8 ms·

Stealth Tank Unveiled by Poland

99 points by tomashertus 12y ago

anigbrowl 12y ago
Wow - that is substantially cooler than I had expected - I would not have associated Poland with such innovative design, so I must revise my assumptions! Showing my age, it instantly reminded me of Battlezone :-)
- tomashertus 12y ago
  Yeah totally, agree. I've read somewhere else that they are planning to take this technology and create uniform with same kind of camouflage. Don't know about Battlezone though:)
- itcmcgrath 12y ago
  Thanks, that brings back memories. Looks like Poland decided to do a prequel :) http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs27/f/2008/144/9/8/BattleZone___Sabre_views_by_NoStr0m0.jpg http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs27/f/2008/144/9/8/BattleZone___...
- morcheeba 12y ago
  It's done with BAE, the british defense giant. And it's based on a Swedish design, so it's a group effort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL-01 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL-01
funkyy 12y ago
Poland is using the strategy of "Showing Teeth" - which means that it is doing everything to actually make any country think twice before attacking. Having huge stockpile of artillery and armoured vehicles it is very difficult enemy to have. Recognizing this as perfect way to deter enemies (mainly Russia) Poland have been investing resources on growing woods (for hiding) and developing newest artillery and "hit and run" vehicles and equipment. You would be surprised what they have in development at the moment. After all - Poland just started huge shopping spree - they started enormous arm up project, so we will see more of those ultra high tech stuff showing up soon.
- M4v3R 12y ago
  The problem is that most other countries do know that we are only "showing teeth" and that Poland actually doesn't have a big supply of these things, and the one we have are outdated as hell. This concept probably hopes to change that image a little bit.
- jonnathanson 12y ago
  Poland is going to be a very interesting country to watch over the next 10-20 years. It has one of the fastest growing economies in Europe, a sizable population, and geopolitically speaking, a very long memory. Tensions with Russia are going to mount in the coming decades as Poland's economy grows, and Russia's slows down. I doubt they'd come to blows, least of all in the near future. But Poland is going to gear up, just in case. A lot of this will come from Poland's desire to reduce its dependence on the US. Poland and the US have cooperated, militarily and politically, more reliably than most European countries have. But in light of recent events in Eastern Europe, the US is starting to look like a less-than-reliable backstop.
  - yogthos 12y ago
    Why would Russian economy be slowing down exactly again, seems to be doing quite the opposite last I checked.
    - jessaustin 12y ago
      Keep up with current events! http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/crude-oil.aspx http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/crude-oil.aspx
    - jonnathanson 12y ago
      The vast majority of Russia's economic growth is coming from oil and gas reserves, especially the latter. That's a notoriously shaky ground on which to build an economic expansion as rapid as Russia's has been in the last few years. Extremely volatile over the long run. It doesn't help that most of that wealth is being captured by a handful of government-sanctioned plutocrats, and by government officials themselves (Putin most especially; he is rumored to have a personal net worth in excess of $70 billion). A very small proportion is actually being reinvested into productive and petrochemical-diverse industry. To make matters worse, the country suffers from some major demography issues. Its birthrate is problematic, and its population is old. It is one of the few major industrialized nations whose population is expected to contract significantly over the next century. There is very little stability underpinning Russia's economy. It's wobbly, as is, right now. It'll be wobblier still over the next 10-20 years.
Frozenlock 12y ago
Ok, seriously... lens flares?
- clay_to_n 12y ago
  I'm glad I wasn't the only one bugged by the really obvious PS lens flare effects
  - readerrrr 12y ago
    You weren't. And it is the most lazy version possible, Render->Lens Flare
DigitalSea 12y ago
Looks like something you would see in the Battlefield game series, more specifically Battlefield 4. Quite clearly Poland feels threatened with the events taking place in Russia and Syria and wants to show that it is not some small place that can be pushed around. To be honest, I honestly do not blame them, the world is a dangerous place and it only continues to grow even more dangerous. Russia is growing increasingly unpredictable and who knows will be stupid enough to follow them or any other reasonable threat country into war if it ever comes to that? Completely unrelated, but I recently travelled to Poland and it is one of the most beautiful places I have ever visited. The people are super friendly, picturesque surroundings and a mixture of historical and modern buildings. If you ever get there and visit Kraków, head to Moaburger for some of the biggest and best burgers you will ever feast upon. I have seen their nice side, I would hate to see their bad side if provoked, I would not want a stealth tank sneaking up on me, especially in winter.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
aeturnum 12y ago
Considering how expensive stealth coatings are to maintain on airplanes, I wonder if this makes sense. Airplanes generally have more options about when they are exposed to the elements than tanks as well. I also wonder how many ISIS or Taliban soldiers have radar or thermal support. I suppose it's meant to be a show of readiness against Russia, but there's no reason Russia can't adopt the tactics of ISIS and co (you could argue it already has).
msandford 12y ago
"which incorporates technology that makes it invisible to enemy thermal imaging" I call bullshit on this one. The US M1 Abrams has a 1500HP gas turbine engine. To develop 1500HP means producing at least another 1500HP in waste heat, if not more like 3000-5000HP. Let's conservatively say it's 1500HP * 732W/HP ~= 1MW How in the world do they think they're going to hide a 1-5MW power plant? From the second video: Peltier plates on the exterior. That's great, but it doesn't do jack to the huge plume of exhaust jetting out the back. And since they've got some kind of fancy exhaust cooling system they've got to be sucking up and discharging MASSIVE amounts of air to dissipate several megawatts without increasing the air temperature too much. Even then, it's not too hard to turn up the sensitivity on the thermal systems a bit so you can spot these things.
- pranjalv123 12y ago
  It might be "invisible" only while standing still. This would still be strategically useful, at least from a defensive standpoint.
  - UnoriginalGuy 12y ago
    It might but the second video showed it in motion (30 sec mark) while "stealthed." Although it was moving relatively slowly.
- muyuu 12y ago
  Hybrid engines? if you can make the thing move cool for the last couple of miles that's a massive range of stealth.
- stcredzero 12y ago
  I call bullshit on this one. The US M1 Abrams has a 1500HP gas turbine engine. To develop 1500HP means producing at least another 1500HP in waste heat, if not more like 3000-5000HP. An electric drive system would alleviate a lot of that. For range, make it a series hybrid. It can recharge batteries en route, then operate in a "cool/stealth" mode, so that it can cool down and lie in wait under camouflage and in an enfilade position peeking over a ridge. For maximum stealth, we might want an electromagnetic accelerator instead of a cannon. Such a system would probably want to sacrifice physical protection from anything deadlier than high explosive artillery shells and machine guns for greater stealth. While we are at it, why do we have to have massive armor and cannons? What if such vehicles could operate as "drone carriers" and launch swarms of drones which are designed as combined surveillance platforms and guided munitions? If you take something like an Abrams M1 tank and land a shaped charge on its main cannon and its tracks, then it just becomes a badly camouflaged machine gun nest. Once immobilized and de-fanged, its machine guns would then be easy to take out. Such drone-missiles can easily out-range the most sophisticated main battle tank gun. EDIT: The lethality of weapons vs. armor has caused dramatic swings in the tactics of hand to hand weapons on the battlefield. It only makes sense that the increasing lethality of computerized weaponry would cause this to happen for armored vehicles. Knights in armor plate used to rule the field. Firearms made personal steel plate armor obsolete. It used to be that high velocity cannon and massive armor ruled the battlefield. Now it's detection and situational awareness.
afarrell 12y ago
I've wondered for a while why they haven't developed an elite cavalry unit given their geography, position in Europe, and the historical importance of their cavalry. I might also have a bit too much fondness for paintings of winged hussars...
- lebesgue 12y ago
  I suggest, sir, that you go to a store, buy a hammer, and use it on your head.
  - afarrell 12y ago
    To what end? I freely admit that my fascination with winged hussars is immature. That doesn't change the fact that Poland is a state in search of security like all others, borders countries it regards as untrustworthy (Russia and Belarus), and has a largely flat topography that allows armored assault by those countries. Of course you can argue that being a part of NATO means that they are under the US nuclear umbrella and therefore it is non-rational for them to invest money in military hardware. However a nuclear umbrella depends entirely upon the protector nation being able to credibly communicate that it is willing to use weapons in the defense of the client nation. This gives the client nation incentive to demonstrate that it has a spine of its own and is willing to pay a reasonably high cost to defend itself. Otherwise, who would believe that the larger nation would defend the smaller when push comes to shove? Why else would Poland have gone to war in Iraq? The winged hussars are still silly, but a well-known elite cavalry unit doe support the narrative that Poland is a bulwark of the alliance against an assault from NATO's traditional enemy. Also, they could better support and possibly train their ally Ukraine.
