>ww1 tank crew 8 >ww2 tank crew 5 >post war crew 4

>>31907671
now
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-14_Armata

>2 crew members
>more than 50t

>>31907671
It's a fad that will go away until the far future when automation has been really fleshed out.

>>31907694
I'm anticipating 1000t 0 man sentient baneblades soon

2000t unmanned robotic beyblades when?

File: 14442155437430.jpg (177KB, 1280x690px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 1280x690px

>>31907671
>2 crew heavier than light tanks when?
Soviet tried that out in the 60s
the tank look hideous

>>31907800
what tank?

>>31907774
>Anticipating fucking BOLOS
Muh dick is so fucking ready for tanks the size of apartment buildings capable of shooting down spacecraft

File: 1452639511-uran9.png (506KB, 808x480px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 808x480px

>>31907671
now. zero crew.

>>31907890
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_775

>>31907800
It looks reliable at some point

File: georgi_simeonov_01.jpg (308KB, 1280x659px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 1280x659px

Do you guys think we will ever see a tank so large and destructive (30+ crew members) that it will be placed in areas like Wyoming or Siberia (low population density) and it will be considered a WMD?
>basically giant, mobile artillery

>>31908236
No.

>>31907671
can't wait for the single crew tanks...
>everything is automated from loading to aiming the gun where you look at the targeting screen.
>you just drive around handles like a light tank
>armored like a heavy tank
>small and sleek
>fuck shit up

>>31907800
>Gun depression?

>Yes, gun suffers depression from being stuck in there.

>>31908287
>low speed small caliber artillery piece
>needing gun depression further than 20 meters

File: MicahJohnsonAK.jpg (80KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 640x1136px

>>31908236

Too big, too expensive!

You have to understand how war works these days and how it has worked for a while now, actually.

It's always the same, one way or another you try to find out where important stuff is.

Then you fire/drop/launch heavy weapons at important stuff.

Sometimes the important stuff is buildings, sometimes it is troop/vehicle or ship formations, sometimes it is command centers etc.

The main point is that you do NOT want to put everything in one basket because there is no way to prevent all kinds of weapons from being used on it.

It will be destroyed and it will be waste of time, money, materials and trained people.

>>31908236
You mean, a weapon to surpass metal gear?

As a tank commander, I would hate to be in a Russian tank that's lacking the loader. That extra set of eyes, hands for maintenance, body to help pull guard at night, is really useful

File: REX_VS_RAY.jpg (136KB, 720x405px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 720x405px

>>31908402
being a supposed rex killer, it did not do what it was meant to do....

>>31908422
>trusting the loading neger with your valuables and life

>>31908443
>russian tanks: auto loader
>US tanks: niggerloader

>>31908422
Yeah, people forget tankers do things other than sitting in the tank all day. Throw a tread? Guess who gets to wrestle it back on the wheels!

After a point, decreasing crew begins to be a bad thing. I suppose there's some room for debate what that point is.

>>31908469
The ideal crew for convenience is probably 4.

>>31908450
https://youtu.be/HyrAqNv1odM?t=2m29s

>>31908469
dude, with exos soon enough a single girl can faster re-track a thread than a crew of 5 guys could before.

>>31908443
>>31908450
>my loader literally is a nigger in every sense
>nigga so dark he takes his uniform off at night for camouflage
>nigga so ignorant he thinks fried chicken is a food group

File: 5866778981_9a00fa4476_b.jpg (467KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

467KB, 1024x768px

>>31908422
>>31908469
Tank or not, with the driver doing the aiming and the autoloader taking care of feeding you could run this thing on your own.

But there's still three guys stuffed in there.

>>31907677
The T-14 has 3 crew.