European MGCS ( Main Ground Combat System)

Scott Kenny said:
Which means they need to sell the US on the new caliber, whether 130mm or 140mm.
Click to expand...
BLOS/NLOS are the reasons for larger guns
Scott Kenny said:
And also stick a .338 Norma/8.6x63mm MG into the coax spot, because those fly better to the longer ranges that a stabilized turret and FCS allow you to shoot at.
Click to expand...

Pentagon Tests AI-Enabled Autonomous Robotic Gun to Tackle Drone Threats – Impact Lab

www.impactlab.com
Scott Kenny said:
Agree on the overlapping APS, not sure about gun based options versus FPV drones. I'd rather use a DEW, whether laser or microwave.
Click to expand...
DEW is always the way, but SWAP & cost is currently a thing.
Scott Kenny said:
That's honestly been the way tanks should work for a really long time. Like since WW2.
Click to expand...
The Army recently seemed to return from Penetration Div to Hvy Div. Attrition Div is a better moniker for the aforementioned tactic. Attrite the adversary until exploitation brings their culmination and dont fuss about penetration as it will likely end in ambush.
 
jsport said:
BLOS/NLOS are the reasons for larger guns
Click to expand...
Koreans have a good "slow BLOS" round, the Korean Smart Top Attack Munition. It's good for steep terrain, mountains or tall cities, as it's basically a 120mm launched BLU108 skeet. Lobs up, pops a parachute while the boom looks for a target.

And the US has developed and then failed to field something like 5 different "fast BLOS" rounds, from STAFF to XM1111 Mid-Range Munition. Those would be good for a mostly-flat battlefield like Iraq or Kursk.


jsport said:

Pentagon Tests AI-Enabled Autonomous Robotic Gun to Tackle Drone Threats – Impact Lab

www.impactlab.com
Click to expand...
Huh, hadn't seen that, cool!

Still want the bigger caliber for more standoff range, though.


jsport said:
DEW is always the way, but SWAP & cost is currently a thing.
Click to expand...
Every military vehicle has enough spare power to run a coffee pot or microwave oven.


jsport said:
The Army recently seemed to return from Penetration Div to Hvy Div. Attrition Div is a better moniker for the aforementioned tactic. Attrite the adversary until exploitation brings their culmination and dont fuss about penetration as it will likely end in ambush.
Click to expand...
If you can get inside someone's OODA Loop, you can get away with Penetration and running rampant in someone's rear areas.

If you cannot get inside their OODA Loop, trying to Penetrate will get you encircled and wiped out.
 

New Franco-German Tank Project Takes Shape With Industry Team Confirmed

The Main Ground Combat System will be centered upon a tank, but aims to provide a wider ‘system of systems,’ with crewed and uncrewed platforms. The Main Ground Combat System will be centered upon a tank, but aims to provide a wider ‘system of systems,’ with crewed and uncrewed platforms.
www.twz.com
 
An ATGM carrier on an MBT chassis is an interesting choice. If these MBTs are somewhat lighter than the previous generation it might be a good choice. Perhaps the ATGM term understates the ability to engage other targets newer missiles feature. I'd guess the French are hoping some variant of their Akeron missile is used for the role.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
An ATGM carrier on an MBT chassis is an interesting choice. If these MBTs are somewhat lighter than the previous generation it might be a good choice. Perhaps the ATGM term understates the ability to engage other targets newer missiles feature. I'd guess the French are hoping some variant of their Akeron missile is used for the role.
Click to expand...
Maximum was (i think) 50t for the mbt so without an real turret probaly around 43t
 
TomS said:
The photo got dropped into the middle of the link, breaking it.

Try: https://armyrecognition.com/news/ar...an-future-main-battle-tank-despite-challenges
Click to expand...
Thank you!

hrm.

Still not sure about putting the ATGM launcher on a tank-armored chassis.

Unless the plot is to put everything on a single chassis? Because that image looks like it has tank, ATGM-carrier, and IFV on the same heavy-armor chassis. (or Tanks and ATGM-carrier are unmanned while the crew is in the "IFV"?)
 
Scott Kenny said:
Thank you!

hrm.

Still not sure about putting the ATGM launcher on a tank-armored chassis.

Unless the plot is to put everything on a single chassis? Because that image looks like it has tank, ATGM-carrier, and IFV on the same heavy-armor chassis. (or Tanks and ATGM-carrier are unmanned while the crew is in the "IFV"?)
Click to expand...
Yes(ish). The new MGCS system is supposed to be multiple vehicle on the same chassy (outside of things like logistic vehicles because thats a given). The 3 vehicles so far discribed where gun carrier (130/140mm), ATGM and an unmanned carrier. You can read a bit about the 3 here:
kqcke for you said:

Auf dem Weg zum Main Ground Combat System

Der neue Kampfpanzer Leopard 2 A8 ist eine Brückenlösung auf dem Weg zum MGCS. Das MGCS soll 2050 vollständig die vorhandenen Kampfpanzer abgelöst haben. Was soll das MGCS können?
esut.de
Click to expand...
 
Colonial-Marine said:
An ATGM carrier on an MBT chassis is an interesting choice. If these MBTs are somewhat lighter than the previous generation it might be a good choice. Perhaps the ATGM term understates the ability to engage other targets newer missiles feature. I'd guess the French are hoping some variant of their Akeron missile is used for the role.
Click to expand...
Less Spike LR (5km), more Spike ER and NLOS (10 - 30km).
ATGMs have long ago became pocket BLOS PGMs, with dual purpose warheads replacing pure HEAT.

As for why it is armored to MBT standard, I have 2 theories:

1. Even tens of km behind a line, if you're a shooter, you still need more or less the same armor as on the front line.

2. These ATGMs prioritize speed. Loitering munitions can provide volume and persistence, and be deployed from lighter platforms far further to the rear. But something with a powerful motor and high speed like an ATGM is even more necessary today as shooters can scoot faster.
 
Big_Zukini said:
Less Spike LR (5km), more Spike ER and NLOS (10 - 30km).
ATGMs have long ago became pocket BLOS PGMs, with dual purpose warheads replacing pure HEAT.
Click to expand...
Maybe even even more but yeah NLOS in greater capacity than today is the goal and nothing beats a missile at it
Big_Zukini said:
As for why it is armored to MBT standard, I have 2 theories:

1. Even tens of km behind a line, if you're a shooter, you still need more or less the same armor as on the front line.
Click to expand...
Yeah something are have seen quite a lot in ukraine and that wouldn't change for nato
Big_Zukini said:
2. These ATGMs prioritize speed. Loitering munitions can provide volume and persistence, and be deployed from lighter platforms far further to the rear. But something with a powerful motor and high speed like an ATGM is even more necessary today as shooters can scoot faster.
Click to expand...
Hypersonics is the word around town but another reason that kinda works with both is cost.
 


Write your reply...

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom