• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

AbramsX Next Generation Main Battle Tank Breaks Cover

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
31,149
Points
1,160
Hybrid drive... very California ;)

AbramsX Next Generation Main Battle Tank Breaks Cover​

This is the first time we have seen the AbramsX concept, which is representative of a future American main battle tank, outside of artwork.

Suffice it to say, the AbramsX very much looks the part of a future tank, with its highly revised turret that features multiple electro-optical sights and a remote weapon station sporting a big 30mm chain gun. The sniper gray-like urban camouflage with countershading along its serrated skirt also gives it a very futuristic look, as does its XM360-derivative 120mm cannon with its ported muzzle brake.

But the heavily-armored tank's hybrid powertrain buried deep inside it is probably its most exciting feature. General Dynamics says this will result in a whopping 50 percent fuel saving — the Abrams' kerosene-guzzling turbine engine has long involved a major logistics-versus-performance trade-off. This hybrid system will also allow AbramsX to operate silently while sitting idle and possibly for short durations at low speed, which would provide a huge tactical advantage.


An unmanned turret with an auto-loading ammunition system makes possible a reduced crew size, down from four to three. This is also a major draw, increasing survivability and freeing up space in the turret for more capabilities. Reducing manpower is also high on the list of wants for armies around the world. The AbramsX is lighter than its predecessors, bucking the ongoing trend of increasingly massive M1 variants.


 
But the heavily-armored tank's hybrid powertrain buried deep inside it is probably its most exciting feature. General Dynamics says this will result in a whopping 50 percent fuel saving — the Abrams' kerosene-guzzling turbine engine has long involved a major logistics-versus-performance trade-off. This hybrid system will also allow AbramsX to operate silently while sitting idle and possibly for short durations at low speed, which would provide a huge tactical advantage.
This is the way all AFV need to go. It will also reduce the thermal signature.
 
With this kind of tech being revealed by the same company with the plant in London, Ont - would be interesting to see if a version of this drivetrain becomes available for their Stryker fleet.

If so, could be an opportunity for us come replacement/upgrade time of the Lav 6 fleet


Just the fuel savings alone with the Abrams tho, would be worth it
 
With this kind of tech being revealed by the same company with the plant in London, Ont - would be interesting to see if a version of this drivetrain becomes available for their Stryker fleet.

If so, could be an opportunity for us come replacement/upgrade time of the Lav 6 fleet


Just the fuel savings alone with the Abrams tho, would be worth it
Or use the same hull for a HAPC
 
Hybrid drive... very California ;)

AbramsX Next Generation Main Battle Tank Breaks Cover​

This is the first time we have seen the AbramsX concept, which is representative of a future American main battle tank, outside of artwork.

Suffice it to say, the AbramsX very much looks the part of a future tank, with its highly revised turret that features multiple electro-optical sights and a remote weapon station sporting a big 30mm chain gun. The sniper gray-like urban camouflage with countershading along its serrated skirt also gives it a very futuristic look, as does its XM360-derivative 120mm cannon with its ported muzzle brake.

But the heavily-armored tank's hybrid powertrain buried deep inside it is probably its most exciting feature. General Dynamics says this will result in a whopping 50 percent fuel saving — the Abrams' kerosene-guzzling turbine engine has long involved a major logistics-versus-performance trade-off. This hybrid system will also allow AbramsX to operate silently while sitting idle and possibly for short durations at low speed, which would provide a huge tactical advantage.


An unmanned turret with an auto-loading ammunition system makes possible a reduced crew size, down from four to three. This is also a major draw, increasing survivability and freeing up space in the turret for more capabilities. Reducing manpower is also high on the list of wants for armies around the world. The AbramsX is lighter than its predecessors, bucking the ongoing trend of increasingly massive M1 variants.



More on the Abrams X


“We have an unmanned turret so the crew is all down in the hull and they share a cockpit style arrangement of control screens which allow them to do that manned unmanned teaming with a ground vehicle or an aerial vehicle with that architecture that underlies all the electronics inside the tank.

A crew of 3 - 2 for the vehicle and one for the "Team"? And none of them with their hair in the breeze.

So.... if a team of 3....

Can that be carried over to all arms?

Tanks, SPGs, Anti-Arrmour, Recce, Air Defence, Infantry, Patrols?
 
No, Recce Dets and Sniper Groups have grown in size. Simply because the manpower needs are greater than planned in peacetime.

I’m not 110% a crew of three is possible to keep running 24/7 for extended periods.
Ideally you want to have two people up at all times, one observing, one on radio/admin/security. If you accept tanks, ATGM will always have an Infantry entity for security, then you might get away with it, but it still isn’t great.

You need to view the tank (or AD system etc) like a section/squad as it’s the lowest level.
 
No, Recce Dets and Sniper Groups have grown in size. Simply because the manpower needs are greater than planned in peacetime.

I’m not 110% a crew of three is possible to keep running 24/7 for extended periods.
Ideally you want to have two people up at all times, one observing, one on radio/admin/security. If you accept tanks, ATGM will always have an Infantry entity for security, then you might get away with it, but it still isn’t great.

You need to view the tank (or AD system etc) like a section/squad as it’s the lowest level.

In 24/7 recce type tasks on ops we'd plan for group of 6 to ensure they could remain operational for extended periods.
 
In 24/7 recce type tasks on ops we'd plan for group of 6 to ensure they could remain operational for extended periods.
So two groups of three then.
Or is that three groups of two?

A LAV would be three groups of three.

3 for the vehicle and 6 for the dismounts.

Most other vehicles, including the ISV, the Milverado and the TAPVs could accommodate 2 groups of 3.
 
So they plan on staying with the 120mm? L44?

I wonder how quickly it can be produced?
 
Back
Top