APS changing the nature of AFV

>>32558559
I've thought over this a bit, some autistic manchild ideas beware

Double rocket launcher, first one is top attack that dumps a load of chaff on target, second one fires after a short delay for kill

Another double rocket launcher, first fires an explosively pumped flux compression generator warhead, fries the electronics out of range of APS and second launches after delay and finishes job

what else, ground based radar jammers?

>>32558626
Before I knew about the reaction time of future systems I was imagining hyper-velocity guns, and for Light AT work, shoulder launched EFP explosives

your chaf idea is good imo

>>32558644
or maybe the other thing is we just use some sort of directed energy weapon to fry all the electronics

>the age of MBTs fighting each other line of sight are over

No
Just means you need a VLS in the MBT instead of a cannon, able to overwhelm APS with simultaneous kinetic penetrators.

>>32558715
VLS is the dumbest answer possible to this question; fuck you stop spouting memes

>>32558746
ur dumb

>>32558762
how many simultaneous attacks are you planning?
even currently deployed APS can handle like 4

>>32558776
As many as it needs.. Or you scale up the missile enough that it can handle being degraded & still penetrate

What do you think a laser or an autocannon is gonna do?

>>32558821
autocannon is to damage aps sensors

>>32558841
But you are already dead because you are outranged & gave away your position

>>32558856
I agree that NLOS net fires vehicle will be added to the arm, but that is not a tank and will complement rather than replace tanks

>>32558856
and if you meant that the other tank will kill you, your APS will intercept their penetrator

>>32558867
Why wouldn't it replace tanks, there is nothing in the Bible that says a tank must have a large heavy turret, with a large cannon as its main armament

>>32558904
because a missile tank can fight over the horizon, this is the exact type of vehicle envisioned for 2020 'objective force'; while a traditional tank is more suitable los fighting not only other afv but doing all the other stuff other tanks do too

>>32558948
a missile tank can fight in line of sight too
Theres nothing that makes a gun more suitable for that

How do you intercept a mach 5 DU rod?

>>32559169
travel time, reaction time, resistance to interception and spoofing
not to mention all tanks double as assault guns

I imagine you've had this argument 100x times on /k/ and just never give up your juvenile idea

>>32559208
knocking it only a few degrees off axis has already been proven to lower penetration dramatically

File: rpg30_2.jpg (39KB, 400x235px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 400x235px

>>32558626
Double rocket launcher is basically the RPG-30
Israelis already made an APS that can defeat it called "Trench Coat"

>>32561151
his double rocket launcher sprays chaf to confuse the radar system

>>32561151
Trophy is the name of the APS. Trench Coat is the name of the upgrade that defeats threats like the RPG-30.

>>32561151
Well I thought of two kinds, where instead of a simple decoy round one utilizes chaff and the other an EPFCG to confuse or take out the APS. However I doubt they would be man portable like an RPG-30.