Okay so the other day i made a thread asking what is the lightest

>>34096886
I wanna fuck a Wiesel, not even pedo

File: Ozelot.jpg (64KB, 800x576px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 800x576px

>>34096907
Cute aren't they.

The IMI website says that 100mm Soviet is the smallest caliber that can consistently punch through any fortification that they regularly encounter.

But they're still probably going to put a full 120mm low-recoil tank gun on their 35 ton IFV.

>>34096886
put a 3 ton cannon on top of a 5 ton vehicle
which has a small 4 or 5 cylinder diesel engine
>wew lad

File: 14026583990_469cdd675b_b.jpg (112KB, 750x438px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 750x438px

So basically a Waffenträger?

>>34096975
Fuck yea man.

I'd love to see something like:

Small as possible hull.
2 crew - driver/radioman
- gunner / commander

Autoloader.

F-35 style helmet with augmented reality feeds utilizing inputs from own cameras, other tank cameras, drones, theatre radar assets, Google earth data, etc. Think "Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter".

ATGM mounted on robust extendable arm to facilitate firing from cover/around corners (using targeting from sensors above). Arm retracts to reload additional missiles, limited by external space on hull (3,4?).

Vehicle dedicated drone for seeing ahead/around corners, feeding to sensors. (3rd crew for this can be stationed back at base?).

Countermeasures, inflatable decoy dropper, CROWS style turret with 90deg elevation (M2 or airbust grenade launcher, range data from sensors again). Directional emitters on turret for jamming across optical and radio wavelengths.

Turbine feeding capacitors, driving electric motors. Lookup Jaguar CX-75 (the Bladen Jets prototype version).

Hull mounted main gun like OP said.

Science allowing, lightwieght batteries to run various systems temporarily, without turbine running (for stealthy camping, ambush, sensing, etc).

"Fly like a butterfly, sting like a bee".

Enought shitposting from this Ausfag now. Roast me faggots.

File: 1u7ktWQFnTlYUUCTxAPbryVssNX-GXVYCSazDRfP1Ig.jpg (96KB, 762x768px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 762x768px

I must go. My people need me.

>>34097080
Cute as fuck, running like a kitten to the dinner bowl.

>>34096886
Literally a google search away from finding the lightest motorised artillery?
Or if you mean absolute theoreticals a Sprut B with some armor plates bolted on top.

>>34097078
I'd think that just having some screens inside the tank would be better than having one of those helmets, they're heavy af man, also don't you need to have it plugged in somewhere? just some simple screens would be nicer imo. Also, idk if quadcopters/drones/whatever would actually be feasible or if they would just get shot down in seconds by some automated laser systems or some shit. Of course those drones would probably work nicely against a poor and badly coordinated enemy that lacks the technology.

But yeah other than those few points i'd really like to see something like this.

>>34097078
Why not give it legs and arms and a head? Also mount the gun on the crotch so you can pretend it's jerking off everytime it fires?

>>34097139
Throw enough money at it, or steal from previous projects depending on when, and the helmet is not heavy. Helmet for sure, I'm talking about spherical view here, so screens ain't enough.

Drones need not be large/too expensive. Thinking 20cm across, storing 5-10 units externally (semi disposable, maybe only used when detail is lacking from other, many sources).

Sensor data is shared between tanks and air assets, needless to say. Targets could be "tagged", and dealt with by flying bombtruck, helo, Naval guns (modern shit if needed, railgun, guided shells etc).

>>34097147
I expected this. No Mechfag here. I grew out of that nearly 20 yrs ago.

It would be good to see the "F-35 tech" (tarded term, I know) achieve better value for money through more widespread use.

Shit like the ATGM on the arm, I think thats been done somewhere before, no?

>>34097078
What is the point of this shit? To stuff as much cool sounding crap into one vehicle as possible? What is even its role?

>>34097209
Kill pretty much everything on the battlefield and die to guns bigger than 50 cal while being cheap and light af.

>>34097179
I agree with the helmets. If you're going for lots of data (to make up for lack of armor) you need a way to access the data very quickly.

>>34097209
OP asked,
>"real" gun, like the Rheinmetal 120mm for example, that is still more or less impervious to small arms fire when buttoned up.