falsedan 12y ago
Did a double-take at the pictures, thought it was a promotional event for a sequel to Arcticfox…
stcredzero 12y ago
Here is a discussion of up-gunning main battle tanks to 140mm guns to keep up with advances in armor. http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/ar/t1514.htm http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/ar/t1514.htm A few interesting points: Larger cannon are going to be harder to protect. Computerized weapons that can directly target cannon from sufficient ranges could severely degrade a force with conventional main battle tanks. The cost of logistics can be related to as the eighth power of the tank’s weight (for a tank of the weight we’re discussing). Therefore, the logistics slice of a 80 ton tank would be roughly 5 times greater than an existing 63 ton tank! O(N^8) is nasty! A technology that can get one out of an arms race involving such unfavorable scaling would be game changing. If remotely guided/autonomous surveillance and munitions vehicles could be made that out-range main battle tank weapons, then stealthy carriers of such weapons would rule the battlefield. This, of course, comes with the caveat that another arms race of countermeasures could ensue. It's hard for me to envision countermeasures that aren't themselves vulnerable to purpose built missiles, however.
danbruc 12y ago
Is it just me and my personal impression or did we pass a local maximum of peace after the end of the cold war and the world is becoming a worse place in recent years?
- idlewords 12y ago
  Almost exactly the opposite is true: http://www.pcr.uu.se/digitalAssets/66/66314_1armed-conflict-by-intensity.pdf http://www.pcr.uu.se/digitalAssets/66/66314_1armed-conflict-...
  - danbruc 12y ago
    I also searched and found this report [1] showing an increase since 2010. So it is probably more nuanced and depends on you definition of conflict. [1] http://ploughshares.ca/programs/armed-conflict/armed-conflicts-report/ http://ploughshares.ca/programs/armed-conflict/armed-conflic...
- vacri 12y ago
  It's your personal impression. The Second Congo War was the deadliest war since WWII, and it started in the late 90s. The 90s had a ton of small wars, there was just little in the way of big ticket 'hollywood' wars like the US in Iraq or Afghanistan. Have a poke around these pages and see the ones you don't recall: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_wars_by_date http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_wars_by_date
smoyer 12y ago
All those angles remind me of the wire-frame tanks in the 1980's video game called Battle-Zone [1] - who would have guessed a stealth tank would make me reminisce? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlezone_%281980_video_game%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlezone_%281980_video_game%...
Elhana 12y ago
It seems to have muzzle brake on main gun. I wonder why they chose to use it, it seems none of the current tanks have them for a reason.
idlewords 12y ago
Okay, I give up. It's time to bring back the Polish jokes.
indymike 12y ago
The Polish have a history of quite innovative military equipment. Here's a very ambitious fighter from the late 80s that was very much ahead of it's time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZL-230_Skorpion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZL-230_Skorpion
kolev 12y ago
Tanks are so noisy, you can hear one from miles!
BariumBlue 12y ago
The thermal camo is likely from BAE who corroborated on this project: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pftna34TbJU&t=0m46s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pftna34TbJU&t=0m46s I do find the missile protection feature to be interesting; active protection been proven to be useful several times, but doesn't seem to be widely used by any country, except for Israel who do use use them on patrols.
- greedo 12y ago
  Active protection is quite common on high end Russian tanks.
josho 12y ago
I thought the tank era had passed us. Once that tank fires a single shot, its location is revealed and an artillery or air strike can be ordered against its approximate location. We are well in the era of air superiority and moving ever closer to the era of drones. Tanks are relevant for the previous wars only.
- shortsightedsid 12y ago
  Only one problem. The enemy can't surrender to an Aircraft. So even with all the air superiority, you still need the Cavalry. Source - http://bluenred.com/2010/11/11/they-can-not-surrender-to-aircraft/ http://bluenred.com/2010/11/11/they-can-not-surrender-to-air...
- stcredzero 12y ago
  So long as you need troops on the ground to hold territory, you will need mobile protection against machine guns and artillery. Once you have those, then you also will need something that takes the role of a tank. However, maybe technology will take us past the era of 70 ton behemoths armed with a huge cannon.
- vacri 12y ago
  its location is revealed ... and? Tanks don't have to rely on stealth to be effective. Air strikes are only reliable if you have some degree of air superiority. And tanks can move - depending on what kind of artillery you're facing, they might not be able to chase a moving target. There were tank-on-tank battles in the US's invasion of Iraq, so they're not that out-of-date. Plus, while there aren't going to many tank-on-tank battles, tanks are an important component of combined arms tactics - you need infantry to take urban areas, and infantry is more effective with armoured support.
  - josho 12y ago
    Infantry support in urban areas don't benefit from a stealth tank. I'm not arguing that tanks have 0 value. I'm saying their value has diminished. In WWII they were the dominant technology, and if total war broke out during the Cold War it would have been as well. But, today their role is diminishing to newer technologies. I think we'll see the same happen to aircraft carriers, they'll be usurped by smaller drones that could launch from cruisers or destroyers. It's not unlike computer tech. We are seeing SSDs replace hard disks. The platter disk still has a role, but we all see the writing on the wall.
PhasmaFelis 12y ago
This seems like the sort of cutting-edge high-tech war machine that sounds fantastic on paper, and in practice is hugely expensive and impossible to maintain in field conditions. In particular, the technology for a completely unmanned, turret with an autoloader replacing the human loader and camera systems replacing "stick your head out and have a look", has been around for decades; there are reasons it's had only limited use. Gosh, it looks neat, though. Anyone know what the "Active Protection System Launchers" are actually launching? At first I assumed it was fancy smoke grenades, but then those pigeonholes around the sides of the turret turned out to be smoke launchers. So...Anti-missile chaff/interceptors? Anti-personnel RPGs? Something else? Oh, one other thing. The second video says it weighs in at 35 tons. Unless they've left off most of the armor for the display model (which is possible), this can't possibly be a main battle tank; there's no way it's got enough armor to take a shot from a full-size tank gun. It seems like they're going more for infantry support and possibly ambush hunting.
- Tuna-Fish 12y ago
  > In particular, the technology for a completely unmanned, turret with an autoloader replacing the human loader and camera systems replacing "stick your head out and have a look", has been around for decades; there are reasons it's had only limited use. It seems to be headed for wide use now -- all new major afv designs are now as small boxes as possible with remote-controlled turrets on top. Look up the Russian Armata and the German ifv Puma. > Anyone know what the "Active Protection System Launchers" are actually launching? Anti-missile/bomb defense. > Unless they've left off most of the armor for the display model (which is possible), this can't possibly be a main battle tank; there's no way it's got enough armor to take a shot from a full-size tank gun. Armor has greatly improved since the 80's. Especially ceramics have improved by leaps and bounds. This, combined with the much reduced and streamlined internal protected volume, and greater allowed armor volume make a high level of protection possible with much lower weight than current designs. Even still, they only promise STANAG 4569 5+ for the 30t main design, and require 5t of additional applique to be fully resistant to guns from front. In the eternal technological contest between armor and weaponry, we are currently at a very high point for armor. The combined development of radar-guided active defenses that defeat all slow projectiles and semi-reactive ceramics that shred and destabilize ke projectiles as they travel through them, given a 60t weight budget no reasonable design using current-level armor and weaponry could penetrate itself from any angle. Of course, given enough time this will just result in better guns, but as direct upscalings of modern tank guns have proven to be unworkable and abandoned by everyone, they will have to use some exotic new tech. In the meantime, if fighting against 80's tank guns, yes you can get full protection on frontal arcs at 35t or less.
ferongr 12y ago
Do note that the vehicle in the pictures is just a Swedish CV-90 with some plastic bits on it, a (probably) mock barrel and various systems. To my knowledge no prototype hull has been completed to date so I find various claims that speak of a target of 2018 for mass production hard to believe. Furthermore, it's not known whether the actual design will pan out.
- Too 12y ago
  Here is a movie from 2011 of this vehicle. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6OjpBUvbz78 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6OjpB... They show how they activate and deactivate the heat camouflage and you can clearly see the difference. It's not fully invisible but if you don't know what you are looking for you will miss it. The camo can also be activated in only certain spots so in one scene they make it look like a normal car in IR by only partially cooling down the exterior.

99 points by tomashertus 12y ago

Wow - that is substantially cooler than I had expected - I would not have associated Poland with such innovative design, so I must revise my assumptions! Showing my age, it instantly reminded me of Battlezone :-)

tomashertus 12y ago
Yeah totally, agree. I've read somewhere else that they are planning to take this technology and create uniform with same kind of camouflage. Don't know about Battlezone though:)
itcmcgrath 12y ago
Thanks, that brings back memories. Looks like Poland decided to do a prequel :) http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs27/f/2008/144/9/8/BattleZone___Sabre_views_by_NoStr0m0.jpg http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs27/f/2008/144/9/8/BattleZone___...
morcheeba 12y ago
It's done with BAE, the british defense giant. And it's based on a Swedish design, so it's a group effort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL-01 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL-01

funkyy 12y ago

Poland is using the strategy of "Showing Teeth" - which means that it is doing everything to actually make any country think twice before attacking. Having huge stockpile of artillery and armoured vehicles it is very difficult enemy to have. Recognizing this as perfect way to deter enemies (mainly Russia) Poland have been investing resources on growing woods (for hiding) and developing newest artillery and "hit and run" vehicles and equipment. You would be surprised what they have in development at the moment. After all - Poland just started huge shopping spree - they started enormous arm up project, so we will see more of those ultra high tech stuff showing up soon.

M4v3R 12y ago
The problem is that most other countries do know that we are only "showing teeth" and that Poland actually doesn't have a big supply of these things, and the one we have are outdated as hell. This concept probably hopes to change that image a little bit.
jonnathanson 12y ago
Poland is going to be a very interesting country to watch over the next 10-20 years. It has one of the fastest growing economies in Europe, a sizable population, and geopolitically speaking, a very long memory. Tensions with Russia are going to mount in the coming decades as Poland's economy grows, and Russia's slows down. I doubt they'd come to blows, least of all in the near future. But Poland is going to gear up, just in case. A lot of this will come from Poland's desire to reduce its dependence on the US. Poland and the US have cooperated, militarily and politically, more reliably than most European countries have. But in light of recent events in Eastern Europe, the US is starting to look like a less-than-reliable backstop.
- yogthos 12y ago
  Why would Russian economy be slowing down exactly again, seems to be doing quite the opposite last I checked.
  - jessaustin 12y ago
    Keep up with current events! http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/crude-oil.aspx http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/crude-oil.aspx
  - jonnathanson 12y ago
    The vast majority of Russia's economic growth is coming from oil and gas reserves, especially the latter. That's a notoriously shaky ground on which to build an economic expansion as rapid as Russia's has been in the last few years. Extremely volatile over the long run. It doesn't help that most of that wealth is being captured by a handful of government-sanctioned plutocrats, and by government officials themselves (Putin most especially; he is rumored to have a personal net worth in excess of $70 billion). A very small proportion is actually being reinvested into productive and petrochemical-diverse industry. To make matters worse, the country suffers from some major demography issues. Its birthrate is problematic, and its population is old. It is one of the few major industrialized nations whose population is expected to contract significantly over the next century. There is very little stability underpinning Russia's economy. It's wobbly, as is, right now. It'll be wobblier still over the next 10-20 years.

Frozenlock 12y ago

Ok, seriously... lens flares?

clay_to_n 12y ago
I'm glad I wasn't the only one bugged by the really obvious PS lens flare effects
- readerrrr 12y ago
  You weren't. And it is the most lazy version possible, Render->Lens Flare

DigitalSea 12y ago

Looks like something you would see in the Battlefield game series, more specifically Battlefield 4. Quite clearly Poland feels threatened with the events taking place in Russia and Syria and wants to show that it is not some small place that can be pushed around. To be honest, I honestly do not blame them, the world is a dangerous place and it only continues to grow even more dangerous. Russia is growing increasingly unpredictable and who knows will be stupid enough to follow them or any other reasonable threat country into war if it ever comes to that? Completely unrelated, but I recently travelled to Poland and it is one of the most beautiful places I have ever visited. The people are super friendly, picturesque surroundings and a mixture of historical and modern buildings. If you ever get there and visit Kraków, head to Moaburger for some of the biggest and best burgers you will ever feast upon. I have seen their nice side, I would hate to see their bad side if provoked, I would not want a stealth tank sneaking up on me, especially in winter.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

aeturnum 12y ago

Considering how expensive stealth coatings are to maintain on airplanes, I wonder if this makes sense. Airplanes generally have more options about when they are exposed to the elements than tanks as well. I also wonder how many ISIS or Taliban soldiers have radar or thermal support. I suppose it's meant to be a show of readiness against Russia, but there's no reason Russia can't adopt the tactics of ISIS and co (you could argue it already has).

msandford 12y ago

"which incorporates technology that makes it invisible to enemy thermal imaging" I call bullshit on this one. The US M1 Abrams has a 1500HP gas turbine engine. To develop 1500HP means producing at least another 1500HP in waste heat, if not more like 3000-5000HP. Let's conservatively say it's 1500HP * 732W/HP ~= 1MW How in the world do they think they're going to hide a 1-5MW power plant? From the second video: Peltier plates on the exterior. That's great, but it doesn't do jack to the huge plume of exhaust jetting out the back. And since they've got some kind of fancy exhaust cooling system they've got to be sucking up and discharging MASSIVE amounts of air to dissipate several megawatts without increasing the air temperature too much. Even then, it's not too hard to turn up the sensitivity on the thermal systems a bit so you can spot these things.

pranjalv123 12y ago
It might be "invisible" only while standing still. This would still be strategically useful, at least from a defensive standpoint.
- UnoriginalGuy 12y ago
  It might but the second video showed it in motion (30 sec mark) while "stealthed." Although it was moving relatively slowly.
muyuu 12y ago
Hybrid engines? if you can make the thing move cool for the last couple of miles that's a massive range of stealth.
stcredzero 12y ago
I call bullshit on this one. The US M1 Abrams has a 1500HP gas turbine engine. To develop 1500HP means producing at least another 1500HP in waste heat, if not more like 3000-5000HP. An electric drive system would alleviate a lot of that. For range, make it a series hybrid. It can recharge batteries en route, then operate in a "cool/stealth" mode, so that it can cool down and lie in wait under camouflage and in an enfilade position peeking over a ridge. For maximum stealth, we might want an electromagnetic accelerator instead of a cannon. Such a system would probably want to sacrifice physical protection from anything deadlier than high explosive artillery shells and machine guns for greater stealth. While we are at it, why do we have to have massive armor and cannons? What if such vehicles could operate as "drone carriers" and launch swarms of drones which are designed as combined surveillance platforms and guided munitions? If you take something like an Abrams M1 tank and land a shaped charge on its main cannon and its tracks, then it just becomes a badly camouflaged machine gun nest. Once immobilized and de-fanged, its machine guns would then be easy to take out. Such drone-missiles can easily out-range the most sophisticated main battle tank gun. EDIT: The lethality of weapons vs. armor has caused dramatic swings in the tactics of hand to hand weapons on the battlefield. It only makes sense that the increasing lethality of computerized weaponry would cause this to happen for armored vehicles. Knights in armor plate used to rule the field. Firearms made personal steel plate armor obsolete. It used to be that high velocity cannon and massive armor ruled the battlefield. Now it's detection and situational awareness.

afarrell 12y ago

I've wondered for a while why they haven't developed an elite cavalry unit given their geography, position in Europe, and the historical importance of their cavalry. I might also have a bit too much fondness for paintings of winged hussars...

lebesgue 12y ago
I suggest, sir, that you go to a store, buy a hammer, and use it on your head.
- afarrell 12y ago
  To what end? I freely admit that my fascination with winged hussars is immature. That doesn't change the fact that Poland is a state in search of security like all others, borders countries it regards as untrustworthy (Russia and Belarus), and has a largely flat topography that allows armored assault by those countries. Of course you can argue that being a part of NATO means that they are under the US nuclear umbrella and therefore it is non-rational for them to invest money in military hardware. However a nuclear umbrella depends entirely upon the protector nation being able to credibly communicate that it is willing to use weapons in the defense of the client nation. This gives the client nation incentive to demonstrate that it has a spine of its own and is willing to pay a reasonably high cost to defend itself. Otherwise, who would believe that the larger nation would defend the smaller when push comes to shove? Why else would Poland have gone to war in Iraq? The winged hussars are still silly, but a well-known elite cavalry unit doe support the narrative that Poland is a bulwark of the alliance against an assault from NATO's traditional enemy. Also, they could better support and possibly train their ally Ukraine.

