'Force field' technology could make US tanks unstoppable

Discussion in 'Military' started by shockedcanadian, Aug 2, 2018.

  1. ABikerSailor
    Offline

    ABikerSailor Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    41,259
    Thanks Received:
    6,876
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Amarillo TX
    Ratings:
    +16,692
    If the round is destroyed BEFORE it hits the tank, then it is nothing like reactive armor. Period.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. night_son
    Offline

    night_son Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2018
    Messages:
    2,240
    Thanks Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    The Keep
    Ratings:
    +2,581
    The closest thing we've had to this system is smoke. Vehicle launched smoke grenades in brigade formation make one hell of a screen but stop nothing. Reactive armor means a hit--and you don't want that when you're huddled down in the back, particularly with the old Halon systems that used to trip randomly. When you're buttoned up, that can be real bad. So can molten gas burning through to the inside from enemy man portable warheads.
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2018
  3. westwall
    Offline

    westwall Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    56,187
    Thanks Received:
    12,099
    Trophy Points:
    2,180
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +40,869




    It will stop any incoming projectile (at least in theory). Sonic weapons are not affected.
     
  4. HereWeGoAgain
    Offline

    HereWeGoAgain Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    49,032
    Thanks Received:
    7,752
    Trophy Points:
    1,860
    Location:
    Fuck Y'all I'm From Texas!
    Ratings:
    +35,826
    It reacts but at a distance rather than upon impact.
    So yeah it's a more advanced reactive armor.
     
  5. HereWeGoAgain
    Offline

    HereWeGoAgain Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    49,032
    Thanks Received:
    7,752
    Trophy Points:
    1,860
    Location:
    Fuck Y'all I'm From Texas!
    Ratings:
    +35,826
    I'd say it's more like the Phalanx system than anything else.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. Crepitus
    Offline

    Crepitus Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,240
    Thanks Received:
    560
    Trophy Points:
    180
    Ratings:
    +4,404
    Day late and a dollar short.

    the Chinese have already deployed their version.

     
  7. DrainBamage
    Offline

    DrainBamage Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2016
    Messages:
    1,256
    Thanks Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +437
    Sigh. Here is a link to information on a single battle in Iraq where USA lost four tanks: Battle of Medina Ridge - Wikipedia

    "TF 1–37 suffered the loss of four M1A1 tanks destroyed and six personnel wounded in action"

    Do you know what the definition of "zero" is when you say no M-1 tanks were lost?

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]



    Well this would be completely different than your previous statement about the next war, you've now backtracked into a completely different scenario of a war with certain countries as opposed the ones we've actually been having wars with. Bottom line = the actual conflicts we've been in over the past whatever decades have involved tanks, and not nukes.
     
  8. BuckToothMoron
    Offline

    BuckToothMoron Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2016
    Messages:
    6,492
    Thanks Received:
    1,163
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +6,482
    Maybe, but I doubt it. If the first nuke dropped in war was dropped to end WW2, why hasn’t it been used since? There have been more tanks destroyed in combat since WW2 than nukes dropped.
     
  9. harmonica
    Offline

    harmonica Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    Messages:
    9,095
    Thanks Received:
    955
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Ratings:
    +4,720
    there has always been the ''battle'' between ''armor'' and anti-armor
    there will be someone/company/etc trying to over ride any ''unstoppable''' armor
    ..
     
  10. DrainBamage
    Offline

    DrainBamage Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2016
    Messages:
    1,256
    Thanks Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +437
    I wonder how these types of systems do against the more advanced antitank weapons that do a swoop & dive?

    For example USA's Javelin doesn't fly like a TOW directly at the target but rather climbs to 150 meters then uses imaging infrared seeker to dive down from above and take advantage of the much weaker armor on the top part of tanks. I'm not sure the sensors on systems like this would pick up anything coming from above, and if even if they could would they be able to aim at it.
     

Share This Page