Could giant tanks make a comeback?

[uk 75]

Giant tanks in fact never left the drawing board but the Nazis as usual decided to do something most other powers thought crazy.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/landkreuzer-p-1000-ratte-and-p-1500-monster.2240/#post-69848

But watching the battlefield in Ukraine where modern fast well protected tanks have been forced to add more and more weird measures to combat drones, missile and endless artillery fire could the giants be due for a new chance.
Rattes lumbering forward relentlessly at a few miles an hour but immune to enemy fire would not look so odd in a stalemated war. Maybe S Korean or even Taiwanese Rattes could hold the line.

 

[Michel Van]

why ?
Tanks over 150 metric tons are unusable

They can't pass bridges, sink in mud terrain
Are too Slow and too Big, make them a easy Target for every Anti-Tank weapon system...
They have no practical sense

 

[Rhinocrates]

I can think of reasons not to.

Any wider or longer than many today and they can't be transported by rail, road or air. Bridges will be impossible. If they're transported in sections, maybe. In another thread I mentioned the possibility of a 'centipede' tank made of mix 'n' match segments - but every joint between segments is a vulnerable point.

Too heavy for soft ground. 'Slow' might easily become 'bogged down.'

Nothing's invulnerable and if it's slow, it can be outmanoeuvred anyway. See below

The Ratte was big enough to be a target for bombers and so was to be fitted with AA armament. Some opinion is that it shouldn't even be thought of as a tank so much as a self-deploying coastal gun emplacement.

Too large to make use of natural cover. Useless in urban warfare.

Economics: each tank represents a concentration of capital and the bigger the tank, the fewer you can have, the fewer places they can be and the more damaging the loss to your total forces when one is disabled. Logistics: same applies to the supply tail. No predator can escape its own stomach.

If it's a problem retrofitting an old tank with systems to counter new threats, then UGVs with specialist modules to accompany a tank as scouts and defenders would be a more economical and flexible option.

 

[Foo Fighter]

The true behemoths were a product of mid WW2, after that the various developments were smaller and almost unarmoured, and that was in the land of the Maus.

If you have access to "Panzers in Berlin" you will see the huge variety of Waffentrager chassis and adaptations. After the end of WW2 nothing so big would be funded and I cannot see it ever changing now.

 

[CV12Hornet]

In this age of massed, near-universal precision fires, you want your tanks to be more expendable, not less.

 

[yeetmahboi]

Giant tanks seems like a recipe for failure. They are huge, which means not cheap. Which then necessitate all kinds of protection system, which makes the cost go up. But by being huge it can't really take advantage of defilade and camouflage, so....

I suspect that modern tanks would be something akin to the FCS MCS but takes lots of tip from Israel's expertise: designed for manufacturability, scalable armour, distributed HEV propulsion, lightweight 152mm low recoil gun, high tech stuff both on board and off board. Essentially PCA and CCA but for ground vehicle.

 

[publiusr]

Got to do something with those crawlers once SLS is dead..Howl’s Moving Castle…

 

[Scott Kenny]

I suspect that modern tanks would be something akin to the FCS MCS but takes lots of tip from Israel's expertise: designed for manufacturability, scalable armour, distributed HEV propulsion, lightweight 152mm low recoil gun, high tech stuff both on board and off board. Essentially PCA and CCA but for ground vehicle.

Probably heavier than FCS's 18-27 tonnes, though. ~40+-5 tonnes seems the sweet spot in terms of manufacturability and mobility.

Basically, a Sherman sized tank but with much better gun and protection.

 

[yeetmahboi]

Probably heavier than FCS's 18-27 tonnes, though. ~40+-5 tonnes seems the sweet spot in terms of manufacturability and mobility.

Basically, a Sherman sized tank but with much better gun and protection.

I'd say 37 tons base weight (rate for STANAG 4569 lv4) with bare equipments.
Aim for LOS distance over plate thickness for protection. Use of multiple APS-es.
Quiet drive and advanced camouflage. Basically, optimized for the first tiers of the survivability onion (stealthiness) over the last (resist penetration)
Scale down the internal space (3 staggered or 2x2 in hull crew) and a compact turret. A lightweight, low-recoil gun shooting a stubby dart and guided HE shells should be appropriate. Automated shell refill like on Object 490 and Crusader instead of the ill-conceived 40-esqe loadout. I'd suggest remotely piped IM liquid propellant but way too complicated.

Something like a scaled up OMFV hull should suffice.

 

[Dilandu]

It's possible, yes. Most likely in terms of additional armor plates being installed for assault operations.

I.e. the tank normally of reasonable weight (60-80 tons), with heavy armor only frontal. But it could be up-armored with installation of all-around additional armor to 100-120 tons.