falsedan 12y ago

Did a double-take at the pictures, thought it was a promotional event for a sequel to Arcticfox…

stcredzero 12y ago

Here is a discussion of up-gunning main battle tanks to 140mm guns to keep up with advances in armor. http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/ar/t1514.htm http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/ar/t1514.htm A few interesting points: Larger cannon are going to be harder to protect. Computerized weapons that can directly target cannon from sufficient ranges could severely degrade a force with conventional main battle tanks. The cost of logistics can be related to as the eighth power of the tank’s weight (for a tank of the weight we’re discussing). Therefore, the logistics slice of a 80 ton tank would be roughly 5 times greater than an existing 63 ton tank! O(N^8) is nasty! A technology that can get one out of an arms race involving such unfavorable scaling would be game changing. If remotely guided/autonomous surveillance and munitions vehicles could be made that out-range main battle tank weapons, then stealthy carriers of such weapons would rule the battlefield. This, of course, comes with the caveat that another arms race of countermeasures could ensue. It's hard for me to envision countermeasures that aren't themselves vulnerable to purpose built missiles, however.

danbruc 12y ago

Is it just me and my personal impression or did we pass a local maximum of peace after the end of the cold war and the world is becoming a worse place in recent years?

idlewords 12y ago
Almost exactly the opposite is true: http://www.pcr.uu.se/digitalAssets/66/66314_1armed-conflict-by-intensity.pdf http://www.pcr.uu.se/digitalAssets/66/66314_1armed-conflict-...
- danbruc 12y ago
  I also searched and found this report [1] showing an increase since 2010. So it is probably more nuanced and depends on you definition of conflict. [1] http://ploughshares.ca/programs/armed-conflict/armed-conflicts-report/ http://ploughshares.ca/programs/armed-conflict/armed-conflic...
vacri 12y ago
It's your personal impression. The Second Congo War was the deadliest war since WWII, and it started in the late 90s. The 90s had a ton of small wars, there was just little in the way of big ticket 'hollywood' wars like the US in Iraq or Afghanistan. Have a poke around these pages and see the ones you don't recall: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_wars_by_date http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_wars_by_date

smoyer 12y ago

All those angles remind me of the wire-frame tanks in the 1980's video game called Battle-Zone [1] - who would have guessed a stealth tank would make me reminisce? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlezone_%281980_video_game%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlezone_%281980_video_game%...

Elhana 12y ago

It seems to have muzzle brake on main gun. I wonder why they chose to use it, it seems none of the current tanks have them for a reason.

idlewords 12y ago

Okay, I give up. It's time to bring back the Polish jokes.

indymike 12y ago

The Polish have a history of quite innovative military equipment. Here's a very ambitious fighter from the late 80s that was very much ahead of it's time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZL-230_Skorpion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZL-230_Skorpion

kolev 12y ago

Tanks are so noisy, you can hear one from miles!

BariumBlue 12y ago

The thermal camo is likely from BAE who corroborated on this project: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pftna34TbJU&t=0m46s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pftna34TbJU&t=0m46s I do find the missile protection feature to be interesting; active protection been proven to be useful several times, but doesn't seem to be widely used by any country, except for Israel who do use use them on patrols.

greedo 12y ago
Active protection is quite common on high end Russian tanks.

josho 12y ago

I thought the tank era had passed us. Once that tank fires a single shot, its location is revealed and an artillery or air strike can be ordered against its approximate location. We are well in the era of air superiority and moving ever closer to the era of drones. Tanks are relevant for the previous wars only.

