

new topics

top topics


log in