RC Tank Warfare community hobby forum

Do you think the Tiger tank might make a return to the battlefield in the future?

Then, we use back the 88mm again. But not normal 88, technology progress and made it possible to implement rail guns on a tank. So this makes big bore/caliber guns obsolete.

Then powered armour renders sloping armour obsolete. The new idea is to focus a massive amount of current at the impact point that disintegrate the projectile. So, you don't want projectile to bounce or glide of the surface.

Then maybe we have micro nuclear reactors to power these tanks. No more crappy diesel/petrol engines. The reactors supply power to the gun and to the armour.

Tanks are now driven world of tanks style. Cameras and sensors take image of the surrounding, rendered it into 3D image and project it to a screen or VR helmet worn by the crew. So, crew can view and control tank in 3rd person view.

Haha, just my imagination.

An 88 couldn't shoot out a tire these days! Even the modern 120mm ammo can't knock out an M1 at point blank range let alone hundreds of meters!

Nope tank of the future will be using a magnetic rail gun and fire rounds at mach 7 with a range that will need to be seen with a satellite!

That's IF there's still any real need for tanks at all. Big, slow, nothing but a target for air support.

Oh, I dont meant normal 88. The bore is 88mm but its a rail gun. If you look at the penetrator of a modern APFSDS round, its nowhere near 120mm. most of the diameter is taken up by the sabot. The penetrator itself is very thin. The penetrator used in the future 88 will be much thicker (2-3x the diameter), a small sabot will be used and it will be flying at mach 7. With so much mass and velocity, it will blast through any armour like paper.

Another good thing is that it can fire HE rounds too. With rail gun, you can adjust the velocity of the round. You no longer need the propellant which takes up the bulk, so the whole 88mm HE round is packed with explosives. Gonna be really deadly. I think at mach 7, it could take out tanks as well.

Given the drag on objects at that speed I think we'll see more rocket type weapons, maybe launched using a rail gun for longer ranges. Laser for close in and interdiction roles. I'm more curious as to whether we get Mech's (walkers) or anti grav for movement.

RobW wrote:Given the drag on objects at that speed I think we'll see more rocket type weapons, maybe launched using a rail gun for longer ranges. Laser for close in and interdiction roles. I'm more curious as to whether we get Mech's (walkers) or anti grav for movement.

Check out the rail guns the US already has. The stats I gave is what they currently can do! Mach 7 and a range over the horizon.

Are those the ship mounted ones? Thought the power cost was too high for most platforms?

RobW wrote:Are those the ship mounted ones? Thought the power cost was too high for most platforms?

My information is from the manufacturer of the rail gun who has videos on YouTube believe it or not. They show ship mounted and truck mounted rail guns. Also show how with the rail gun using air burst rounds guided by satellite can take out any incoming missile because of their range and speed.

Who knows what's real of just science fiction at this point.

Tanks are pretty much obsolete nowadays. They look impressive, but they are only used in conflicts rather than full scale war. In the event that any major power engaged with another, we would see the top secret weapons deployed, mostly airborne, and the whole thing would be over in 30 minutes. We wouldn't know who won or lost as we wouldn't be around to witness it. Most countries would be so radioactive that habitation would be impossible, and if anyone did survive they would only do so until the food and fresh water stocks ran out.

If the food chain was destroyed, it could not rebuild itself. So no bees, no pollination, no crops, no food.
No housing and no power stations, so the first winter and everyone freezes to death.
No hospitals.
No communication.
The list is endless.

It amazes me how prospective world leaders are asked the dumb question 'would you press the button?'.
Not one ever replies with 'when do you suggest I press it?'.

If they press it first, the opponent would press theirs. Both countries are erased.
If they press it second, the opponent has already pressed theirs. Both countries are erased.
It's a lose/lose scenario.

No tank is immune to a missile attack, which is what would be use to destroy them before they got close to a battlefield. Submarines are what carry the nukes, and the name of the game is being undetectable. One sub can carry say 30 nuclear missiles. Each missile has multiple warheads. They have to launch all of them so that they are no longer a target themselves. Blast area from each warhead is a few miles. Fallout area is huge. WW2 nukes were a fraction of modern ones, the effects would be devastating. One sub could erase the whole of the UK in less than an hour.

Chernobyl and Fukushima demonstrated that radioactivity, just from a power station meltdown, can travel thousands of miles. Contamination would kill all survivors eventually. If multiple nukes were launched you could have a million tanks and they would be of no use at all. Electromagnetic waves would knock out the ignition systems so along with all other vehicles they would just grind to a halt.

WW not to mention the whole world as collateral damage! If the US and Russia went at it the entire world would be lost.