'Tank of the future': France and Germany sign new arms deal

Badeendje, 12 days ago

Last time they did we ended up with Leclerc and leopard 2, no?

WolfhoundRO, 12 days ago

And now they may end up with Leclerc 2 and Leopard 3

maynarkh, 13 days ago

Most important question though - is it going to be named after a big cat?

Maalus, 12 days ago

Doing that gives a permanent -15% malus to gearbox reliability

maynarkh, 12 days ago

That will only give more jobs and power to the - naturally unionized - gearbox maintenance industry it will spring up, which will somehow capture the whole German MIC - and I mean both factories - due to only them being able to navigate the byzantine equipment requisition forms - all on paper and submitted in triplicate to the EU, the German government, and the municipality of Schmedeswurtherwesterdeich.

trslim, 10 days ago

I read that as natually Un-Ionized and was very confused.

VindictiveJudge, 12 days ago

Like Garfield?

maynarkh, 12 days ago

I meant like all German armoured vehicles, like Leopards, Gepards, Pumas, Tigers, Panthers.

Who am I kidding tho, it’s going to be a wank and probably be named something like Panzerkampfwagen Zweitausendfünfundzwanzig Russlandgehundfickdichselbst in German, and something like Charabialeeraux (pronounced “arrr”) in French.

VindictiveJudge, 12 days ago

I know, I just wanted to be a smartass.

maynarkh, 12 days ago

It was a good joke, appreciate it!

AnUnusualRelic, 13 days ago

This means that in three years, the Germans are going to drop out.

tal, 13 days ago (edited 13 days ago)

They got to lead development on this in exchange for France getting lead on the FCAS, so I kind of doubt it, short of the FCAS failing.

DarkThoughts, 13 days ago

Glad to hear that things are finally moving along. Took them long enough to come to their various agreements regarding this system.

wintermute_oregon, 13 days ago

I would like to see a modern tank that is greener, and I don’t mean that as a joke.

The amount of fuel consumed is insane. It creates logistics problems if nothing else.

TheMightyCanuck, 13 days ago

Didn’t the Abram X showcase an all electric drive mode that could run independent and silent for a bit?

wintermute_oregon, 13 days ago

I have not heard that. That would be cool.

There has been talk of moving more electric but I haven’t seen much.

The problem is the haters. If done right it’ll make our military even more lethal.

ours, 13 days ago

Or at least to run sensors and turret without a roaring turbine.

tal, 13 days ago

The Abrams has had an APU for a couple of revisions, doesn’t need to run the main engine for that.

DarkThoughts, 13 days ago

Moving 60-70 tons requires a lot of power, regardless if they're electric or not. Next gen tanks are also likely to be hybrids, not for the environment's sake, but to be quieter when they have to or simply as a backup / redundancy.

Skua, 13 days ago

The popularity of the new Fallout show tells me that it's definitely time to revive the Chrysler TV-8 concept

wintermute_oregon, 13 days ago

The m1 consumes about 6 gallons per mile.

In a large war that is a lot of fuel and supply lines.

I know of Iraq/Afghanistan. They were testing solar to power the bases because they required so much diesel, and those were the convoys being attacked.

I know people will call it woke but we need to green up the military to protect lives.

ThePyroPython, 13 days ago

Well the military already considers climate change a threat to national security.

gaael, 13 days ago

I hope they start shooting billionaires private jets soon then.

wintermute_oregon, 13 days ago

I would agree. As the climate changes, what is important will change.

I think the average person outside of America doesn’t grasp the size of America. We have enough water, land, etc to feed our population if we plan correctly. Other countries don’t have that luxury and wars can be caused over a shortage of water and food.

maynarkh, 13 days ago

You are busy fucking that up though. Through fracking for example.

Also, plan correctly? When is the US going to try to start doing that?

wintermute_oregon, 13 days ago

I don’t frack. So I’m not sure you mean by you. Nor do I support fracking. Gas should be expensive.

RubberElectrons, 12 days ago

We are, collectively, working to change that.

Redwood materials is trying to close the loop on lithium recycling from ev purposes, we can expect us military-industrial companies to take advantage of the cost savings, if for no other reason than to say “here’s a silent tank, we’re pocketing 60% of the unit cost for… Development… Reasons”

From acorns grow tremendous trees, it’s likely there will be a big change from an unexpected avenue.

DarkThoughts, 13 days ago

The M1 generally has a higher fuel consumption due to its turbine engine. Instead of babbling nonsense for media attention, maybe suggest some solutions though. Because superchargers along the battlefield aren't one of them.

fuckingkangaroos, 12 days ago

Also to power energy weapons like anti-drone lasers and gauss/rail weapons.

DarkThoughts, 12 days ago

I doubt we'll see mobile railguns anytime soon. Lasers will likely be extra vehicles instead of being part of a MBT so that they can fill more batteries in the hull. But afaik MGCS is likely going to be a multi platform solution anyway.

fuckingkangaroos, 11 days ago

Thanks for the corrections. Wow, MGCS first production rolling off the line in 2035.

It’s encouraging to see France and Germany working together on this, especially with such a long planning horizon.

Whether they’re comfortable with the role or not, they’re a critical part of the democratic vanguard in the world. People have started taking democracy as a given… it’s scary.

Agent641, 11 days ago

Unshielded nuclear reactor it us, tgen!

Every tank kill will result in a 10-15 kiloton excursion.