I figured lightest = weak armour. Ok, try not to get hit. Electronics weigh fuck all, take fuck all room, and cost fuck all once design costs are absorbed or reused.

Assuming it could be made to work (see F-35 process, but without starting from scratch), how could "This shit" not help? Show me a tanker who wouldn't love to know whats around the corner 95% of the time, consistantly.

Who wouldn't appreciate the benefits of being bold when you can be, and careful when you must? Ever play an FPS with a "transparent wall" cheat?

/k/, please educate me - are there any current or upcoming ATGMs with self contained sensor hardware in the nose of the Missile itself? Thinking about how A-10s did(do?) use Mavericks to track targets in absence of better sensors.

>>34097260
>are there any current or upcoming ATGMs with self contained sensor hardware in the nose of the Missile itself?
Javelin, but the sensor in the nose is only 64x64, just high enough res to track a tank. The "Command Launch Unit" has separate optics for the soldier to aim. So if you're going to corner-shot style stuff just put thermals/optics next to the launch tube like the Javelin's CLU does.

>>34097287
Awesome. This I guess, allows the arm/crane to act as a periscope even without the ATGM loaded.

Thanks anon, you're most decidedly not a faggot.

>>34097287
On the subject of sensors on the arm/outboard launcher, what can /k/ tell me about compact millimetre radars, or those man portable radars (Russia?) Used to detect loaded troops amongst organic cover.

Visible light/IR is obvious, but once miniaturization/cost are overcome, what would the harm be in using other wavelengths for different situations? Obviously there's the active vs. passive issue...

>>34097297
Somehow you had to be told cameras exist before you can think of an alternative to periscopes> Truly we are dealing ith a world-class intellect.

>>34097009

>implying the wiesel is a tankette
>implying the bundeswehr isnt calling the wiesel a waffenträger
>implying the wiesel cannot carry TOW 2

>>34097226

>cheap
>with that tech in it

File: Jagdleopard-elevating-platform-for-HOT-Anti-Tank-Missiles.jpg (493KB, 621x1004px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 621x1004px

>>34097316
>>34097297

>what is Jagdleopard

>>34097374
>Mentions cameras on tank and networked feeds from other tanks' cameras multiple times previously.

Snarky fucker, poor reading comprehension, or both?

>>34097462
Thankyou for answering my last paragraph here, >>34097192

cheers Dude.

>>34097481
So why so fixated on whether the ATGM has a camera?I'm not the one making a post acting like as if putting a camera on the arm didn't occur to you.

>>34097495
Thanks man, I had no idea you could do that. Cheers for straightening that one out, and putting me on the path to righeousness.

Feel better now?
>Don't be upset Charlene knocked you back. Plenty more cousins to choose from.

>>34097513
lol, you mad?

>>34097451
>tech
>expensive
Dude go to your local phone store and look around.

File: 1473217270291.gif (1MB, 480x351px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 480x351px

>>34097527

>>34097374
no what he wanted to know is if the sensor on the missiles can be used to enhance vision on the tank. To which the answer is that the missile itself can't significantly improve vision but the launch unit can

File: sdfsdfsdfsdfsdfsdf.png (1MB, 975x649px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 975x649px

>>34097316
search for 'FARA-1 radar" or "FARA-1 sight". I don't know any information off-hand though

>>34097494

We germans experimented with crane mounted atgms in the 80s

carrier stays in cover crane goes up, PARS-Trigat missile which could lock on on helos and tanks do the rest

File: Reconaissance.jpg (179KB, 480x321px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 480x321px

>>34096886
French has been doing this for a long time.

They're not downsizing the caliber and simply strapping some ATGMs on the successor.

>>34097078
>Vehicle dedicated drone
Why dedicate it to the vehicle. Future warfare will see drone swarms organically interacting with each other and with the rest of the battlefield. Maintaining survivability against enemy weapons (drones, ground based, whatever) and communication against jamming attempts will be a huge topic.

>Crane missile launcher
Not necessary if the missile can just launch vertically and adjust it's course. Might still be worth it for reasons of cost, speed, dunno. Or maybe put a remote weapon station in there. Is there a (good) reason this is not a thing already?
>Crane sensors
Dunno. Again, why is it not a thing already?

>How heavily will it be armored
It's probably easy to take out the crane and get a mission kill, so it's probably a better idea to make it light and fast instead.