 

[Dilandu]

My own theoretising about "Tank-20XX":



* It's a 60-70 ton tank normally, but designed to be up-armored with additional sides & rear armor modules up to 100-120 tons.

* The LARGE unmanned turret is serving as top cover for all the tank against strikes from above. The turrets is essentially isolated from tank hull (with the exception of power cables and data cables); all ammo is stored in turret in individual isolated modules with blow-up panels (so if hit, only one module would be destroyed)



* The tank is armed with low-impulse 155-mm gun, with large elevation angles. The gun is mainly designed to fire HE/HESH/concrete-piercing shells against "soft" targets, supporting the infantry assaults. In case of fighting enemy armor, the gun-launched AT missiles and roof-hitting guided shells (like on Korean tanks) are used

* The turret modules allow for both placement of 155-mm ammo (in rotary drums) and secondary weaponry - remote-controlled autocannons/machineguns, guided missiles, kamikaze drones and FPV-drones



* The tank is moved by linear perdail drive, linrail (tm, it's my own concept ). Instead of track chain, the tank used individual (not linked to each other) "pads", propelled along the rails by linear magnetic engine. The whole system is mechanically simple, could be made extremely rugged, and damage to individual "pads" would not immediately immobilize the tank; the crippled pad could just be detached and dropped.

* The linrail is powered by four multi-fuel turbine generators, set in two pairs in bow & rear compartment.

* The crew compartment is in the middle of tank hull (best protected position); between two generator compartments (there are rear tunner and bottom hatches for entry/exit)




(yeah, I like catboys)))

 

[yeetmahboi]

My own theoretising about "Tank-20XX":

View attachment 752397

* It's a 60-70 ton tank normally, but designed to be up-armored with additional sides & rear armor modules up to 100-120 tons.

* The LARGE unmanned turret is serving as top cover for all the tank against strikes from above. The turrets is essentially isolated from tank hull (with the exception of power cables and data cables); all ammo is stored in turret in individual isolated modules with blow-up panels (so if hit, only one module would be destroyed)

View attachment 752398

* The tank is armed with low-impulse 155-mm gun, with large elevation angles. The gun is mainly designed to fire HE/HESH/concrete-piercing shells against "soft" targets, supporting the infantry assaults. In case of fighting enemy armor, the gun-launched AT missiles and roof-hitting guided shells (like on Korean tanks) are used

* The turret modules allow for both placement of 155-mm ammo (in rotary drums) and secondary weaponry - remote-controlled autocannons/machineguns, guided missiles, kamikaze drones and FPV-drones

View attachment 752399

* The tank is moved by linear perdail drive, linrail (tm, it's my own concept ). Instead of track chain, the tank used individual (not linked to each other) "pads", propelled along the rails by linear magnetic engine. The whole system is mechanically simple, could be made extremely rugged, and damage to individual "pads" would not immediately immobilize the tank; the crippled pad could just be detached and dropped.

* The linrail is powered by four multi-fuel turbine generators, set in two pairs in bow & rear compartment.

* The crew compartment is in the middle of tank hull (best protected position); between two generator compartments (there are rear tunner and bottom hatches for entry/exit)


View attachment 752400

(yeah, I like catboys)))

That looks straight out of Sturgeonhouse... And I love it!

 

[Dilandu]

That looks straight out of Sturgeonhouse... And I love it!

Well, I just tried to extrapolate solutions from modern tanks problems)

 

[paralay]

A superheavy tank can consist of two independent links. 120 - 130 tons is quite an achievable weight. Something like a landship

 

[Dilandu]

A superheavy tank can consist of two independent links. 120 - 130 tons is quite an achievable weight. Something like a landship

Yep, thought about this concept also. The main problem here is the articulated link itself; it must be both relatively durable & flexible.

 

[Scott Kenny]

My own theoretising about "Tank-20XX":

View attachment 752397

* It's a 60-70 ton tank normally, but designed to be up-armored with additional sides & rear armor modules up to 100-120 tons.

Means that it's going to need suspension and springs etc set up for the max weight and it'll bounce all over the place at half that weight.

Ever ridden in the back of a 5ton truck that isn't carrying any load, or ridden in an unloaded pickup truck? Know how you bounce all over the place? Problem is the springs being set up for carrying a load, and not for normally driving around with an empty bed.

* The LARGE unmanned turret is serving as top cover for all the tank against strikes from above. The turrets is essentially isolated from tank hull (with the exception of power cables and data cables); all ammo is stored in turret in individual isolated modules with blow-up panels (so if hit, only one module would be destroyed)

I'm pretty sure the blow-out panels on an Abrams are actually fairly thin, less than the nominal top armor thickness. I don't know how well the use of blow-out panels squares with heavy armor protection.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Another example of the Yamato culture, another giant with feet of clay, another bad news for taxpayers.

 

[Dilandu]

Means that it's going to need suspension and springs etc set up for the max weight and it'll bounce all over the place at half that weight.

That's why smart suspension is required) Probably magnetic one)

I'm pretty sure the blow-out panels on an Abrams are actually fairly thin, less than the nominal top armor thickness. I don't know how well the use of blow-out panels squares with heavy armor protection.

You can't put enough armor on roof anyway. The area is just too big. So it's more reasonable to have modular turret, so the damage to some sections would not affect others.

 

[Dilandu]

Another example of the Yamato culture, another giant with feet of clay, another bad news for taxpayers.

You are making the classic mistake, assuming that "size growth is ALWAYS bad". It isn't.

 

[Michel Van]

There is another factor that determent size of Tank: War time economics

Big Tanks need allot material means during War a few can be build
in contrast with same material you can build more smaller tanks

The Germans learn that hard way with Tiger and Königstiger (and Maus from economic point of view )
a Tiger could kill one Sherman or T-34 (massproduce)
but several Sherman or T-34 kill a Tiger faster.

And now to biggest Problem of Big Tanks, Fuel consumption.
Tigers and Königstiger were thirsty on high octane petrol, (T-34 used diesel)
and with German lack of petrol, allot Tanks run dry and abandon by there crew.
Patton consider Tigers and Königstiger as The Best Roadblock the German ever build !

 

[Justo Miranda]

You are making the classic mistake, assuming that "size growth is ALWAYS bad". It isn't.

Well, if I have to pay with my taxes something that is not going to be of any use, I prefer it to be small.

https://es.aliexpress.com/item/1005004355662397.html?src=google&pdp_npi=4%40dis%21EUR%2153.78%2119.89%21%21%21%21%21%40%2112000028880706732%21ppc%21%21%21&src=google&albch=shopping&acnt=439-079-4345&isdl=y&slnk=&plac=&mtctp=&albbt=Google_7_shopping&aff_platform=google&aff_short_key=UneMJZVf&gclsrc=aw.ds&&albagn=888888&&ds_e_adid=&ds_e_matchtype=&ds_e_device=c&ds_e_network=x&ds_e_product_group_id=&ds_e_product_id=es1005004355662397&ds_e_product_merchant_id=107701660&ds_e_product_country=ES&ds_e_product_language=es&ds_e_product_channel=online&ds_e_product_store_id=&ds_url_v=2&albcp=21840696692&albag=&isSmbAutoCall=false&needSmbHouyi=false&gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI4ZTZioKqigMVYVNBAh0taxxPEAQYByABEgIPlfD_BwE

 

[Dilandu]

There is another factor that determent size of Tank: War time economics

True. But the modern situation is, that medium-sized tanks are exactly in the middle of disadvantages; they are both too costly for mass production, and too vulnerable to stand a chance on modern battlefield. So essentially tanks should either go heavier (to increase survivability) or lighter (to increase numbers).

 

[Justo Miranda]

lighter (to increase numbers).

 

[yeetmahboi]

Interesting commentary on lighter tanks

The Soviets is under pressure to maintain force parity, and they have been fairly serious in procurement, however in this case they lack technological paths that is now available. Stuffing high performance AESA on everything to hard kill is just a non-starter. Perhaps formations will be packing so much smoke that they'd cover Denmark to Italy with thick, thick smoke for hours on end, or that tanks'd get 'de-evolve' to be even less logistically demanding and more expandable.

I'd suppose that if your demographics support this, better go for it. After all gigantic behemoths screams of "Tiger and Maus!" vibes. Huge money sinks imo.

If giant tanks, something like GCV would be cool: a heavily armoured mothership guiding drones and UGVs.

 

[Michel Van]

(yeah, I like catboys)))

Japanese like girls in tanks...
(by way this show how unpractical a Maus tank is in Urban combat...)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNtkIzNthb0

 

[Dilandu]

Japanese like girls in tanks...

True) But let's say that I prefer stronger of sexes)

 

[Owens Z]

UK 75, I see that the thread you took the time to create immediately attracted various comments having little to do with your stated subject, just as my recent thread "new big 'Ogre' tank that combines functions of tank and self-propelled howitzer?" has done. Including an inevitable appearance by Justo "the tank is dead" Miranda.