shortsightedsid 12y ago
Only one problem. The enemy can't surrender to an Aircraft. So even with all the air superiority, you still need the Cavalry. Source - http://bluenred.com/2010/11/11/they-can-not-surrender-to-aircraft/ http://bluenred.com/2010/11/11/they-can-not-surrender-to-air...
stcredzero 12y ago
So long as you need troops on the ground to hold territory, you will need mobile protection against machine guns and artillery. Once you have those, then you also will need something that takes the role of a tank. However, maybe technology will take us past the era of 70 ton behemoths armed with a huge cannon.
vacri 12y ago
its location is revealed ... and? Tanks don't have to rely on stealth to be effective. Air strikes are only reliable if you have some degree of air superiority. And tanks can move - depending on what kind of artillery you're facing, they might not be able to chase a moving target. There were tank-on-tank battles in the US's invasion of Iraq, so they're not that out-of-date. Plus, while there aren't going to many tank-on-tank battles, tanks are an important component of combined arms tactics - you need infantry to take urban areas, and infantry is more effective with armoured support.
- josho 12y ago
  Infantry support in urban areas don't benefit from a stealth tank. I'm not arguing that tanks have 0 value. I'm saying their value has diminished. In WWII they were the dominant technology, and if total war broke out during the Cold War it would have been as well. But, today their role is diminishing to newer technologies. I think we'll see the same happen to aircraft carriers, they'll be usurped by smaller drones that could launch from cruisers or destroyers. It's not unlike computer tech. We are seeing SSDs replace hard disks. The platter disk still has a role, but we all see the writing on the wall.

PhasmaFelis 12y ago

This seems like the sort of cutting-edge high-tech war machine that sounds fantastic on paper, and in practice is hugely expensive and impossible to maintain in field conditions. In particular, the technology for a completely unmanned, turret with an autoloader replacing the human loader and camera systems replacing "stick your head out and have a look", has been around for decades; there are reasons it's had only limited use. Gosh, it looks neat, though. Anyone know what the "Active Protection System Launchers" are actually launching? At first I assumed it was fancy smoke grenades, but then those pigeonholes around the sides of the turret turned out to be smoke launchers. So...Anti-missile chaff/interceptors? Anti-personnel RPGs? Something else? Oh, one other thing. The second video says it weighs in at 35 tons. Unless they've left off most of the armor for the display model (which is possible), this can't possibly be a main battle tank; there's no way it's got enough armor to take a shot from a full-size tank gun. It seems like they're going more for infantry support and possibly ambush hunting.

Tuna-Fish 12y ago
> In particular, the technology for a completely unmanned, turret with an autoloader replacing the human loader and camera systems replacing "stick your head out and have a look", has been around for decades; there are reasons it's had only limited use. It seems to be headed for wide use now -- all new major afv designs are now as small boxes as possible with remote-controlled turrets on top. Look up the Russian Armata and the German ifv Puma. > Anyone know what the "Active Protection System Launchers" are actually launching? Anti-missile/bomb defense. > Unless they've left off most of the armor for the display model (which is possible), this can't possibly be a main battle tank; there's no way it's got enough armor to take a shot from a full-size tank gun. Armor has greatly improved since the 80's. Especially ceramics have improved by leaps and bounds. This, combined with the much reduced and streamlined internal protected volume, and greater allowed armor volume make a high level of protection possible with much lower weight than current designs. Even still, they only promise STANAG 4569 5+ for the 30t main design, and require 5t of additional applique to be fully resistant to guns from front. In the eternal technological contest between armor and weaponry, we are currently at a very high point for armor. The combined development of radar-guided active defenses that defeat all slow projectiles and semi-reactive ceramics that shred and destabilize ke projectiles as they travel through them, given a 60t weight budget no reasonable design using current-level armor and weaponry could penetrate itself from any angle. Of course, given enough time this will just result in better guns, but as direct upscalings of modern tank guns have proven to be unworkable and abandoned by everyone, they will have to use some exotic new tech. In the meantime, if fighting against 80's tank guns, yes you can get full protection on frontal arcs at 35t or less.

ferongr 12y ago

Do note that the vehicle in the pictures is just a Swedish CV-90 with some plastic bits on it, a (probably) mock barrel and various systems. To my knowledge no prototype hull has been completed to date so I find various claims that speak of a target of 2018 for mass production hard to believe. Furthermore, it's not known whether the actual design will pan out.

Too 12y ago
Here is a movie from 2011 of this vehicle. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6OjpBUvbz78 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6OjpB... They show how they activate and deactivate the heat camouflage and you can clearly see the difference. It's not fully invisible but if you don't know what you are looking for you will miss it. The camo can also be activated in only certain spots so in one scene they make it look like a normal car in IR by only partially cooling down the exterior.