The German paper projects you refer to, to be armed with pocket battleship 283mm guns, were completely impractical, although I wouldn't want to be facing one lumbering toward me with just a Garand and a bazooka in my arms. But a squadron of P-47s armed with Tiny Tim rockets would have quickly burned out such a vehicle, each embodying a year's worth of German labor and expensive materials. The book German Superheavy Panzer Projects of World War II by Michael Fröhlich (2020, Schiffer Publishing Ltd) is an admirable introduction to these wartime projects, for those who may be interested. To my knowledge, in subsequent times no Soviet AFV project got close even to Maus size, much less to a superheavy land dreadnought. I gently suggest that Ukraine, Taiwan, and other threatened peoples today would do better with alternatives rather than a thousand-ton tank.

Now a giant fighting robot, on the other hand... ;-)

 

[Justo Miranda]

UK 75, I see that the thread you took the time to create immediately attracted various comments having little to do with your stated subject, just as my recent thread "new big 'Ogre' tank that combines functions of tank and self-propelled howitzer?" has done. Including an inevitable appearance by Justo "the tank is dead" Miranda.

The German paper projects you refer to, to be armed with pocket battleship 283mm guns, were completely impractical, although I wouldn't want to be facing one lumbering toward me with just a Garand and a bazooka in my arms. But a squadron of P-47s armed with Tiny Tim rockets would have quickly burned out such a vehicle, each embodying a year's worth of German labor and expensive materials. The book German Superheavy Panzer Projects of World War II by Michael Fröhlich (2020, Schiffer Publishing Ltd) is an admirable introduction to these wartime projects, for those who may be interested. To my knowledge, in subsequent times no Soviet AFV project got close even to Maus size, much less to a superheavy land dreadnought. I gently suggest that Ukraine, Taiwan, and other threatened peoples today would do better with alternatives rather than a thousand-ton tank.

Now a giant fighting robot, on the other hand... ;-)

I apologize if my comments have bothered you, years ago I saw photographs of the cannon of a Syrian tank pierced by an Israeli sabot that had hit head-on at an angle of less than ten degrees.

For me it makes no sense to drag several tons of armor across the battlefield that an old woman can pierce with the push of a button.

I have always felt sorry for crabs, all predators eat them despite their uncomfortable armor that prevents them from escaping.

Here's The Story Behind That Viral Video Of Napoleonic Armor Smashed Through By A Cannonball

Documents found on one of Napoleon's young heavy cavalrymen who fell at the Battle of Waterloo reveal the history behind the mangled armor.

www.twz.com

 

[Byeman]

Got to do something with those crawlers once SLS is dead..Howl’s Moving Castle…

retire them

 

[shin_getter]

Big tanks are not useful because no efficient weapon is of that size. The most powerful weapon on this planet, an ICBM, fits on a ~60ton class vehicle, and no armor protection is plausible with this scale of conflict. The standard 155mm scale warhead can be carried in a backpack with rocket to propelled up to relevant tactical distances.

Well, no efficient weapon given the scaling laws of chemical engines and weapons.

Try a Energy weapon, the required size grows greatly. Try an energy weapon for anti-orbit work powered by nukes and the size goes up even more.

Imagine such a vehicle popping out of tunnels to take pot shot of space assets before hiding again. This vehicle can also assert air superiority by shooting down everything above the horizon and work as a sensor by being a LIDAR in lower threat environments.
----
Another option would be ultra long range rail/coil/multistage guns, but it probably overlaps too much with much more successful rocketry to be really worth it.

 

[DE1083]

Maybe we need some BOLOS!

 

[Scott Kenny]

Maybe we need some BOLOS!

Not without some crazy breakthrough in armor materials.

For example, Steve Jackson Games proposed OGREs, armored with biphase carbide armor. Carbon fibers in a diamondoid matrix. This made BPC very light compared to steel armor, and incredibly tough. OGREs (the giant tanks) carry multiple meters of BPC, and even small tanks can carry a couple of feet of the stuff. There's even power armored infantry in the game, which are armored well enough to take hits from an old school tank gun, with only a few centimeters of BPC.

 

[Dilandu]

For example, Steve Jackson Games proposed OGREs, armored with biphase carbide armor. Carbon fibers in a diamondoid matrix. This made BPC very light compared to steel armor, and incredibly tough. OGREs (the giant tanks) carry multiple meters of BPC, and even small tanks can carry a couple of feet of the stuff. There's even power armored infantry in the game, which are armored well enough to take hits from an old school tank gun, with only a few centimeters of BPC.

So basically all weapon in OGRE is a pure-fusion devices of different magnitude, yep. Also, big stationary lasers de facto stopped long range missiles and aviation from being a threat.

 

[Scott Kenny]

So basically all weapon in OGRE is a pure-fusion devices of different magnitude, yep. Also, big stationary lasers de facto stopped long range missiles and aviation from being a threat.

nuclear shaped charges and regular blasts.